The URL can be used to link to this page

08-05-09 CC Agenda Packet AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber VVednesday,August5,2009 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 B. Presentation of Envision Award - Dwight Townes - 2008 Highway 55 Lilac Planting C. Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting - July 7,2009 B. Approval of Check Registers: 1. City 2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority C. Licenses: 1. General Business Licenses 2. Solicitor's License - Integrity Construction LLC 3. Solicitor's License - VVorking America 4. Gambling License Exemption and VVaiver of Notice Requirement - Sons of the American Legion Post 523 D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Board of Zoning Appeals - June 23, 2009 2. Environmental Commission - May 18, 2009 3. Open Space and Recreation Commission - June 22, 2009 4. Bassett Creek VVatershed Management Commission - June 18, 2009 E. Bids and Quotes: 1. Asphalt Overlay - Quotes, Authorization to Sign Agreement with Metropolitan Council for Park and Ride Rehabilitation, and MnDOT for 1-394 Frontage Road Rehabilitation 2. Miscellaneous Building Maintenance - Bids F. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or VVine at Brookview Park G. Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing Form and Details and Providing for Payment of $5,465,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 20090 09-43 H. Approval of One Year Extension - Conditional Use Permit 08-123 - 601 Boone Avenue North - TruStone Financial, Applicant I. Authorization to Sign Agreement with Hopkins School District for Fiber Optic Connection 09-44 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM A. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance #421 - Conditional Use Permit 09-67- Amendment #1 - 9405 Medicine Lake Road - George Kabalan, Applicant 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Announcements of Meetings B. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT alley m ran m City Administration/Council 763-593-8014/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary for Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 1. B. Presentation of Envision Award - Dwight Townes - 2008 Highway 55 Lilac Planting Prepared By Jeanne Andre, Assistant City Manager Summary Dwight Townes has been recommended to the City Council to receive the first Envision Award. Dwight conceived, planned, and coordinated the Highway 55 Lilac Planting Project, beginning in 2006 and culminating with the first phase in October, 2008. The initial event attracted more than 80 volunteers and involved planting lilacs and other vegetation in designated areas on both sides of the highway between General Mills Boulevard and Winnetka Avenue. Dwight's vision and coordination combined state resources in the form of planning services and materials with local assets including city staff support, corporate contributions, and especially, many volunteers. The Highway 55 Lilac Planting is a manifestation of the city's Envision Connection Project which was created to encourage community members to take ownership of their aspirations and implement civic activities, programs, and day-to-day initiatives that help translate those dreams into reality. The city benefits from the beautification of a transportation corridor, the effective use of available resources with minimal financial contributions and maximum volunteer involvement. Dwight's initiative is tangible evidence that an individual can initiate, plan, promote, and implement a project in the context of Envision Golden Valley. He became involved with the inception of the Connection Project's Bridge Builder training where he identified the Highway 55 Lilac Planting Project as his "small spark" idea which led to a bright light of citizen involvement and community participation. Recommended Action Award the first Envision Award to Dwight Townes for conceiving, planning and coordinating the 2008 Highway 55 Lilac Planting Project. Valley M morandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8003/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5,2009 Agenda Item 1. C. Hennepin County Attorney Presentation Prepared By Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Summary Mike Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, will attend the meeting and make a brief presentation, I alley Memorandum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. B. 1. 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. alley M mo ndum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Attachments Loose in agenda packet. Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. I Valley Memorandum Inspections 763-593-8090 I 763-593-3997 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5,2009 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. #4004 #4006 #4012 #4013 #4008 #4009 #4016 #4005 #4007 Borton Volvo, Inc. New/Used Vehicle Sales 905 Hampshire Avenue North $400.00 Lupient Buick, Pontiac, GMC New/Used Vehicle Sales 7100 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 Jim Lupient Used Cars New/Used Vehicle Sales 701 Louisiana Avenue North $400.00 ABC Cars & Leasing New/Used Vehicle Sales 1200 Mendelssohn Avenue $400.00 Carousel Porsche New/Used Vehicle Sales 9191 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 Carousel Audi New/Used Vehicle Sales 9393 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 Jim Lupient Infiniti New/Used Vehicle Sales 7200 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 Saturn of G.V. New/Used Vehicle Sales 801 Louisiana Avenue South $400.00 Rudy Luther Toyota New/Used Vehicle Sales 8805 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 #4014 Jaguar/Landrover New/Used Vehicle Sales 8905 Wayzata Boulevard $400.00 #2713 Poquet Auto Sales New/Used Vehicle Sales 800 Lilac Drive North $400.00 #2715 Auto Point New/Used Vehicle Sales 9130 Olson Memorial Highway $400.00 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff. alley Memorandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Solicitor's License - Integrity Construction LLC Prepared By Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to do so. Attachments Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Integrity Construction LLC. Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month. PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLlCA liON TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: $ ~O (J () 7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Persons: I , Golden Valley, MN 55427 Type of License Requested: ~YS Enclose the sum of $ ~6 for I (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary for obtaining this license. 1M -hU-1L-t--rJ ~~~ C/no-.J LL L (Business or Individual Name to be Licensed) (, (s (;; k. CAlA ()C ~ ~. (Address,' eluding City, State ,zip Code) , )~ ~ L. ~ '2..('.:>r C;. \(, {,L'tN 3 \ '-3""l.... 3"32-0 SS-~2L. NOW, THEREFORE, period of r ;!fJ'I at:- -si~,.J C{Z..L.s(Q~ hereby makes application for the (Applicant Name) through 6/30/10-. subject to the conditions and provisions of said City Code. (Signature of Applicant/Principal Officer) REQUIRED LICENSE INFORMATION Applicant (if different from above): Name Address (Include City, State and Zip Code) Telephone Number (including area code) Date of Birth (if an individual) Business Name of Applicant Address (Include City, State and Zip Code) LLC/ (Corporation, Proprietorship, Pa~nership, etc.; State of Incorporation) Description of goods or services for sale (include prices) or indicate if soliciting donations. If more space is needed, attach additional sheets (be specific): ro-~(l..U ..4, - fl.o~...." ( Sl PI ~~ I f 091 ~s) Ae-- Define Business NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete information regarding such change or modification. If the Peddler or Solicitor is so engaged on behalf of an organization, supply: Name of Organization (~~L( Address of Organization (Include City, State and Zip Code) TelePh07e Numb~r (Includin~ Area Code) _ ~~2J ~~~3oqL r Define Business LLC-- (Corporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation) List the names and addresses of EACH person who will be peddling or soliciting on behalf of said organization in the City, or, in the alternative, the name, address and telephone number or numbers where a responsible person of said organization will maintain a list of names and addresses of all persons engaged in peddling or soliciting in the City: 'SI-!A.-..J.,J c.A/2.LS....J (If more space is needed, attach additional sheets) STATE OF rn/~ ) ) ss. COUNTY OF Ifti,NpJiJ(tJ ) _~~~ L~~ (Officer/I ndividual) I, of { "-'-~l ~ ~5~c::nov cLC (Name of Organization) being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to his/her own knowledge except as to matters therein stated on information and b ii~f, an~9such matters, he/she believes them to be true. . - /4IL- ( ...- -- (Signature fApplicant/Principal Officer) , 20rfL. JUDITH A. NALLY NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2010 dldtfiVall ey morandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8002 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. C. 3. Solicitor's License - Working America Prepared By Christine Columbus, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, any individual or group intending to go door-to-door within the City selling products, taking orders or soliciting for business or donations must be licensed by the City to do so. Attachments Peddler/Solicitor License Application (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the solicitor's license for Working America. Application and fee must be submitted to the City Manager's Office the Wednesday prior to the City Council Meeting. Council Meetings are normally held the first and third Tuesday of each month. PEDDLER/SOLICITOR LICENSE APPLICATION TO: Golden Valley City Council Fee Paid: $ ;;0 0-0 7800 Golden Valley Road Number. of Persons: --- Golden Valley, MN 55427 Type of License Requested: Sol l{..fz>~ J veh.~ Enclose the sum of $ ~ for unlu;W (number) peddlers/solicitors as required by City Code of the City of Golden Valley and have complied with all the requirements of said Code necessary for obtaining this license. \ ... (Busines or Indivldua Na e to be Licensed) Jtj07 & C;r- La fcQ~ >~(~e+ (Address, including City, State and Zip Code) 0(2 ~9?1'- c;qt)f) (Telephone Number, including ~ea Code) NOW, THEREFORE, /Vlctn "'~ IM\ ^ II (\1 I l!.. ~t'L nGl (ApplicaQt Name) perlod Of~ !h'm\1gh 6130Iy4;Ub'~nd~lons and provisions of said City Code. ~~ NtJi r5"'1vf; hereby makes application for the REQUIRED LICENSE INFORMATION Business Name of Applicant Address \~ . Define Business rporation, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation) more NOTE: If the products for sale are changed or modified, you must give the City complete information regarding such change or modification. .,... If the Peddler or Solicitor is so engaged on behalf of an organization, supply: Name of Organization DC Address of Organization Teleph.one Nu~~er (Inclu?j'l9 Area Code) .l.o)-- {2..z 7- "1 fJ L Define Business M (Corpora ion, Proprietorship, Partnership, etc.; State of Incorporation) (If more space is needed, attach additional sheets) STATE OF frl,(V'JNf.~om- ) ) ss. COUNTY OF #f.1V(VCpIJV ) I, (\/l~e \J li~l , . (Officer/Individual) of ~vtilO~ Ar-e{)Co (Name 0 Organization) being first duly sworn, depose and say that all the foregoing information is true to his/her own knowledge except as to matters therein stated on information and belief, and as 0 such matters, he/she believes them to be true. Subscribed and sworn to before me this ~ayqf ,20 6q JUDITH A. NALLY NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan, 31,2010 ~71 Gai Valley morandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. C. 4. Gambling License Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo - Sons of the American Legion Post #523 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. Attachments Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the gambling license application to conduct excluded bingo for Sons of the American Legion Post #523. Minnesota Lawful Gambling LG240B Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo 7/09 Page 1 of2 No fee ORGANIZA TION INFORMATION Organization na:f. A .1 !.revious gambling permit number So 11\"" Ihe. ""'f:.-4IC.b."" L~(;1JH:JV\ po,>r ~;) Type of nonprofit organization. Check <"'> one. ' o Fraternal o Religious ~ Veterans o Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City StatelZip Code County ~ 00 'IV () rl"t. L, l. 'f(. V,.. G-"Jd",t't lJ~l J~ 1M tIL S" S",.~ 2 Ite.'-llll ATTACH A COPY OF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING FOR PROOF OF NONPROFIT STATUS * Do not attach a sales tax exempt status or federal 10 employer number as they are not proof of nonprofit status. X Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation ORa current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 180 State Office Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-296-2803 _ Internal Revenue Service -IRS Income tax exemption [501(c)) letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact the IRS at 877-829-5500. _Internal Revenue Service - Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization (charter) If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of b2th of the following: a. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. _Internal Revenue Service - proof previously submitted to Gamblng Control Board If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the Intemal Revenue Service, no attachment is required. EXCLUDED BINGO ACTIVITY 1. ~No _Yes Has your organization held a bingo event in the current calendar year? If yes, list the dates when bingo was conducted 2. The proposed bingo event for which we are applying will be: :1 "1"..(Oo-r; .x one of four or fewer bingo events held this year. Dates _]V <:) V Q OR _conducted up to 12 consecutive days in connection with a: _county fair. Dates _civic celebration. Dates _Minnesota state fair. Dates Daytime phone , 1.< /; I & J 33 c; 3. Person in charge of bingo event b ~'1'& J Jelltk lVtJ' 4. Name of premises where biT will be conducted C It <:".<: n-r T? 'I' J A tvl.~"'~ J" oQ. ~ I 0 11\ 5. Premises street address 00 N . J...1l. Cri Co D (' 6. City Cs:Q(J~o1L \)~ liey If township, name of township County /iQI/\V\. Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. Otherwise, bingo hard cards, bingo paper, and bingo number selection devices must be purchased from a distributor licensed by the Gambling Control Board. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.us and click on Ust of Ucensed Distributors. Or call 651-639-4076. Be sure to complete page 2 Page 2 of 2 LG240B Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo 7/09 Chief Executive Officer's Signature The information provided in this ap~/i~tion is CO~Plete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Chief executive officer's signature ~AlL.. Phone number (' a-t/& "338 d v Name (please print)POllll J ve VI. k. \ Vl.5 Date 7 I .L) 1 0' 9' Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment and Approval If the gambling premises Is within city limits, the city must sign this application. On behalf ~f the c~ .t approve this. application fo~ . Print city name I/;ddt h II die, excluded bmgo activity at the premises located withm b? the city's jurisdiction. iving application DateL2X1 Ti If the gambling premises Is located In a township, only the county is required to sign this application. For the county: On behalf of the county, I approve this application for excluded bingo activity at the pmm~sro~mdw~mthecoooty~~riroiooon Print county name Signature of county personnel receiving application Title Date---1---1_ (Township signature is not required) Print township name For the township: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for excluded bingo activity within the township limits. A township has no statutory authority to approve or Signature of township official acknowledging application deny an application (Minn. Stat. 349.166, Subd. 2). Mail Application and Attachment(s) Send the application and proof of nonprofit status to: Gambling Control Board Suite 300 South 1711 W. County Rd. B Rosevllle, MN 55113 Title Date---1---1_ You will receive a document from the Gambling Control Board with your excluded permit number for the gambling activity. Your organization must keep its bingo records for 3-1/2 years. Questions? Contact the Gambling Control Board at 651-639-4000. Or, you may fax It to 651-639-4032. This form will be made available in altemative format (Le. large print, Braille) upon request. Data Privacy Notice: The information requested on this form (and any attachments) will be used by the Gambling Control Board (Board) to determine your qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to supply the information requested; however, if you refuse to supply this information, the Board may not be able to determine your qualifications and, as a consequence, may refuse to issue you an authorization. If you supply the information requested, the Board will be able to process your application. Your name and your organization's name and address will be pUblic information when recaived by the Board. All the other information will be private data until the Board issues your authorization and the information then becomes public. If the Board does not issue you an authorization, all information provided remains private, with the exception of your name and your organization's name and address which will remain public. Private data about you is available to: Board members, Board staff whose work requires access to the information; Minnesota's Department of Public Safety, Attorney General; Commissioners of Administration, Finance, and Revenue; Legislative Auditor, national and international gambling regulatory agencies; anyone pursuant to court order; other indMduals and agencies that are specifically authorized by state or federal law to have access to the information; indMduals and agencies for which law or legal order authorizes a new use or sharing of information after this Notica was given; and anyone with your consent. Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, June 23,2009 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members Kisch, Nelson, Segelbaum, Sell and Planning Commission Representatives McCarty. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes - May 26, 2009 MOVED by Sell, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the May 26, 2009 minutes as submitted. II. The Petitions are: 6480 Wayzata Blvd. (09-06-07) Vladimir Sivriver, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.47, Subd. 6(B) Front, Side and Rear Yard Setbacks, Surface Parking Requirements . 15 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (west) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into conformance with Zoning Code requirements. Request: Waiver from Section 11.47, Subd. 6(C)(2) Side and Rear Yard Setbacks, Buildings Requirements . 10ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing structure into conformance with Zoning Code requirements. Request: Waiver from Section 11.47, Subd. 8(H) Parking Screening Req uirements . 5 ft. off the required 5 ft. landscaped frontage strip to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (west) property line. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 2 Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into conformance with Zoning Code Requirements. Request: Waiver from Section 11.47, Subd. 6(G} Maximum Impervious Surface Requirements . Waive provision to allow greater than 65% total impervious land coverage. Purpose: To bring the existing property into conformance with Zoning Code Requirements. Hogeboom noted that this is the first variance request for a property located in the 1-394 Mixed Use zoning district. He explained the applicant's request to add 6 parking spaces on the west side of the building and build an entryway on the north end of the existing building. He stated that both of the applicant's proposed requests conform to zoning code requirements however the existing parking lot and structure are non-conforming so in order for the applicant to expand the footprint of his existing building by adding an entryway the entire property needs to be brought into conformance with zoning code requirements. He added that the applicant has been working with the Public Works Department on grading and drainage issues and that staff is supporting these variance requests. Kisch referred to the survey submitted by the applicant and noted that this property requires 25 parking spaces. However it currently has 32 parking spaces so he is concerned about increasing the impervious surface of this lot even more by allowing the 6 additional spaces the applicant is requesting. Hogeboom agreed that that the applicant is requesting more parking spaces than what the code requires, however he has demonstrated the need for the additional parking spaces. McCarty referred to the survey and stated that it appears the applicant is proposing to have less impervious surface than he currently has. Hogeboom agreed that the applicant is making an effort to reduce the amount of impervious surface on his property. Segelbaum referred to the variance request regarding screening of the parking lot and asked if that requirement is for aesthetic or safety purposes. Hogeboom said he believes it is for aesthetic purposes. Sell said he believes the screening requirements are to provide a buffer for residential areas. Vladimir Sivriver, Applicant, stated that he needs the additional 6 parking spaces he is requesting because he is searching for new retail tenant which will require more spaces. Also his existing engineering firm and school currently located in this building need more parking spaces. He stated that this has been a very challenging site and since he bought it he has put a lot of money into fixing it up. He showed the Board a PowerPoint presentation that provided a background of his business including his education, Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 3 professional experience, accomplishments and projects he has done in Golden Valley. He discussed his future plans for this site including the reduction of impervious surface, drainage improvements and landscaping. Kisch referred to the survey of the property and stated that the reduction of impervious surface that has been mentioned has taken place outside of the applicant's property lines. He asked the applicant how much impervious surface is located within the property lines. Sivriver reiterated that this is a very difficult lot and that MnDot probably should have taken it when they reconstructed the frontage road. He explained that he did remove some impervious surface from the boulevard area along Wayzata Blvd. because if he didn't, no improvements would have been made. He stated that he is also planning on doing some landscaping along Florida Ave. McCarty referred to the 3% reduction in impervious surface area and asked how much of it was located outside of the property lines. Sivriver said approximately 50% of the reduction was located outside of the property lines. Kisch noted that the addition of 6 parking spaces would increase the impervious surface total within the property lines. Sivriver stated that he proposed using water infiltration but the City wouldn't allow it because the water table is so high in this area. Kisch asked the applicant if has considered using permeable pavers for the proposed 6 additional parking spaces. Hogeboom noted that the City would still consider permeable pavers to be impervious surface area. Kisch asked about the City's opinion of the parking lot. Hogeboom explained that the City Manager gave the applicant approval to re-stripe his parking lot because it already exists. He reiterated that the applicant has been working with the Engineering Department regarding catch basin and retention pond issues. Kisch said he is hesitant to grant approval for the 6 additional parking spaces because they will be adding additional impervious surface to the site. Sivriver stated that the area is very dense in use with the skate park, the collision center, Majors and JJ's and that sometimes there aren't enough parking spaces plus he still has 2,000 sq. ft. of space to rent. Segelbaum asked the applicant if there have been any accidents in his parking lot. Sivriver said no. Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public hearing. McCarty asked Hogeboom if there are any requirements stating that a person can't install more than the minimum amount of required parking space. Hogeboom stated that there are only minimum parking stall requirements, not maximum. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 4 Kisch said he realizes the limitations on this property but he is concerned about increasing the amount of impervious surface. McCarty said he would more concerned if the applicant was adding more impervious surface but the applicant is just proposing to re-stripe what is already there. Kisch stated that the applicant is proposing to add more impervious surface because he has been calculating the amount of impervious surface using space that is outside of his property lines. Segelbaum suggested that it may be appropriate to approve the variance requests for the existing non-conformities however in regard to the variance request involving impervious surface maybe the Board could allow the applicant to keep the amount of impervious surface the same, but not let him increase the amount of hard cover. Sell said he agrees that this is an unusual piece of property and suggested that the City Code be revisited to consider adding permeable pavers and other similar techniques to be considered pervious surface. He suggested to the applicant that he work with Taco Bell to use some of their parking spaces. Kisch said he can see a hardship for allowing the entryway because of the heating and cooling issues in the building but the only hardship for the additional parking spaces is because the applicant says he needs more parking. Segelbaum added that the Board has to balance the potential impact with the hardships on this lot. Nelson suggested allowing the applicant to keep the net existing impervious surface amount the same. If he wants to add the 6 additional parking stalls he'll have to make up for the difference in another location on his lot. Sell agreed and added that the Engineering Department should determine how they want the water to drain on this site. Segelbaum said he agrees that the Engineering Department should determine how the water drains on this site but there are also the aesthetics of the property to consider. Nelson agreed that the area is very congested. She said she feels allowing the applicant to add something orderly like the proposed 6 parking spaces would be better than having cars parked all over the place. Kisch stated that he doesn't think there is a hardship to allow the 6 additional parking spaces but if there is a stipulation that the total impervious surface area does not increase from the existing hard surface coverage amount currently located within the property lines to allow no net gain in impervious surface he would feel better about the proposal. MOVED by Sell seconded by Nelson and motion carried unanimously to approve the following variance requests: . 15 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (west) property line to bring the existing parking lot into conformance with Zoning Code requirements. . 10ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (east) property line to bring the existing structure into conformance with Zoning Code requirements. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 5 . 5 ft. off the required 5 ft. landscaped frontage strip to a distance of 0 ft. to the side yard (west) property line to bring the existing parking lot into conformance with Zoning Code Requirements. MOVED by Kisch seconded by Nelson and motion carried unanimously to approve the following variance request: . Waive provision to allow greater than 65% total impervious land coverage with the condition that there be no net gain of impervious surface area within the property lines of the site. The applicant is not to exceed the amount of impervious surface currently on the property . 309 Turnpike Road. (09-06-08) Natasha Solorieff, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback Requirements . 12.8 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 2.2 ft. to the side yard (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of an addition to the home and attached garage. Hogeboom stated that the applicant is proposing to construct an addition to the existing home and a new 2-stall garage with living space above that would be 2.2 feet away from the north, side yard property line. He explained that staff believes a single car garage is a hardship and is therefore is recommending that the proposed garage addition be located at least 5 feet away from the north property line. However staff does not feel that the addition being proposed behind the new garage has a hardship and it should be able to meet setback requirements. Hogeboom referred to the neighboring property to the north at 301 Turnpike Road. He explained that the homeowner there built a similar addition to what is being proposed however that addition is located 5.5 feet away from the side yard property line compared to the 2.2 feet being requested. Nelson stated that precedents were set but that doesn't mean the variance should have been granted and each property needs to be looked at individually. Segelbaum asked if the required side yard setback for this property is 15 feet. Hogeboom stated that the side yard setback for this property would be 12.5 feet however due the height of the proposed addition the north side yard setback requirement is 15 feet rather than 12.5 feet. He added that the existing house does conform to the setback requirements. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page a Patrick Buckner, contractor representing the applicant, Natasha Solorieff, stated that they are trying to upgrade the home to make it usable to today's standards. He said they need a two stall garage with a minimum interior width of 22 feet. He explained that the existing garage has no footings underneath so they are proposing to tear it down and build a new garage with living space above plus additional living space behind the proposed new garage. He added that garages with living space above them are very common in Golden Valley and will fit in with the character of the area. He said he considered building in the back yard but he would then have to remove trees and he doesn't want to do that. He stated that the plans he submitted are conceptual and can be changed but they need to have some compromise from the City. Segelbaum asked if the eaves shown in the elevation plans are taken into consideration when figuring out setback requirements. Hogeboom explained that 3D" of eaves and overhangs are allowed to go into the setback area however they cannot cross over the property line. Segelbaum asked how close the proposed eave would be to the property line in this case. Buckner, said he wouldn't have to build an eave on the north side, he could install a gutter instead. Segelbaum asked if the proposal for the 22-foot wide garage is what makes the addition be 2.2 feet away from the property line. Buckner said yes and added that they would need 11.5 feet of space in order to get a 22-foot wide garage. Nelson explained to the applicant that the Board does consider a single stall garage to be a hardship but they typically like garage additions to be at least 5 feet away from side yard property lines. Buckner said they can't build a two stall garage 5 feet away from the side yard property line without significantly changing the plans and the budget. He added that he would not do the project at all if the minimum width of a new garage is not at least 22 feet. Segelbaum asked Buckner if he is representing the owner of the property, William Adolfson. Buckner said no, he plans to live in the house. Segelbaum asked if he has a purchase agreement with the owner. Buckner said yes. Segelbaum asked if the purchase of the property is contingent on the approval of this variance request. Bucker said no and added that if they don't receive approval for the variance they will have to cut down trees. Kisch referred to the survey and noted that the topography is fairly flat on this lot. He referred to the plans of the building section and noted that it is showing a walk-out style of house. Buckner said the house will have an egress and will not be a walk-out it will be a four-level split style. Kisch asked about the difference between the level of the garage and first floor. Buckner said the difference is about 4 feet. Kisch said he is concerned about having an almost a aD-foot long wall along the north side property line. Segelbaum referred to the proposed addition behind the proposed garage and questioned if that part of the proposal could be built elsewhere on the lot. Solorieff Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 7 reiterated that they are trying to keep the existing trees. Kisch explained that the Board considers ecological issues but that isn't the only criteria considered. Buckner stated that he is trying to get the square footage he needs to match today's living standards. The existing house is only about 1,200 square feet which is very small so they need to expand the dimensions of the rooms and bring the house up to date. Solorieff stated that many houses in the neighborhood have been enlarged and modernized. Segelbaum said he is concerned about the impact to surrounding properties and asked the applicants what would prevent them from adding onto the rear of the house in a different and conforming location. Buckner said if he builds into the back yard he may create drainage issues. He said he is trying to be responsible and respectful and not affect anybody else's property. Segelbaum stated he would really like to see at least a 5 foot setback from the proposed new garage to the north side yard property line. Buckner said there is no way to get a 22- foot wide garage 5 feet away from the property line. He added that he would also like to install a fence along the north property line. Kisch said if a fence was installed there the applicant couldn't fit a ladder in the space in order to maintain the fence. Segelbaum asked if the existing garage were removed how much space there would be between the house and the property line. Buckner said there would be 25.4 feet which is not enough room to build a minimal 2-stall garage. Kisch noted that in the past the Board has considered a 20-foot wide garage to be a minimally sized 2-stall garage. He referred to the applicant's plans and noted that he is proposing 22.3 feet for the overall dimension of the garage which would be located 3.6 feet away from the property, not 2.2 as stated. He asked the applicant if there are any other alternatives. Buckner said there are other alternatives but putting a garage in the back yard will make for a really long driveway and he doesn't want to have to drive his cars by the next door neighbor's windows in order to get the garage. Solorieff agreed that she wouldn't want cars going up and down the driveway next the neighbor's bedroom windows. McCarty said he doesn't want to increase the costs for the applicant or require them to tear down trees but in this case there are other alternatives. Buckner reiterated that he is concerned if he puts a garage in the back it may cause drainage issues on the neighboring properties. McCarty asked about the drainage issues if he builds the garage where he is proposing. Buckner said he is planning on installing drain tile. Hogeboom stated that he has talked to the City Engineer about this proposal and was told that the drainage issues could be addressed and dealt with in the drainage and erosion control process. Sell referred to the survey and said he re-did some of the math. He said it seems to him that the applicant could build a 21-foot wide garage and still maintain a 4-foot setback area. The Board agreed. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 8 Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public hearing. Kisch said his concern is the proposed addition off of the back of the proposed garage. He said he feels the impact of a 60-foot long wall that close to the property line would be worse than losing a tree and building additional living space elsewhere on the property. He said he agrees that a one-stall garage is a hardship and that building the garage in the back yard and having cars drive past the neighbors bedroom windows is worse than granting the side yard variance request. He said he would be ok with granting a variance to allow a garage 28 feet in depth to be built 4 feet from the side yard property. Nelson agreed that there is a hardship regarding the one-stall garage. She added that she feels it would devalue the neighborhood and this property to build a garage in the back yard and it would not make sense to build a detached garage in this area. McCarty said he could see razing the entire house and starting over. He added that this property has plenty of potential without having to grant variances. Sell said he would be ok with allowing a variance to allow the garage to be 28 feet in depth, 4 feet away from the property line. Segelbaum stated that allowing living space above the garage will make the garage addition more opposing. McCarty said he would support a variance to allow the garage to be 5 feet away from the side yard property. He added that the hardship in this case is the single stall garage not the applicant wanting more living space. Buckner reiterated that the house is not up to today's standards and that the house next door was granted a variance in 2003 to build a garage with living space above. Kisch said the term "today's standards" is subjective and reminded the applicant that the neighboring property was granted a variance for a garage, not for living space behind the garage, to be 5.5 feet away from his side yard property line. Buckner stated that green consciousness is a passion of his and he wants to incorporate any green measure he can including not removing any trees. Kisch stated that saving one tree is not as environmentally sound as some other building practices the applicant could use. Segelbaum said he would be in favor of granting a variance to allow the garage, without living space above it to be 4 feet away from the north side yard property line. MOVED by Sell, seconded by Nelson and motion carried unanimously to approve a variance request for 11 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 4 ft. to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of an attached garage. The garage can be 28 feet in depth with no living space above. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2009 Page 9 III. Other Business Kisch reported on the June 16 City Council meeting where they discussed the appeal of the Board's decision for the property at 1525 Sumter Ave. N. He stated that the City Council reversed the Board's decision because of the ambiguity of the definition of a porch, landing, deck and stoop. The language in the Code regarding front porches, decks, landings and stoops and what constitutes a "covered front porch" will be reviewed by the Planning Commission in the future. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm. GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes May 18, 2009 Present: Commissioners Anderson, Baker, Chandlee, Gitelis, Hill, Pawluk, and Stremel. Also present were Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works; and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant. 1. Call to Order Pawluk called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2. Approval of Joint Meetina Minutes - April 27. 2009 MOVED by Baker, seconded by Hill, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 27, 2009 joint meeting. 3. Approval of Reaular Meetina Minutes - April 27, 2009 MOVED by Hill, seconded by Stremel, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 27, 2009 meeting. 4. Mayor's Climate Protection Aareement (MCPA) . MCPA Proaress Report A. Measure ment - With the completion of the lighting audits, staff has recommended the cost of lighting improvements be included in the CIP. B. Educa tion Articles - nothing new C. Development Materials - Baker withdrew his offer to create new materials for new residential structures. Staff will send out the current materials electronically to the commissioners. D. Education Forum -nothing new E. Green Team - nothing new 5. By-Laws and Chair and Vice Chair Appointments Pawluk asked for volunteers for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair. Baker volunteered to be Chair and Stremel volunteered to be Vice Chair. MOVED by Hill, seconded by Anderson, and the motion carried unanimously to elect Baker as Chair and Stremel as Vice Chair for the Environmental Commission. Pawluk handed out a draft of the annual report. An electronic copy will be sent to the Commissioners for comment. Minutes of the Environmental Commission May 18, 2009 Page 2 of 2 6. Proaram/Project Updates A. TMDL i. Sweeney Lake - Load allocation process has started. A public meeting is scheduled for June 3rd. Lisa will send the meeting time to the Commissioners ii. Medicine Lake -Consultants are working with the individual cities on the models. iii. Wirth Lake - Just starting the project management phase. iv. Minnehaha Creek and Hiawatha - no change. B. III - There have been 69 sanitary sewer permits issued to residents in the 2009 PMP area. The City was informed that the grant money from MCES is running out. It is anticipated that submissions from the May will be the last. As of the end of April a total of $59,414.64 has been granted to 34 residents in Golden Valley. C. Private Development Update - The developer for Xenia Ridge has resubmitted information and has asked for an extension on the approval for the PUD. Staff has met again with the developers of the property adjacent to Good Day Cafe. The City provided them the cost of updating the traffic model which needs to include medical office space. The Storm Water ordinance was brought to the City Council. Further recommendations were made which staff is addressing. 7. Commission Member Council Reports None 8. Other Business None 9. Adiourn MOVED by Baker, seconded by Hill, and the motion carried to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:40 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be June 22,2009 at 7:00 pm. c:g Uold~n Valley OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION Meeting Minutes Brookview Community Center Monday, June 22, 2009 5:45 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Vaughan called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Roger Bergman, Bob Mattison, Emily Piper, Anne Saffert, Jim Vaughan, Rick Jacobson, Director of Parks and Recreation; Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager; and Sheila Van Sloun, Parks and Recreation Administrative Assistant. Absent: Ken Graves, Kelly Kuebelbeck and Jerry Sandler. III. AGENDA CHANGES OR ADDITIONS None made. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -April 27, 2009 MOTION: Moved by Bergman and seconded by Piper to approve the April 2ih meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously. V. PARK AND OPEN SPACE TOUR The Open Space and Recreation Commission visited the following parks and open space areas: General Mills Nature Preserve, Golden Oaks Park, Lakeview Park, Golden Ridge Nature Area, General Mills Research Nature Area, Medley Park, Wesley Park, Hampshire Park, Wildwood Park/Olson School, Pennsylvania Woods, Canadian Pacific Rail Corridor, Honeywell Little League Area, Sandburg Ball fields, St. Croix Park/Bassett Creek Trail, Scheid Park, Glenview Park, Wirth Park, Humane Society, Luce Line Trail, Schaper Park, Natchez Park, Davis Community Center, Blazer Park, Lions Park, Western Avenue Marsh and Brookview Park. VIII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Bergman and seconded by Mattison to adjourn at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. B~s,selt.Ctegk~atij~~bedM:anagement ,\lll~!~:\d',;~ii'~",:I~B~,,~~,,~~Q? ,:1';:~'\:'lg~1 The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) was called to order at 11:30 a.m., Thursday, June 18, 2009, 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 Also present: Commissioner Pauline Langsdorf Commissioner Linda Loomis, Treasurer Alternate Commissioner Ted Hoshal Commissioner Michael Welch, Chair Not represented Commissioner Daniel Stauner Commissioner Ginny Black, Vice Chair Not represented Not represented Counsel Engineer Recorder Charlie LeFevere Karen Chandler Amy Herbert Laura Adler, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of St. Louis Park Cliff Aichinger, Administrator, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Derek Asche, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Plymouth Pat Byrne, City of Minneapolis Lois Eberhart ,BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minneapolis Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council Dave Hanson, Alternate Commissioner, City of Golden Valley Ron Leaf, SEH, Inc. Tom Mathisen, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Crystal Richard McCoy, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Robbinsdale Jeff Oliver, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley Liz Stout, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City ofMinnetonka Liz Thornton, Alternate Commissioner, City of Plymouth -1i.~PJl10~"~[,~fdAgEi~i:f,I:~BtlTe:ol:'lsent Agenda Chair Welch added to the agenda 4Cvi - Invoice from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and moved agenda items 6G - Update on Bassett Creek Main Stem report" and 6H - Update on Plymouth Creek Feasibility Report - to be addressed directly after agenda item 6A - BCWMC's Missions and Goals. Ms. Black moved to approve the minutes as amended. Mr. Stauner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously {Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and S1. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. At the request of Mr. LeFevere, Chair Welch removed the Counsel Communications from the Consent Agenda. Ms. Black moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ms. Langsdorf seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. #249329 vI Page 1 BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes '3;..Citiz~tJ), . "o'o;'N:() Mr. Hoshal reported on a possible opportunity for the Commission to hear a presentation by a recent Gustavus Adolphus College graduate I current City of Golden Valley intern on her thesis Bassett Creek: Perceptions of an Urban Stream at a future BCWMC meeting. Commissioners indicated their interest in hearing the presentation and Ms. Loomis said she would discuss the possibility with the intern and her department supervisor and report back to the Commission. A. Presentation of the May 21, 2009, BCWMC meeting minutes. The minutes were approved as part of the Consent Agenda. B. Presentation of the Financial Statement. The June f'mancial report was received and approved as part of the Consent Agenda. The general and construction account balances reported in the June 2009 Financial Report are as follows: Checking Account Balance TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE 628,179.37 653,244.19 Construction Account Balance TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BALANCE -Less: Reserved for CIP projects Construction cash/ investments available for projects 2,811,876.80 2,811,876.80 3,515,358.17 (703,481.37) C. Presentation of Invoices for Payment Approval. Invoices: i. Kennedy & Graven - Legal Services through April 30, 2009 - invoice for the amount of $1,552.60. ii. Barr Engineering Company - May Engineering Services - invoice for the amount of $21,616.93. iii. Barr Engineering Company - Sweeney Lake TMDL Phase II Services - invoice for the amount of $3,058.00. iv. Amy Herbert - May Recording Administrator Services - invoice for the amount of $2,228.46. v. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust - Annual Premium for Liability and Open Meeting Law Coverage - invoice for the amount of $3,830.00. Ms. Loomis moved to approve the payment of the invoices. Mr. Hoshal seconded the motion. By call of roll, the motion carried unanimously (Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. By call of roll, the motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 2 4.:N'ew:'Hlu~ill'~ss' . '" ", '. :' ,-<.- .... : :.- '" ,:,~" ,"(~';:.'~',:j:t,ri ,,:.',,;-ii; \"::j:>:;';:,; l~.(;;,'-,' ',' ~~~'" ,;",; A. Plymouth Middle School Parking Improvements: City of Plymouth. Ms. Chandler explained that the school is located on 36th Avenue in Plymouth. She reported that the project is for improvements to the school's parking and bus staging area. Ms. Chandler stated that the project would increase the impervious surface area by 0.28 acres. She explained that the reason the Commission is reviewing the project is because it includes an underground stormwater treatment vault. Ms. Chandler said the project would meet the Commission's nondegradation requirements because the project would treat a larger area, more than 1 acre, than is being added, which brings the total phosphorus loading to less than currently drains off of the site. Ms. Chandler said that the Commission Engineer recommends approval of the project subject to the condition B in the June 10,2009, Engineer's Memo, with the following revision that would include an operation agreement so the condition would read, "An operation and maintenance agreement must be established between the city and owner to ensure the StormTech Chamber System will be properly maintained in accordance to manufacturer recommendations." She said the reason to revise the condition to add the operation agreement is to make sure the underdrain pipe that goes under the system is closed. Ms. Chandler reported that the Commission Engineer has discussed the condition with the City of Plymouth and is confident that the condition will be met. Ms. Black moved to approve the project with the Commission Engineer's recommended condition as revised. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. ,. G., Jill", :,B,tlstne$s..,.....'. __ _ c 00-',-',_,.",'-'. , ','''c.;:''C-CO;',---.,' A. BCWMC's Missions and Goals - Update. Chair Welch explained that the Commission is trying to prioritize a list of goals for the organization for the remainder of 2009 and for 2010. He said a list of goals came out of the Commission's organizational analysis conducted by Springsted, Inc. Chair Welch stated that the goals are priorities for how the Commission conducts its work and provides a framework for how the Commission functions. The commissioners and alternate commissioners were invited to cast three votes, tallied as shown below, for the goals they considered the most important for the Commission to address i02009 and 2010: . Draft and adopt an organizational mission - 1 vote . Review and, as necessary, redesign and reorganize the BCWMC website - 2 votes . Draft and approve job descriptions for commissioners, officers, TAC members, consulting staff- 1 vote . Define additional administrative and technical services needed to improve commission function and reorganize existing committees, contracted services provides, including contracting additional services as identified, to meet identified needs - 4 votes . Review and, if necessary, propose revisions to the BCWMC joint powers agreement - 4 votes . Review and, if necessary, revise BCWMC bylaws - 0 votes #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 3 . Establish and maintain commissioner liaisons to the TAC, TMDL stakeholder groups, EPOC and other working groups as selected by the commission - 0 votes . Identify and address commissioner watershed-management education needs - 2 votes . Review and, if necessary, revise process by which capital improvement projects are identified and proposed for additional to the BCWMC implementation plan and ClF - 2 votes . Identify medium- and long-term water-quality improvement initiatives (other than capital projects) - 2 votes . The following task identified in the organizational analysis was not included in the vote due to Commission's action on it in 2009 - Review and restructure the BCWMC project-review procedures to effectively integrate with member city permitting programs, then communicate protocols to member cities to ensure consistent application. Ms. Black stated that the Administrative Services Committee would set up a meeting to discuss the goals as prioritized by the Commission. B. Update on Bassett Creek Main Stem Feasibility Report (Highway 100 to Regent) and Update on Plymouth Creek Feasibility Report. Ms. Chandler requested to take agenda items 6B and 6C together since the two projects need to go through similar administrative processes. She reported that the BCWMC's 2010 operating budget includes a levy that includes the Plymouth Creek restoration project but also a portion of the Bassett Creek main stem restoration project. Ms. Chandler explained that the Commission needs to order the projects so they can be included in the BCWMC's levy request to Hennepin County for 2010. She said that the Commission needs to schedule and hold the public hearing on the projects prior to ordering them and also needs to have the projects' feasibility reports completed prior to the public hearing. Chair Welch added that the plans for the projects need to be sent to Hennepin County prior to the Commission's public hearing on the projects. Ms. Chandler stated that the feasibility report for Bassett Creek has not been prepared and that the feasibility report for the Plymouth Creek restoration project is still in draft form. She said that the Commission needs to take action to have the two reports completed. She said that a lot of the work that would go into completing the Bassett Creek feasibility study has been done as part of the Resource Management Plan. Chair Welch commented that since the Resource Management Plan has been prepared it would seem efficient to have Barr Engineering prepare the Bassett Creek Main Stem feasibility report. He asked Ms. Chandler if Barr prepared a proposal and cost estimate. Ms. Chandler said Barr estimates it would cost approximately $5,000 for Barr to prepare the feasibility report. Chair Welch commented that as a policy going forward proposals and cost estimates should be presented to the Commission in writing. Ms. Black commented that the Administrative Services Committee is reviewing possibilities of using other engineering firms for work such as feasibility studies. She said that had the schedule of these projects been brought to the Commission's attention earlier the Commission could have had the option of putting out a request for proposals for the work. Chair Welch moved to order Barr Engineering to complete the feasibility study on the Bassett Creek Main Stem. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried with five votes in favor [Cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, Medicine Lake, Minneapolis, and Plymouth] and one vote #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 4 against [City of New Hope] The following three cities were absent from the vote: Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park. Chair Welch directed staff to notice the public hearing for both projects for the September BCWMC meeting. Chair Welch directed staff to fmalize the Plymouth Creek Restoration Project feasibility study. C. Update on Plymouth Creek Feasibility Report - See agenda item 6B. D. Education and Public Outreach Committee i. Report on Search for Watenhed Article Writer. Ms. Langsdorf reported that the Committee sent out a scope of services to four writen and received a proposal and work samples from two of them. She said the Committee recommends contracting with Judie Arginteanu to write three to five articles in 2009 at a cost of $900. Ms. Langsdorf move approval of the recommendation. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously with five votes in favor [City of Minneapolis abstained and Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. Chair Welch asked the Committee to see if the writer has a contract that Commission Counsel could review and if not directed Counsel to draft a contract. The Committee asked for the Commission to forward to it contact information for people in the watershed that could be interviewed by the writer for the articles. Chair Welch directed staff to add to the July meeting agenda a discussion on whether the Commission needs to establish a cut-off policy regarding when materials need to be received by the Commission prior to the monthly meeting in order for an item to be included on the meeting agenda and! or for action to be taken on an item. ii. Request for Education Grant Reimbursement from the Blake School. Ms. Black reported that the Education Committee received the final report from the Blake School regarding its use of the grant funds. Ms. Black stated that the Committee recommends approving payment of the $1,000 grant to the Blake School. Ms. Langsdorf moved approval of paying the $1,000 grant to the Blake School. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. E. Cliff Aichinger, Administrator, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, (RWMWD) Discussion on TMDL Study Load Allocation Approaches. Chair Welch introduced Mr. Aichinger, the Administrator of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watenhed District, who was invited to speak to the Commission about RWMWD's experience regarding TMDL wasteload allocation determinations and RWMWD's experience with structuring and proceeding with a watershed-wide TMDL study. Mr. Aichinger said that a number ofthe lakes in the RWMWD are listed for different impairments, primarily nutrient impairments. He said the District has only one creek impairment, which is for chloride. He said the RWMWD would use the same basic type of implementation measures to solve the issues of the impaired lakes in their district, which is why he became interested in the watenhed-wide approach. He was interested to see if the watenhed-wide approach would reduce the District's level of effort for addressing the impairments. #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 5 Mr. Aichinger mentioned that he did hear about the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission's effort. He said it was a very exhaustive effort. He commented that Elm Creek did not have very much data heading into the process. Mr. Aichinger said the RWMWD is entirely modeled and there is hydraulic analysis on every drainage area in the entire district. He said every lake in the district has a completed strategic lake management plan. He said the data issue is completed for RWMWD and that 70% of the TMDL study was already complete going into the TMDL study process. Mr. Aichinger said the RWMWD sees time savings, as in finishing the process sooner, as an advantage of the watershed-wide TMDL study. He said another advantage the District hopes to see is that since the results from each lake are very similar, it should be easier to incorporate the measures into the District's management plan and easier for the cities in the district to incorporate the measures into their local water management plans. He said these outcomes still need to be tested. Mr. Aicbinger said the District did a cost estimate for the MPCA regarding conducting a watershed-wide TMDL study versus conducting the individual TMDL studies and the costs were anticipated to be the same. Mr. Aichinger said that before coming to talk with the Commission he had conversations with several people regarding approaching load allocations categorically or individually. He said the RWMWD approached the load allocations individually right from the start, even the watershed- wide TMDL. Mr. Aicbinger said the District has enough data to be able to assign load allocations to individual MS4s. He said that every city in its District is an MS4. He said the EP A and MPCA would prefer to have the allocations divided individually if the data is there. Mr. Aichinger commented that from speaking to MPCA staff it is his understanding that the categorical approach came about because many watersheds do not have very specific water quality, water quantity, and hydrologic data so that a category of cities or a category of industries would need to be the approach taken. He said the downside of the categorical approach in the MPCA's opinion is that someone needs to take on the role of monitoring the accounting of the load reduction. Mr. Aicbinger explained that the RWMWD took on the responsibility of doing the projects to achieve the MS4s' load reductions, which were assigned by the RWMWD. He said the District is doing a phased approach and has projects to be completed in the f'll'st ten years with the hope that the completion of those projects will meet the standard set in the TMDL. He said the District is starting with implementing a one-inch f'Iltration standard and completing projects that had already been identified. He said that if the water quality standards aren't met with the completion of the f'll'st phase, then the District will revise its TMDL and will transition into the cities having to do additional BMPs. Mr. Aichinger explained that the District will be more specific about what those BMPs could be and what credits could be achieved by the MS4s with those BMPs. He said the RWMWD acknowledges that it will have to go in and retrofit in order to reach the standard set by the TMDL. Ms. Eberhart asked if the RWMWD, as an MS4, has its own load allocation. Mr. Aichinger responded no and said it is because the District doesn't have any lateral storm sewer systems. Ms. Eberhart asked if the RWMWD has an agreement with the MS4s. Mr. Aicbinger responded that the RWMWD is going to formalize the agreement, which will state that the MS4s recognize the District's authority and that the District is taking a phased approach and that the parties agree that if in ten years if the District identifies that the improvements the District has implemented does not fully achieve the TMDL then the MS4s will have to revise their SWPPP. Ms. Eberhart asked what would be the responsibility of the MS4s if in the first 10 years something happens and #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 6 the District cannot carry through with its projects. He responded that the MS4s would have to make their way toward achieving their load allocation. Mr. Leaf asked if cities go above and beyond the standard in the first 10 years, will the cities get credit? Mr. Aichinger said yes that everything the cities do in the first 10 years will be entered into the modeL Mr. Mathisen asked ifMnlDOT and Hennepin County have their own load allocations. Mr. Aichinger said he would need to look into it. Ms. Eberhart asked how the District will achieve some balance in the Urst 10 years so that when that phase is done, there isn't one area left that hasn't made any progress at all. He responded that it is the load from the entire subwatershed that matters rather than whether one city is getting most of the improvements that the District is installing. He said that when the District re-evaluates the loading and the impact on the lake, the District wUllook at the total loading factor and what needs to be reduced. Ms. Eberhart asked if he meant that in ten years the District would start from scratch regarding the distribution of the load as opposed to saying in ten years that City A has achieved X amount of reduction but City B has achieved zero. Mr. Aichinger responded yes, although the District hasn't spoken about it in detail it seems to him that redistributing the load would be a fair approach. Ms. Eberhart asked who is responsible for the maintenance of the projects completed by the District and Mr. Aichinger responded that if the RWMWD does a capital project, the RWMWD maintains it. F. Update on Medicine Lake TMDL Study. Chair Welch reported that included in the meeting packet is the technical document from LimnoTech containing the results of the P8 watershed modeling for the Medicine Lake TMDL. He stated that the MPCA would like the Commission to decide today regarding the waste load allocation approach - either individual or categorical. Chair Welch reminded the Commission that the approach favored by the Medicine Lake TMDL Stakeholder Committee was the categorical in which all MS4s besides Mn/DOT would be grouped together. He said that Chris Zadak ofthe MPCA communicated to him that if the Commission doesn't decide or say yes to the approach favored by the stakeholder committee, then the MPCA will proceed with the individual wasteload allocation in order to keep moving forward with the project. Chair Welch said if the Commission doesn't make a decision today, then an adjustment could be made later on in the TMDL that the MPCA is drafting. Ms. Loomis remarked that since the Medicine Lake Stakeholder Committee doesn't meet again until July 30th perhaps the BCWMC's Technical Advisory Committee (T AC) could meet prior to the July Commission meeting so the Commission could have the T AC's input. Mr. Oliver said that the City of Golden Valley is requesting that LimnoTech turn the data and model over to the Commission Engineer and the member cities for their review. He said the City of Golden Valley is not comfortable making a decision about the waste load allocation until it reviews and understands the data. Ms. Chandler stated that Barr Engineering has requested the model from LimnoTech so that Barr could look at it to understand the discrepancy regarding the amount of total phosphorus removal predicted for the West Medicine Lake Ponds project. Chair Welch remarked that he will be interested in seeing how the agreement with the cities that the RWMWD is working on comes together. Mr. Frost stated that the MPCA does allow for adaptive management. He said there aren't #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 7 expectations that the TMDL goals will be met in a five-year permit cycle. Mr. Frost stated that the Commission would have to go in and do what it needs to do and then reassess and that there would be a cycle of reassessment over the long-term. Chair Welch said he hears the Commission saying that it is not ready to make a decision between the categorical and the individual approaches even if the MPCA says that it will go forward and write into the draft TMDL that the approach will be individual. Mr. Asche asked if the Commission and the MS4 member-cities will have a voice in how the loads are allocated in the individual approach or if the MPCA will decide the loads. Chair Welch said he could forward the request to the MPCA that the Commission wants the model and the data forwarded to Barr Engineering and the member cities but he can't answer Mr. Asche's question. Chair Welch moved to have the data and model turned over to the cities and the Commission Engineer for evaluation, refinement, and discussion, and to have the T AC meet in July to discuss the issues and to provide a recommendation to the Commission for its July meeting. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote]. G. Watershed-wide TMDL. The Commission tabled the discussion until the July BCWMC meeting. H. Update on Sweeney Lake TMDL Study. Mr. Leaf asked if the Commission wants SEH to send the draft report to the MPCA this month or to wait another month. He said SEH could include a cover letter stating that the wasteload allocation approach is still being discussed but the report is being submitted for review of its methodology and data. Mr. Leaf explained that the draft report states that regarding the wasteload allocation that MnlDOT gets assigned an individual load and the cities of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park are grouped together under a categorical load assignment. He said no decision was made and that approach was included because it was the recommended approach by the technical team. Ms. Loomis recommended tabling further discussion until the July BCWMC meeting. I. Update on Mississippi River TMDL Study. Ms. Loomis reported that EOR has been named the engineering firm heading up this TMDL. She said the Commission's informatiou is accessible through STORET. Ms. Loomis said the E. Coli sources could be from all over the place. Ms. Loomis said she commented at the stakeholder meeting that DNR has not been participating in the stakeholder meetings but that DNR would need to be involved if MS4s would need to implement a plan regarding wildlife such as rounding up deer. She said there was a discussion of the E. Coli f'mgerprinting and ways of identifying strains of E. Coli. Ms. Loomis also noted that this is the first bacteria TMDL study in which the impaired water is a drinking water source. , . 7~:~.orl1ffil:lnicatJ()'lS A. Chair: i. Chair Welch reported he received marketing information from a consulting engineering firm and he would forward the information to Ms. Herbert to e-mail to the Commission for its information. Ii. Chair Welch remarked that the June 11 tb BCWMC watershed tour was great and would be a good model for future BCWMC watershed tours. #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 8 B. Commissioners: i. Ms. Black stated that the Recycling Association of Minnesota (RAM) is holding a rain barrel sale and that Ms. Herbert would forward the e-mail with the sale information to the Commission. ii. Mr. Hoshal said he attended a public informational meeting in St. Louis Park regarding the Emerald Ash Borer infestation in St Paul. He said the look of the neighborhoods in the watershed could change drastically in the next five years if the infestation takes hold. Mr. Hoshal said the impacts of the infestation could affect water quality and may be something the Commission needs to take a closer look at even in terms of budgeting. He said that he did speak with the Communications Director of the MN Department of Agriculture to say that their department makes informational presentations to watershed districts and watershed management organizations and BWSR so that everyone is on board to know what to expect. Mr. Hoshal said that perhaps for a meeting in the fall the Commission could have someone from the MN Department of Agriculture come in and speak. C. Committees: Education Committee i. Ms. Langsdorf announced that the next Joint Education and Public Outreach Committee meeting will be held on July 15th at 8:00 a.m. at Plymouth City Hall and the next Education Committee meeting will be held on July 21st at 9:00 a.m. at Golden Valley City Hall in the Councll Conference Room. ii. Ms. Thornton reported that the Joint EPOC revised the educational brochure with the changes regarding ordinances recommended at the May Commission meeting. D. Counsel: i. Mr. LeFevere said that for years the watershed outlet monitoring station has been operating informally and without a contract with the Commission and now a contract is being requested so updates on that process will be coming in front of the Commission at a future meeting. ii. Mr. LeFevere said that BWSR's PRAP compliance checklist asks WMOs if they have updated their data practices plan within the last five years. He said that at the last Shingle Creek board meeting Kennedy & Graven was authorized to prepare a plan for them. He said his f'll'Dl will prepare a generic plan and will split the cost between the organizations that want the firm to prepare it. He said it would cost a few hundred dollars and asked if the Commission would want on board.-Chair Welch moved to authorize counsel to prepare a data practices plan for the BCWMC in conjunction with the other organizations for which he is preparing it for. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park were absent from the vote). Chair Welch said the Commission is required to have a document retention schedule. Mr. LeFevere said perhaps it could adopt one from the member cities or Kennedy & Graven could provide a generic form electronically to Ms. Herbert to review. E. Engineer: i. Ms. Chandler reported that Joel Settles of Hennepin County requested from the Commission a preliminary estimate of its tax levy request to the County for 2010. She said she prepared a draft e-mail, included in the meeting packet, with the preliminary figures and stating that the #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 9 Commission would send the final request by October 1st. Chair Welch directed Ms. Chandler to send the e-mail to Joel Settles. "Q~1i,-~dJlli~Q.rne.ri.t. Ms. Loomis moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Black seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 2 :35 p.m. Date Michael Welch, Chair Date Amy Herbert, Recorder Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary Date to. #249329 vI BCWMC June 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes Page 10 Valley e du Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5,2009 Agenda Item 3. E. 1. Authorize Agreements with Metropolitan Council and Mn/DOT and Award Contract for the 2009 Asphalt Overlay Project, City Improvement Project No. 09-11 Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator Summary The 2009 Asphalt Overlay Project includes milling and overlaying the following sections of the south frontage road of 1-394 and the east frontage road of TH 100: 1. South frontage road of 1-394 from General Mills Boulevard to the south City limits at Texas Avenue. 2. South frontage road of 1-394 from the south/east City limits west of TH 100, under TH 100 to the east frontage road of TH 100. 3. East frontage road of TH 100 and south frontage road of 1-394 from Douglas Avenue to the east City limits at France Avenue. During design of the 2009 asphalt overlay project, staff contacted Metropolitan Council staff to discuss rehabilitation of their existing crosswalk on the south frontage road of 1-394 just east of General Mills Boulevard as part of the City's project. During those discussions, Met Council staff requested that the City's contract include a mill and overlay on their Park and Ride facilities at that location. Alternate bid items were included in the bid documents to accommodate the work. A copy of the Joint Powers Agreement relating to the costs for performing the work on the crosswalk and the Park and Ride facility, and reimbursement to the City is attached for Council consideration. Also during project design, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) staff contacted Golden Valley staff to request that the City's project extend east of the Golden Valley limits to the first intersection east of France Avenue. At their July 21, 2009 meeting, the Council authorized entering into Master Partnership Contract No. 94976 with the State of Minnesota that allows the City to perform such work in cooperation with Mn/DOT. Alternate bid items were also included in the bid documents to accommodate this work. A copy of Work Order 2 under the Master Partnership Contract for the extra work specifically relating to the extension of the overlay on the south frontage road and reimbursement to the City is attached for Council consideration. Bids for the 2009 Asphalt Overlay Project, City Improvement Project No. 09-11 including the above alternate items, were opened on July 21, 2009. The following bids were received: Midwest Asphalt Corp. Hardrives, Inc. Asphalt Surface Technologies, Inc. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. Bituminous Roadways GMH Asphalt Corp. C.S. McCrossan, Inc. $355,519.16 $359,834.71 $372,131.60 $373,400.62 $377,886.35 $378,179.80 $385,459.00 Engineer's Estimate $555,200.00 Funding for the 2009 Asphalt Overlay Project is included in the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (S-013, page 91). The construction costs for work related to agreements with Met Council and Mn/DOT are estimated at $79,100. In accordance with the proposed agreements, the City will receive reimbursement for all costs for rehabilitation of facilities for the Met Council and Mn/DOT, including all design and construction administration costs. Attachments Location map (1 page) Joint Powers Agreement Relating to the Allocation of Costs for the Park and Ride Facility (5 pages) State of Minnesota Work Order Under Master Partnership Contract, Work Order 2 (14 pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action 1. Authorize entering into a Joint Powers Agreement with the Metropolitan Council for rehabilitating the existing Park and Ride facilities just east of General Mills Boulevard on the south frontage road of 1-394. 2. Authorize staff to enter into Work Order 2 under the existing Master Partnership Contract 94976 with Mn/DOT for the rehabilitation of the south frontage road of 1-394 from France Avenue to the first intersection east. 3. Award a contract for the 2009 Asphalt Overlay Project to the lowest responsible bidder, Midwest Asphalt Corporation, in the amount of $355,519.16. ~ :::::::--nr.. ~ ~ - JA StVD ~\' "" /.. ~ ~ley 2:, gl ~ DOUGLAS AVE ~ r;1$ ~cm ~ ( I --- WAYZATA BLVD ~ -r-. ) \ - ~ .~ m TYROL CREST u:' ~ w (.) :z ~ u. 'o.;l-ge Road ,;.*xtension '~ UJ W ; ~ -- ~ ''''.4 ~ 2009 ASPHALT OVERLAY 1-394 SOuth Frontage Road (West) from General Mills Blvd to Texas Ave 1-394 SOuth Frontage Road (East) from CIty Umlts to TH 100 East Frontage Road" TH 100 East Frontage Road/I-394 SOuth Frontap Road from Douglas Ave to France Ave SOuth PrInt Date: 7/20/09 Sourt:eS: Hennepin County SUflleyors Of/Ice [or Property Unes (ZOOS). r [ t JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE ALLOCATION OF COSTS FOR PARK AND RIDE FACILITY THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 2009, by and between the Metropolitan Council, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, 506 Sixth Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota ("Met Council"), and the City of Golden Valley, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 ("City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City and Met Council, deemed it beneficial to both parties to enter into a joint powers agreement for the construction of certain improvements along a portion of the south frontage road of Interstate Highway 394, located in the City of Golden Valley, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota ("Joint Powers Agreement"), which improvements include the following: rehabilitation of the existing roadway within Golden Valley from approximately General Mills Boulevard to the east City limits at France Avenue South and rehabilitation of a Park and Ride facility consisting of two separate parking lots (hereinafter collectively "Improvements"); WHEREAS, the City has prepared certain plans and specifications to construct the Improvements, which plans are referred to as City Project 09-11 ; WHEREAS, the plans and specifications for Golden Valley City Project No. 09-11 include the mill and overlay rehabilitation of a Park and Ride facility located near the intersection of the frontage road and General Mills Boulevard; WHEREAS, the City has authorized its consultant to evaluate the need for a pedestrian signal system on the frontage road at the Park and Ride facility's crosswalk for an estimated cost of Four Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Six Dollars and Seventy Cents ($4,346.70); WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement provides that the parties thereto would enter into separate agreements to allocate the cost of the Improvements to the appropriate party; WHEREAS, the Met Council and the City have entered into this joint powers agreement for the purpose of allocating certain costs incurred by the City relating to the Park and Ride facility; and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. ~ 471.59 authorizes political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota to enter into joint powers agreements for the joint exercise of powers common to each. G:\PROJECTS\Overlay Projects\South Frtg Rd 1-394 (2009)\Agreements\GV-MTC Joint Pwrs Agreement ver4.doc NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually stipulated and agreed as follows: I. PURPOSE The City and Met Council have joined together for the purpose of delineating each party's responsibility with regard to cost of crosswalk improvements and rehabilitation of the Park and Ride facility. II. METHOD A. Construction Improvements: 1. The cost of removal of the existing crosswalk and construction of proposed new crosswalk improvements shall be deemed the responsibility of Met Council in accordance with Exhibit A, Preliminary 1-394 Mill & Overlay Cost Estimate. 2. The cost to evaluate the need for installation of a Push Button Activated Pedestrian Signal System, at the crosswalk for the Park and Ride facility and should it be deemed necessary, the subsequent design and installation thereof, shall be considered the responsibility of Met Council in accordance with Exhibit A. 3. The cost of all rehabilitation of the Park and Ride facility listed under Alternate Bid #1 (MTC Park and Ride) of Exhibit A shall also be deemed the responsibility of Met Council. 4. All other costs, with the exception of those deemed the responsibility of the Minnesota Department of Transportation in accordance with Exhibit A, shall be considered the responsibility of the City. B. Indirect Costs: 1. The Met Council shall pay to the City, eighteen percent (18%) of the actual construction costs of the improvements, deemed the responsibility of the Met Council as described above, for indirect costs including, but not limited to, project design, construction observation, legal fees and contract administration (the "Indirect Costs"). 2. The Met Council shall also pay to the City the costs, estimated at $4,346.70, for the evaluation of the need for a pedestrian signal system at the Park and Ride facility crosswalk. III. PAYMENT Upon award of a contract by the City, Exhibit A will be modified using the bid prices received to reflect the new estimated construction cost. The City will invoice the Met Council for ninety-five percent (95%) of the estimated construction cost. Within 30 days after receipt of the invoice from the City, the Met Council shall pay the City 2 rev. 6/11/09 ninety-five percent (95%) of the estimated construction cost. Upon completion of the Improvements and after receipt of a written statement documenting the actual cost of construction of the Improvements, the Met Council shall pay to the City the difference between the actual construction cost and the estimated construction cost. If the Met Council fails to timely pay for such invoice, it shall be responsible for all of the City's cost of collection and attorney's fees. IV. DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS All funds disbursed by any of the parties to this Agreement shall be disbursed by each party pursuant to the method provided by law. V. CONTRACTS AND PURCHASES All contracts let and purchases made pursuant to this Agreement shall be made in conformance to state laws. VI. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION In accordance with the City and the Met Council's Affirmative Action policies, no person shall illegally be excluded from full-time employment, income or be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the program which is the subject of this Agreement on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, marital status, public assistance status, age, disability or national origin. VII. INDEMNIFICATION Subject to applicable exceptions and limitations provided by law, including but not limited to Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, the City, and the Met Council mutually agree to hold harmless each other from any claims, losses, costs, expenses or damages resulting from the acts or omissions of the respective officers, agents or employees relating to activity conducted by either party under this Agreement. VIII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT/REQUIREMENT OF A WRITING It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and all negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter thereof, as well as any previous agreement presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter thereof. Any alterations, variations or modifications of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed by the parties herein. 3 rev. 6/11/09 In witness whereof, the parties hereto have set their hands on the dates indicated. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY METROPOLITAN COUNCIL By: Linda R. Loomis, Mayor By: Its: Dated: By: Thomas D. Burt, City Manager ATTEST By: Dated: Its: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM By: Its: Dated: 4 rev. 6/11/09 EXHIBIT A. PREUMINARY 1-394 MILL & OVERLAY COST ESTIMATE General Mills Blvd. to Texes Ave. & Dougles Ave to France Ave. including THl 00 underpass to City limas City of Goldan Valley Given: Overlay Thickness (in.) - 2 Contingency (%) - 15 Indirect Cost (%) - 25 CL Length (LF) - SEE SECT DATA Avg Width (LF) - SEE SECT DATA )!.,nr )i 1II;":'i';> iYi:;:;}. ./i _. ~~C"iCCCCiii;;>_. . ; c<Xiiii;;/; y:r;; ;>;;l;l;iil>!;!I~I!;; i'.c;y,: li;i;]i>;I;i;; ;;:;/I>I,;>;)I!I'I/lll';;, .'i';ir. ~r~ ; . ~ BAsE BID: Mobilization LS 1 $8,500. 0.50 $4 250.0( 0.49 $4 165.0( 0.01 $85.00 $8 500.00 Mixture for Joints & Crack Re""ir IT""", 1 \ LB $4. Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 2908 $3. 1,344 $4,032.0( 1564 $4 692.()[ $8,724.00 Remove Concrete Pavement SY 131 $7. 64 $448.0( 67 $469.OC $917.00 Saw Concrete Pavement - Full Deoth LF 255 $4. 255 $1 020.1\1 $1 020. Mill Bituminous Surface SY 22 940 $0. 11427 $3,nO.91 11513 $3 799. $75702 Type LV4 Wearinll Course Mixture TON 7754 $59. 1 372 $80 948:rn 1 382 $81 538. $162 486. BauminousMixtureForTackCoat GAL 1,148 $3. 572 $1716.0( 576 $1728.0 $3444~C Adlust Gale Valve end Box EACH 20 $200. 10 $2000.01 10 $2 000. $4 000. Adiust Frame & Rinll Castinll EACH 10 $550. 5 $2 750.nc 5 $2 750. $5 500.0 6" Concrete Pavement SY 23 $64. 23 $1 472. $1 472. 24''x 48" Truncated Dome Panel EACH 4 $250. 4 $1 000. $1 000. Concrete Curb & Gutter Des 8618 LF 2908 $16.2 1 344 $21 840.0 1 564 $25415.0( $47255. 36" Concrete Gutter Throunh Drlvewav SY 64 $47. 64 $3 008. $3 008.0 Pavement Messaoe (Rieht Arrow Eooxv EACH 1 $170. 1 $170. $170. Pavement Messatle IStrainht-Throunh Arrow E""xv EACH 1 $170. 1 $170. $170.00 4" Double SoUd Line Yellow - Eooxv LF 6754 $0.6 2,844 $1 905. 3910 $2 619.7 $4 525.1 4" SoUd Line Whfte - E""xv LF 4 8n $0.41 4 8n $1 999.5 $1 999.5 24" Solid Line Whae - Eooxv LF 89 $9.x 89 $818.8 $818.8 Zebra Crosswalk Markine - Eooxv sa FT 666 $4.1 540 $2 214. 126 $516.6J: $2 730.S( Sod sa YO 1,619 $5.311 750 $3 975. 869 $4 605.7 $8 580.70 Traffic Control LUMP SUM 1 $8 500. 0.50 $4 250.0 0.49 $4,165.OC 0.01 $85.0{ $8 500.OC COST~UBTOTAL ESTIMATED BASE BID CONSTRUCTION $141,285.7 $137,477.8~ $3,627.6 $282,391.0! IAL TERNATE BID 111 fMTC PARK & RIDE: Mobilization LS 1 $1,500. 1 $1 500. $1 500. Mixture for Joints & Crack Renair ITvne 1\ - LB 328 $4. 328 $1 476. $1 476. Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 340 $3. 340 $1 020. $1 020. Saw Concrete Pavement - Full Deoth LF 40 $4. 40 $160. $160. Mill Bauminous Surface SY 5486 $1.1 5486 $8 012. $8 012. Type LV4 Weerinn Course Mixture TON 657 $65.0 657 $42705. $42705. BauminousMlxtureForTackCoat GAL 274 $3.0 274 $822. $822. Concrete Curb & Gutter Des B618 LF 340 $17. 340 $5 780. $5780.00 4" Sofid Line Whfte - Paint Parkinn Lot LF 2762 $0. 2762 $828. $828.60 Sod SY 194 $11. 194 $2134. $2134.00 Traffic Control LS 1 $1 000. 1 $1 000. $1,000.00 SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED ALTERNATE BID CONSTRUCTION COS $63,438 $63,438.2Il L TERNATE BID tI2 MnDOT EXTENSION - EAST END: MobirlZ8lion LS 1 $1 000. 1 $1 000.01 $1 000. Mixture for Joints & Crack Repair lType 1 - LB 213 $4. 213 $958.51 $958.!;11 Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter LF 129 $3. 129 $387.01 $387. Mill Bituminous Surface SY 1 409 $0. 1 409 $464.9 $464.97 Type LV4 Wearine Course Mixture TON 170 $59. 170 $10030. $10030.OC Bituminous Mixture For Tack Coat GAL 71 $3. 71 $213:] $213. Concrete Curb & Gutter Des B618 LF 129 $17. 129 $2,193~ $2193. 4" Double Solid Line YeUow - Eooxv LF 303 $0.6 303 $203.01 $203.01 24" Solid Line Whae - Eooxv LF 30 $9.21 30 $276m $276.00 Sod SQ YO 72 $22.01 72 $1,564. $1 584.00 Traffic Control LUMP SUM 1 $730.01 1 $730. $730.OC SUBTOTAL ESTIMATED AL T BID tI2 CONSTRUCTION COST: $18039.41 $18,039.411 :TO:T'Alkftr v , , -tlFCDST':;:::::: ,'<-,;,:.?,<:/, 1a;;'-: .'It:\7 :1t,.: ,; iAimU' NOTE: - Crack sealing will be done by City staff (not included in bids) after milling and before placement of the asphalt wearing course. Cost to be determine on a T&M basis. NOTE: -Indirect cost for Mat Council estimated at 18% plus $4,346.70 estimated cost of signal evaluation 'alley m Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. E. 2. Award a Contract for the 2009 Building Maintenance Project No. 09-17 Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator Summary The City has retained professional assistance to develop a facility analysis report and implementation schedule. Work to address deficiencies has been underway for the last few years. The 2009 program includes exterior repairs to the Utility Maintenance Building, Fire Station #2 and Fire Station #3. This work primarily consists of tuck pointing, repair and resealing of windows, and minor trim repairs. In addition, the 2009 Building Maintenance Project includes roofing and siding repairs to approximately nine additional City buildings that sustained hail damage in 2008. The following bids were received for the 2009 Building Maintenance Project 09-17: Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. Stock Roofing Company Restoration Systems, Inc. $74,398.11 $77,976.00 $102,923.00 $80,000.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE The 2009-2013 Building Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes $50,000 for building exterior work on Fire Station #2 and Fire Station #3 in 2009 (B-025, page 54). The 2009-2013 Water and Sewer Capital Improvement Program includes $25,000 for building exterior work on the Utility Maintenance Building (W&SS-045, page 140). Repairs for the nine buildings that sustained hail damage in 2008 are included in this project. All costs above the City's insurance deductable will be funded by the 2009 Building CIP. Attachment EPI recommendation for award letter, dated July 28, 2009 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to award a contract to Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. in the amount of $74,398.11 for the 2009 Building Maintenance Project No. 09-17. Environmental Process, IDe. :> 1m 715 Florida Avenue South, Suite 111, Golden Valley, MN 55426-1700 Phone: 763-39&-3040 · Pox: 763-398-0121 · emaiI: epimpJs@rconnect.oom · www.go-ep;.com epr July 28, 2009 Mr. Al Lundstrom Environmental Coordinator City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Re: City of Golden Valley 2009 Building Maintenance City Project No.: 09-17 EPI Project No.: 2009-057 Dear Mr. Lundstrom: Environmental Process, Inc. (BPI) reviewed the City of Golden - 2009 Building Maintenance project work scope with Mr. Tom Casey of Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. and there were no questions. Tom Casey indicated that they fully understand the scope of work and that they will be ready to start work in August as in the tentative schedule. The work schedule will be discussed in the preconstruction meeting. Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. will be the General Contractor and will use subcontractors for the restoration (sealant, tuck pointing, etc.) work, painting, window replacement, damper removal, roofing, and siding. Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. is based in Golden Valley, Minnesota. BPI has not worked with Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. in the past. Based on the review of project work scope with Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. and the fact that they are the low bidder we recommend awarding the project to them. EPI recommends that the base bid cost of $71,698.11 for the City of Golden Valley - 2009 Building Maintenance project be accepted from Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. In addition, BPI recommends the following Alternate Bids be accepted: · Alternate G-l (Fire Station #2 Antenna Removal) bid cost of $1,350.00; · Alternate G-2 (Fire Station #3 Antenna Removal) bid cost of $1,350.00. EPI recommends the base bid and alternates G-l and G-2 for a total cost of $74,398.11 be accepted from Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. Please call (763) 398-3040 with any questions, comments. Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL PRqCESS, INC. tt)~ J? ~ Denny Langer, PE Project Manager 01 Valley em randum City Administration/Council 763-593-8006/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. F. Approval of Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code Section 10.83, Subd. 2 I. "No person shall possess, display, consume or use alcoholic beverages on any City park property, unless permission is granted by the Council." As part of the application process for a Facilities Use Permit to use the large and small picnic shelters at Brookview Park the applicant has the option to pay an additional $10 to be able to serve beer and/or wine. Attached is a list of the individuals and/or organizations who have requested that option. Attachment Beer and/or wine request list (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. BEER AND/OR WINE REQUEST LIST NUMBER CC IN DATE INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION DATE TIME GROUP SHELTER BEER OR WINE APPROVED Robert Otis 08-08 5 pm-dusk 70 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Honeywell 08-13 11 am - 4 pm 85 large beer & wine 08-05-09 EPICOR 08-14 11 am - 4 pm 80 large beer & wine 08-05-09 Nicole Collins 08-16 5 pm - dusk 15 large beer & wine 08-05-09 Ajasa Technologies 08-20 5 pm - dusk 30 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Moneygram 08-21 5 pm - dusk 60 large beer & wine 08-05-09 Renae Calva 08-22 5 pm - dusk 50 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Marsha Williams 08-23 5 pm - dusk 100 large beer & wine 08-05-09 Feta Cole 08-23 5 pm - dusk 100 small beer & wine 08-05-09 BBDO 08-26 11 am - dusk 50 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Allianz 08-26 11 am - dusk 80 large beer & wine 08-05-09 Hennepin County Assessors 08-27 5 pm - dusk 40 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Princess Marbury 08-29 5 pm - dusk ? large beer & wine 08-05-09 Samantha Donneley 09-05 11 am - 4 pm 40 small beer & wine 08-05-09 Schneider Electric 09-12 11 am - dusk 40 small beer & wine 08-05-09 >> ohln'Valley Memorandum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. G. Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for the Payment of $5,465,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 20090 Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary At their meeting of June 2, 2009 the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of these bond issues and gave approval for the City Manager or designee to approve the sale. The sale date was held on Wednesday, July 22, 2009. This mechanism was put in place to monitor the market for a more opportune time, establish a system to respond to such a market and set a minimum threshold of the present value of interest cost savings of 3.1 % of the present value of the 2002A Bonds' remaining debt service. This resolution approves the final steps for the refunding. Attachments Resolution Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for the Payment of $5,465,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 20090 (19 pages, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing for the Payment of $5,465,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 20090. Valley M m Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. H. Approval of One Year Extension of Conditional Use Permit 08-123 - 601 Boone Avenue North - TruStone Financial, Applicant (formerly Teacher Federal Credit Union) Prepared By Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the September 2, 2008 City Council meeting, the Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the construction of a new 7,700 square foot credit union building with 4 drive-through lanes at the northwest corner of TH 55 and Boone Avenue North. The building would be the new home of TruStone Financial (formerly Teachers Federal Credit Union) that is now located on TH 55 just west of Douglas Drive. Since the approval of the CUP last year, TruStone has removed the old gas station on the site and done soil correction. However, they have not yet started construction. Their plan is to begin construction soon in order that the new credit union branch may open in the summer of 2010. The City Code requires that construction begin within one year of approval of the CUP. TruStone Financial is asking that this time period be extended by one year which would allow construction to begin by no later than September 2, 2010. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Email from Daniel Lieberthal, TruStone Financial, dated July 9,2009 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve an extension until September 2, 2010 for the construction to begin on the TruStone Financial building at 601 Boone Avenue North. o o o SOlI I ~ z 750 0 ~ 745 0 73tI 73tI 83S & 0 0 7060000 0 0 o o o 3> 00000000000 0000 8IlOO 8IIO!i , Subject Property \L - -- 7THAVEN.. 89DlI 81 9000 60lJ \ GOlDEN VALJ..Ey RD 90DlI 895lI jk'fSS \o\t~ ~t."(sS t41! ~"( sS \0\\(;\'\'4'1 G9 881Il Ii 440 ~ 432 '" ~ I'll :it: 424 416 8811 8951 8945 4D Wittman, Lisa From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LieberthaJ, Daniel [dan.lieberthal@trustonefinanciaJ.org] Thursday, July 09, 20092:26 PM Wittman, Lisa Wohlers, Matt; Mark Bigelbach; Lieberthal, Daniel Extension of CUP approval- 601 Boone Avenue North - Former Amstar Dear Ms. Wittman, I am sending this email to you in order to formally request placement on the next available City Council Consent Agenda. According to the information that I received from your department, there is a process for obtaining an extension of a CUP approval that requires action by the Golden Valley City Council. As you may recall, Teacher Federal Credit Union (now renamed to TruStone Financial as of June 1, 2009) purchased the former Amstar Gas Station in August of 2008. As a part of our due diligence process, we made an application to the City of Golden Valley for a Conditional Use Permit in order to be allowed to construct drive-up banking lanes at our new proposed facility. Our application was approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. The date of our approval was September 2, 2008. Since we are fast approaching the 1 year anniversary of this approval, we need to request an extension of the CUP approval in order for us to begin our development of this site. We are currently planning on an opening of the new TruStone Financial branch on Boone and Highway 55 during the July - August, 2010 timeframe. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to provide to the City of Golden Valley regarding this extension request. I can be reached at 763-512-6170. Thank you, in advance, for your assistance in this matter. Respectfully, Daniel J. Lieberthal Daniel J. Lieberthal Vice President - Real Estate TruStone Financial 14601 27th Avenue, Suite 104 Plymouth, MN 55447-4189 (763) 512-6170 direct (763) 595-4039 fax (612) 210-3899 cell dan.lieberthal@trustonefinancial.orQ 1 emorandum Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley Council Meeting August 5, 2009 Agenda Item 3. I. Authorization to Sign Agreement with Hopkins School District for Fiber Optic Connection Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director/City Clerk Summary The agreement with the City and the Hopkins School District will allow a fiber connection from the Fire Station facility at 400 Turner's Crossroad South to the fiber located at Meadowbrook School location. This will allow the City to have data/voice connection and define the responsibilities and cost sharing for maintenance of the connection. This is the same agreement that LOGIS uses with cities and school districts that share connections. Attachments Agreement Between the City of Golden Valley and Hopkins School District No. 270 for Fiber Optic Connections (5 pages) Resolution Authorizing Approval of Agreement Between the City of Golden Valley and Hopkins School District No. 270 for Fiber Optic Connections (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Approval of Agreement Between the City of Golden Valley and Hopkins School District No. 270 for Fiber Optic Connections. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY AND HOPKINS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 270 FOR FIBER OPTIC CONNECTIONS This Agreement (the "Agreement") is made by and among the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and School District No. 270 a Minnesota public corporation ("Hopkins School District") (collectively "the Parties") on this 5th day of August, 2009 (the "Effective Date"). I. Responsibilities of City of Golden Vallev ("City"). The City agrees: 1. The City will cooperate with Hopkins School District to establish an interconnect point between each party's fiber networks on the East side of the City Fire Station #2 at 400 Turner's Crossroad South. The interconnect point will be constructed by the City by intercepting the conduits containing the fiber owned by the Hopkins school district at this location. The City will place a hand hole, rated at 20,000 pounds at the interception point. The fiber from the fire station will be brought into this hand hole and coiled and labeled. For the purpose of this Agreement, this interconnection point will be referred to as the "Hopkins Interconnect". 2. The City has cooperated with Hopkins School District on past projects to establish an interconnect point between each party's fiber networks in the hand hole on the southeast corner of the Brookview Golf Course. For the purpose of this Agreement, this interconnection point will be referred to as the "Golden Valley Interconnect". 3. The City of Golden Valley shall cooperate with the Hopkins School District to splice the specified fibers at both of the Interconnect locations. 4. The City of Golden Valley will maintain and administer all fiber and fiber connections within its fiber network and shall provide necessary passive components to ensure end-to-end connectivity for the 2 fiber strands from the Hopkins Interconnect to the Fire Station #2 and the Golden Valley Interconnect to City Hall. These passive components include any required fiber-optic termination panels, patch panels, patch cables, and relevant rack space. 5. Once the City begins using the School District's fiber, the city will share 50% of the future costs of location, break fix, and relocation services for the Hopkins School District fiber plant between the Hopkins Interconnect and Golden Valley Interconnect. Hopkins School district shall submit an invoice to the City for their share of these services with the supporting documentation. II. Responsibilities of Hopkins School District. The Hopkins School District agrees: 1. The Hopkins School District will allocate the long-term use of two (2) fiber strands from the Hopkins Interconnect to the Golden Valley Interconnect to transport traffic between the Golden Valley Fire Station and Golden Valley City Hall. 1 2. The School District will create a splice point at the Hopkins Interconnect by pulling 20 feet of slack from the School district fiber in both directions in the hand hole. The Hopkins School District will invoice the City for the costs associated with creating this splice point with supporting documentation. 3. The Hopkins School District shall be responsible for the splicing and testing the two (2) strands of fiber provided at both Interconnect locations. The Hopkins School District will invoice the City for the costs associated with this splicing with supporting documentation. 4. The Hopkins School District shall provide as built maps documenting the location of the fiber cable between the Golden Valley Interconnect and the Hopkins Interconnect. These maps will be used for identifying the path that the fiber takes between the two Interconnect locations, including detailed footage from either street center line or back of curb. 111. Cost SharinQ: The Parties shall share in the cost of the fiber connection as follows: 1. The cost of establishing the "Golden Valley Interconnect" shall be City of Golden Valley responsibility. 2. The cost of establishing the "Hopkins Interconnect" shall be the City of Golden Valley responsibility. 3. The City of Golden Valley shall be responsible for 50% of the costs of locates, break-fix, and relocations required for the fiber optic plant from the Golden Valley Interconnect to the Hopkins Interconnect once they begin using the fiber. 4. All parties to this agreement shall be responsible for any other maintenance and locates of their fiber optic networks. Each Party shall be responsible, at its own cost, for its own connectivity and to access the Internet or other services. Each Party shall: a) Provide the other party and their representatives with any existing contractor agreements and contact information for the purpose of 24 * 7 repair and maintenance. b) For all schedule maintenance that would have an impact on another party, all parties agree to work with each other to schedule maintenance times to reduce the impact of the maintenance on the Network. c) Provide the other parties a minimum of 7 days notice prior to maintenance of the Network that would have an impact on them, except in the case of emergencies. d) Notify the other parties in a reasonable time period when emergency repairs are being performed that would have an impact on the other parties. IV. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for ten years and shall be automatically renewed for two additional years unless terminated under Section VI hereof. 2 V. Termination. This agreement may be terminated by any Party at the end of the initial term or any extension thereof by giving 180 days written notice prior to the termination. Any Party may terminate this Agreement for material breach 90 days after giving written notice to the breaching Party describing in reasonable detail the nature, scope and extent of the breach if the noticed Party has not remedied the breach by that time. If funds are not annually appropriated for this Agreement by the City of Golden Valley or the Hopkins School District or the Agreement becomes illegal in full or in part, the Party may give 30 days written notice to the other Parties to terminate the Agreement without further cost to any of the Parties. Notwithstanding the above, the use of the agreed upon fibers by the Parties shall survive the termination of this agreement and each organization shall continue to provide access to and maintain their fiber network as best possible for the term of the agreement and any renewal thereof and shall cooperate fully with each other to allow the continual operation of the fiber networks. Additionally, the Parties mutually agree to execute a successor agreement within a reasonable time that addresses the changed financial environment. VI. Authorized Representatives. Each Party shall designate a representative for purposes of administration of this Agreement (the "Authorized Representative"). Each Authorized Representative shall have authority for acceptance of services and shall be the point of contact for all payments due under this Agreement. A Party changing the designation of its Authorized Representative shall notify the other Party pursuant to the notice provision of this Agreement. Hopkins School District Authorized Representative: Director of Technology Hopkins School District 1001 Highway 7 Hopkins, MN 55343 City of Golden Valley Authorized Representative: City Manager City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 VII. AssiQnment. Except as specifically provided herein, the Parties shall not assign, transfer or delegate any rights or obligations under this Agreement either directly or indirectly by any means, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of the other Parties, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. VIII. Amendments. This Agreement contains all the terms agreed to by the Parties and any promise or communications of any type not reflected in the Agreement are null and void. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be approved by the governing Board of each party. 3 IX. Governinq Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. X. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be: a) personally delivered; b) sent by telecopier, facsimile transmission or other electronic means of transmitting written documents; or c) sent to the Parties at their respective addresses indicated here by registered or certified U.S. mail, return receipt requested and postage prepaid, or by private overnight mail courier service. If personally delivered, such communication shall be deemed delivered upon actual receipt; if electronically transmitted, such communication shall be deemed delivered the next business day after transmission; if sent by overnight courier, such communication shall be deemed delivered upon receipt; and if sent by U.S. mail, such communication shall be deemed delivered as of the date of delivery indicated on the receipt issued by the relevant postal service. The Parties to this Agreement may change their address for the purposes of this Agreement by giving notice thereof in accordance with this section. XI. Force Maieure. The Parties understand that acts of God, acts of civil or military authority, government regulations, embargoes, epidemics, war, terrorist acts, riots, fires, explosions, earthquakes, floods or other unusually severe weather conditions or other environmental disturbances, strikes, or other circumstances not under the control of the Parties ("Force Majeure") may delay performance as set forth in this Agreement. In the event a Force Majeure event materially limits one or all of the Parties' ability to perform under this Agreement such limitation shall not be considered a breach of the terms of this Agreement. XII. Liability. The Parties are liable to each other only to the extent the negligent actions or inactions of one of the Parties proximately cause direct out-of-pocket costs to one of the other_Parties. The Parties are not responsible for lost services, lost revenues, lost profits, indirect, consequential or special damages or attorneys' fees incurred by each other. XIII. Insurance. Each Party represents that it carries the insurance coverage necessary for school districts, municipalities and/or joint powers organizations under Minnesota law and has and will maintain coverage for operations. No Party waives its imitations on liability under Chapter 466. XIV. Dispute Resolution. If the Parties cannot agree on any matter arising out of this Agreement, after a reasonable period of good faith negotiations, they agree to engage a qualified third party to mediate the disagreement, and share the costs of the mediator on an equal basis. The Parties will work in good faith with the mediator to find an acceptable solution and must reduce any settlement agreement to writing. Any such agreement must be incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement. If a mediated agreement cannot be reached each Party has available to it all rights in law or equity. XV. Indisputable Riqht of Use. The City is granted an Indisputable Right of Use which is an exclusive and irrevocable right to use the fiber optic strands in this agreement. The IRU includes a right to use tangible and intangible property in order to use the IRU Fibers, including but not limited to cable sheathing, troughing, pedestals, slack containers, and related equipment necessary for the operation and use of the IRU Fibers as contemplated 4 herein, but excluding any electronic or optical equipment which shall be provided by the City at its sole cost. The City shall be entitled to use its IRU Fibers for any lawful purpose and hereby agrees to be bound by all laws, regulations and any requirements of this agreement. XVI. Miscellaneous. 1. The failure of a Party to give notice of default, or to enforce or insist upon compliance with any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, the waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement, or the granting of any extension of time for performance, shall not constitute the permanent waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement, and this Agreement and each of its provisions shall remain at all times in full force and effect until modified by the Parties in writing. 2. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the Parties. 3. This Agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 4. Each Party warrants and represents that it is duly authorized to execute this Agreement. 5. The headings of this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not constitute a part hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. For City of Golden Valley By: Linda R. Loomis, Mayor By: Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Date: For Independent School District No. 270 By: Title: By: Title: Date: 5 Resolution 09-44 August 5, 2009 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIIZNG APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY AND HOPKINS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 270 FOR FIBER OPTIC CONNECTIONS WHEREAS, Hopkins School District No. 270 has available fiber plant and is interested in sharing the cost of fiber locates, break-fixes, and relocate services for some of their fiber optic network; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is interested in connecting its Fire Station facility at 400 Turner's Crossroad South to the City fiber network; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the Agreement will not be effective until it is approved by the governing body of each Party. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to sign the Agreement Between the City of Golden Valley and Hopkins School District No. 270 for Fiber Optic Connections on behalf of the City. 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. Uot+uValley M morandum Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2009 "60 Days" Deadline: September 27,2009 Agenda Item 4. A. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance No. 421 - Conditional Use Permit 09-67- Amendment NO.1 - 9405 Medicine Lake Road - George Kabalan, Applicant Prepared By Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the July 21, 2009 City Council meeting the Council continued this item per the applicant's request to the August 5, 2009 City Council meeting. At the June 22, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission held an informal public hearing to consider the application for an amended Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that would permit truck and trailer rental along with the gas/convenience store that is located at 9405 Medicine Lake Road. After the hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the amended CUP subject to the following conditions: 1. A new site plan updating the 9/1/95 site plan shall be submitted and be made a part of this permit. The two equipment parking spaces shall be the two spaces south of the store and closest to TH 169. There shall be a total of 9 parking spaces for customers, employees and equipment display. The parking spaces on the property shall be clearly designated and striped and the two spaces for the rental trucks shall be clearly marked 2. The property may be used as a gas/convenience store with one automated car wash bay. Also, up to two trucks or trailers may be displayed for rent on the site in the location identified in the above Condition NO.1. 3. All signage on the site will meet the requirements of the City's sign code by no later than August 31,2009. 4. "No parking" signs shall be installed per the Fire Marshal along the west side of the shared driveway adjacent to TH 169 by no later than August 31, 2009. 5. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. 6. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation ofthe CUP. I am attaching a copy of my memo to the Planning Commission dated June 17,2009. This memo goes into detail regarding the application. Also attached is the minutes from the June 22, 2009 Planning Commission meeting that summarizes the Planning Commission's discussion on this application. In summary, the application recommended for approval by the Planning Commission would allow Mr. Kabalan to park two rental trucks or trailers in the rear parking lot. Mr. Kabablan noted that these are local trucks or trailers that are rented at this location and returned only to this location. This will not be a location where other U-haul products may be returned. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Planning Commission Minutes dated June 22, 2009 (6 pages) Memo to Planning Commission dated June 17, 2009 (4 pages) Conditional Use Permit No. 95-67 dated October 17, 1995 (1 page) Memo to the Planning Commission dated September 22, 1995 (5 pages) Memo to the City Council dated October 10, 1995 (2 pages) Ordinance No. 421, Approval of Amended Conditional Use Permit 09-67, Amendment #1, 9405 Medicine Lake Road, George Kabalan, Applicant (2 pages) Photo of the Site (1 page, loose in agenda packet) Site Plan dated September 1, 1995 (1 oversized page, loose in agenda packet) Recommended Action Motion to approve Ordinance No. 421, Approval of Amended Conditional Use Permit 09-67, Amendment #1, 9405 Medicine Lake Road, George Kabalan, Applicant. ! i Subject Property: 9405 Medicine Lake Rd. Il6TKAW' MEDIaNE LAKE RD ,'. .. ~. .. -. o o o o o o 2S1fI I..,: I'~ <XXxx:x:> ! 24f1D~ io( !: I a:;x:x:J:J::J:) .: IS I :,' 0 :2l ;.' ~ ,-~ f ~u: ~ ~ . Il:~[;1~ .~' .~:~ ~. :1 . _VAUEY.. .... ~""E~ ""~ I ' =- czJ>.":~ri~fi "" 'I ;: .,~ ~:~P;;,h if!~ :I~ i ~~'~:F""'W~4~\ . n~' ~ ~ .. = l~\ ~ . I e 'O',~~\~/~i\ ..,_.,,__~,~"'... >-. TA......~ .~~ ' ~~.~. _~ 2145 Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 A regular meeting of the Planning ommission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, uncil Chambers, 7800 Golden lIey Road, Golden Valley, Miflflesota, on Monday, June 2 , . Vice Chair Waldhauser: lied the meeting to or .' . "'pm. issioners..<' ...; ck, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall i ,gfJ Planning and Development Mark Grimes . Chair Keysser was absent. 1. Ju.. ,009 Regular Plan~ng Commission Meeting . . M ;' ' by Eck, seconded by MC,liLrty and motion carriedlJnanimously to approve the utes as submitted. 1" 2~ Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - Amendment #1 - 9405 Medicine Lake Road - CU-67A1 Applicant: Winner Gas/Convenience Store, George Kabalan Address: 9405 Medicine Lake Road Purpose: To allow the ~pplicant to rent U-Haul trucks at his existing location in the Commercial zoning district Grimes referred to a location map and noted that this property is at the intersection of Highway 169 and Medicine Lake Road. He explained that the applicant would like to amend the existing Conditional Use Permit for this property to allow him to rent two U- Haul trucks along with his gas station, car wash and convenience store. Grimes explained that the original gas station did not require a Conditional Use Permit. In 1995 when the owner wanted to install his car wash, the City required him to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. He referred to the existing Conditional Use Permit and the site plan and showed the area where the applicant would like to park the rental trucks. Grimes stated that he would like the trucks to be located in the two furthest west parking spaces behind the building and not where the applicant is proposing in order to allow better access to the car wash. Grimes stated that the applicant has been renting U-Haul trucks for a couple of years. However it was only recently brought to his attention because there were several trucks parked along an easement area which was supposed to be posted "no parking" according to the original Conditional Use Permit. He added that he allowed the applicant to continue Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 Page 2 renting two trucks during the time it took to go through this Conditional Use Permit amendment process and upon visiting the site this evening he noticed that there are currently two trucks and two trailers parked on this lot which is disappointing because that was not his agreement with the applicant. Grimes referred to the site plan and stated that originally the City required 15 parking spaces on this site for the gas station/convenience store. He stated that he did a recalculation of the parking spaces needed based on current parking requirements and feels 7 parking spaces will meet the needs of this property. He said he doesn't think the number of parking spaces will be an issue however cars should not be parked in the access easement area and the "no parking" signs should be installed per the original Conditional Use Permit agreement. Grimes stated that another issue he is concerned about is the non-conforming signage on the property. He explained that the City's sign code administrator Roger McCabe has been dealing with the property owner regarding the amount of signage on the property. Therefore he is recommending as a condition of approval tflaHhesignage on the property be brought into conformance by August 31,2009. Kluchka asked Grimes to clarify what the sign problem is. Grimes showed the Commissioners photos of the site and stated that the applicant probably has double the amount of signage allowed. Waldhauser asked about the allowed amount of signage. Grimes said he doesn't know what the allowed amount of signage is for this property because some of the signs may be "grandfathered" in. He added that the sign code is not part of the zoning code and suggested that the applicant meet with Roger McCabe to come up with a sign plan in order to bring his property into conformance. Grimes reiterated that if the applicant rents two U-Haul trucks or trailers he doesn't think this proposal will bean issue. Ifhowever there starts to be more trucks or trailers on the property there could be issu~s with the access to the car wash and the un-striped parking area in the back of thebuJlding.Kluchka asked how many available parking spaces would be available for rental activity. Grimes referred to the site plan and pointed out that there are 4 parking spaces in the front of the building and 11 spaces behind the building. He reiterated that he feels the parking requirement for this property can drop from 15 spaces to 7 spaces leaving them with 8 spaces more than what is required. Kluchka asked how many spaces would be used for the rental trucks. Grimes stated that the applicant is asking for permission to have 2 rental trucks on his property. Waldhauser asked if some of the spaces behind the building are not usable for parking because of the need to access the car wash. Grimes said it is his understanding that the spaces in the back haven't been striped because there really isn't a need for them. Waldhauser asked why it would be a problem to allow the applicant to have more than 2 rental trucks on this property since they have enough parking spaces. Grimes said the Planning Commission could recommend that the applicant be allowed to have more than 2 rental trucks however he is concerned at this point that more trucks would be parked on this property than are allowed. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 Page 3 McCarty referred to the signage requirements and asked about the City's recourse on businesses that don't comply with the sign code requirements. Grimes stated that it would be considered a misdemeanor violation of the City Code however staff likes to work with people first to try to bring their properties into conformance if that doesn't work than the matter could be taken to court. McCarty asked if the owner has been approached by the City regarding the non- conforming sign issues. Grimes said it is his understanding that Roger McCabe has spoken with the property owner regarding the signage at this property. Waldhauser referred to the easement on the east side of the parking lot and asked if landscaping or planting can be done in easement areas. Grimes said that plantsean be placed in easement areas. Kluchka asked Grimes what part of the City Code or what department deals with the striping of parking lots. Grimes said the Planning and PUblic Works Departments would work with applicants regarding the striping of their parking lot. Kluchka asked if it would be appropriate to require as a condition of approval that the parking lot be appropriately striped to encourage good circulation and access to the car wash. George Kabalan, Applicant, stated that he has parked U-Haul trucks on this lot and in the easement area for 2 years now and no one has said anything. He agreed that Mr. Grimes allowed him to keep renting 2 trucks during this Conditional Use Permit amendment process and that the 2 trailers Mr. Grimes saw on the property earlier this evening belong to an employee who wasn't aware that there were only supposed to be 2 trucks on the property. He added that the trailers wiU be removed in the morning. He stated that he would like to be allowed to rent tWo trucks to help him improve his business. He referred to the signage issues and said he would work with Roger McCabe to come up with a signage plan. Waldhauser aske.d the applicant if he has spoken with Mr. McCabe in the past. Kabalan said he has not. Waldhauser asked about the "no parking" signs that are supposed to be located on the west access road. Kabalan said there are no signs regarding parking at all on his property. Waldhauser noted that the requirement regarding the installation of "no parking" signs pre-dates this current property owner. Kluchka asked the applicant if it would be helpful or useful to him to have more than 2 rental trucks. Kabalan said it would help him get more business if he could have more trucks but he would do whatever the City allows him to do. Grimes asked the applicant about the size of trucks he would be renting. Kabalan said the longest truck he would rent will be 17 feet. Waldhauser referred to the 5 parking spaces behind the building that aren't routinely used and asked if that is where people drive to access the car wash. Kabalan said he would be willing to re-strip the parking lot in order to make parking, circulation and access easier. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 Page 4 Cera asked the applicant to describe the rental business. Kabalan said he would have 2 trucks and people can rent them for "in town" or local use. He said there would not be customers dropping of trucks from different locations. Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Kimberly Vedo, representing Hillsboro Court Apartments, 2911 Hillsboro Ave. N., New Hope, said she opposes this proposed use because she doesn't think it's.attractive to the community particularly with the improvements other property owners inthedare~ have made and this use will not enhance the community at all. She said that typically U-Haul dealerships are found in communities that have a lot of economic and crime issues. She added that this corner with the gas station and liquor store is already not very attractive and a U-Haul dealer won't help the situation. Waldhauser asked Vedo if her concern is just the appearance of the U-Haul vehicles or something else. Vedo said she thinks the U-Haul trucks would reflect negatively on the neighborhood and would give people a bad perceptionqf the area. She added that a U- Haul dealership is not something she would consider to6~.an attractive attribute when marketing her apartments. McCarty stated that the U-Haul dealership could be seen as an attractive amenity to the apartment residents. Vedo said that she generally doesn't encourage her residents to move. Waldhauser questioned if it would make a difference from an appearance stand point if the U-Haul trucks were located behind the gas station. Vedo said that would be preferable to having them in the frontor on the side. She added that there are just certain things that don't necessarily reflect positively on a community such as pawn shops, U-Hauls, check cashing stores, tobacco shops, etc. and those types of things fall into neighborhoods that are not as desirable as she would like hers to be. Grimes referred to the location map and reiterated where he is recommending the trucks be parked. He said he thinks it will be hard for people to see the trucks if they are parked where he is recommending and not in the easement area. He said he thinks the signage on the site is more of an issue. Eck askedVedo who she is referring to when she says "we". Vedo said she is speaking for the ownerand partnership group for the property. Eck asked if she is speaking on behalf of the renters or if any of the renters have complained. Vedo said she is not speaking on behalf of the renters and she hasn't had any complaints yet, but typically she hears from renters about issues after the fact. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Waldhauser closed the public hearing. McCarty asked the applicant how long he has had U-Haul trucks at his location. Kabalan said he has been renting the U-Haul trucks for two years. He added that he realizes the Sinclair station across the street is newer but that is not what is important. What is Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 Page 5 important is how he serves people in the community. He said he willing to find a solution regarding the signage and he is willing to park the trucks in the specified location but he feels no one from the apartments will be able to see the trucks. Waldhauser said doesn't have too much concern about this proposal except for the signage issues. She said the appearance of this property is important because it is an entrance to Golden Valley. She noted that there is landscaping in the front and trees on the highway side of the property however she wishes there were trees between this property and the McDonald's next door to the east. She said there seems to be adequate parking even with a couple of trucks parked in the back. She added that it would be nice to have the parking clarified with "no parking" signs in the easement area and striping to indicate where cars should go. Schmidgall said he doesn't want to cripple a thriving business but ~~;s property is visually chaotic and he is disappointed that it has been out of complian<;e with the sign ordinance for 14 years and the "no parking" signs haven't been instalh:~d in 14 years. He would really like to see this property brought into compliance with the original Conditional Use Permit. He said he would also like to limit the number of U-Haul trucks to 2 in order to keep the visual chaos to a minimum. McCarty agreed that the num.ber of rental trucks should be limited to 2 and added that the City also needs to do its part to enforce the conditions in the Conditional Use Permit. Cera also agreed with the idea of limiting the number of trucks to 2 and suggested a condition be placed on the approval that the property should be brought into compliance before the proposal goes to the City Council.'Kluchka said he agrees that progress toward sign compliance should be shown. Waldhauser reviewed the conditions in the original Conditional Use Permit. She stated that the suggested new conditions for this amendment request are as follows: 1) The parking spaces on the property shall be clearly designated and striped and the two spaces for the 'rental trucks should be clearly marked; 2) All signage shall meet the City's sign code requirements by no later than August 31, 2009 and 3) "no parking" signs shall be installed per the Fire Marshall, along the west side of the shared driveway adjacent to TH 169 by no.laterthahAugust 31,2009. Kluchka suggested they add a condition regarding landscape screening of the parking area for adjacent properties. McCarty said he would be in favor of requiring landscape screening if there were adjacent residential properties but it doesn't seem fair to put the landscape cost burden on this applicant. The Commissioners agreed. McCarty asked about the process for revoking a Conditional Use Permit if the conditions are not met. Grimes said staff typically tries to work with property owners before revoking their Conditional Use Permits. He added that for a Conditional Use Permit to be revoked staff would have to receive a complaint or notice some gross violation of the Conditional Use Permit. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2009 Page 6 McCarty said he is concerned that the deadline of August 31 to bring the property into compliance is arbitrary and won't mean anything to the applicant or the City so he'd like to see some progress on the site before the applicant is allowed to go to the City Council. Cera agreed he would like to see some progress before the proposal gets approved by the City Council. Grimes stated that the applicant has been working with Roger McCabe to bring his property into conformance with the sign code. Waldhauser asked if the sign code deals with aesthetic issues or if signage is only based on allowing a certain amount. Grimes said there are no design standards for signs other than in the 1-394 Mixed Use zoning district. Kluchka asked the Commissioners for their opinion about how visible the rental trucks will be to the rest of the neighborhood. Schmidgall said he is happy with Mr. Grimes' recommendation for the location for the rental trucks. Kluchka suggested that the applicant be required to submit a revised plan showing the parking lot striping, designated truck rental spaces and the location of any signs. Grimes agreed that would be a good idea. MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by Cera and motion carri~d unanimously to recommend approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit at 9405 Medicine lake Road to allow the applicant to rent U-Haul trucks at his existing location in the Commercial zoning district with the following conditions: 1. A new site plan updating the 9/1/95 site plan shall be submitted and be made a part of this permit. The two equipment parking spaces shall be the two spaces south of the store and closest to TH 169. There shall be a total of 9 parking spaces for customers, employees and equipment display. The parking spaces on the property shall be clearly designated and striped and the two spaces for the rental trucks shall be clearly marked 2. The property may be u~eda$a gas/convenience store with one automated car wash bay. Also, up to two trucks or trailers may be displayed for rent on the site in the location identified in the above Condition NO.1. 3. All signage on the site will meet the requirements of the City's sign code by no later than August 31, 2009. 4. UNo parking" signs shall be installed per the Fire Marshal along the west side of the shared driveway adjacent to TH 169 by no later than August 31,2009. 5. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. 6. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the CUP. --Short Recess-- Hey Planning 763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: June 17, 2009 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing on Amended Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to Permit Truck and Trailer Rental in Addition to the Gas/Convenience Store with Car Wash at the Winner Gas/Convenience Store at 9405 Medicine Lake Rd., George Kabalan, Applicant George Kabalan is the owner of the Winner Gas/Convenience store at 9405 Medicine Lake Road. In 1995, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) was issued to this property by the City Council in order that the gas station could be converted to a gas/convenience store with a car wash bay. Prior to that time, the gas service station operated without a CUP because it was constructed at a time when a CUP was not required for the operation of a gas service station. Therefore, it was considered a nonconforming use that could be continued as long as changes to the operation were not made. In 1995, the owner changed the full service gas station to a gas/convenience store and a car wash bay. This change could be done only by obtaining a CUP from the City in 1995. Attached is a copy of the 1995 CUP. The site plan submitted in 1995 is the same as the one submitted by Mr. Kabalan with the exception of the two designated spaces for rental trucks. The amended CUP is required because the Commercial zoning district allows equipment rental only with a CUP. Recently, staff noticed that there were often U-Haul vehicles and trailers on the site. According to the applicant, he has been doing this U-Haul operation for a couple of years. Staff spoke to Mr. Kabalan last month and told him that he would have to apply for a CUP if he wanted to continue renting U-Haul vehicles. (He has been permitted to keep two U-Haul vehicles parked on the site during the CUP process.) He is proposing to have space to display and store two U-Haul trucks or trailers. He has had more on the site over the past couple of months but he has agreed to reduce the inventory to no more than two at a time due to space limitations. This property is guided on the General Land Use Plan map for Commercial purposed. The property is also zoned Commercial. Within the Commercial zoning district, convenience store, gas stations, equipment rental and car washes are permitted only by CUP. 1 I am attaching a copy of my memo to the Planning Commission dated September 22, 1995 and my memo to the City Council dated October 10, 1995. In these memos I describe the site and the proposed CUP that allowed the existing gas/convenience store with a car wash bay. There have been no additional buildings added to the site since 1995. I am also attaching a copy of the CUP issued in 1995 and the site plan that is part of the CUP. This site plan is the same one used by the applicant for the amended CUP. Generally, the existing gas/convenience store with car wash bay has operated within the terms of the CUP. There are a couple of areas of concern that will have to be addressed in an amended CUP. First, the existing CUP states that all signage shall meet the City's sign code. The existing site exceeds the signage permitted by the sign code. Staff suggests that the amended CUP state that site shall meet the sign code requirement by no later than August 31,2009 or the City Council will consider revocation of the CUP. Second, the existing CUP states that the shared driveway along the west property line that also serves the commercial building to the south shall have "no parking" signs installed. The signs have either been removed or never installed. This ~hould again be included in an amended CUP and the signs installed by no later than August 31,2009. In terms of the parking for the site, the site plan submitted in 1995 and for the amended CUP indicates 15 spaces on the site. This number of spaces has been more than adequate for the gas/convenience/car wash operation. Since 1995, the City has amended the parking code which has reduced the number of spaces required from 15 to 7. The updated parking requirements are one space for each 250 sq. ft. of gross retail floor space. The store is 1,500 sq. ft. in area. There are not specific parking requirements for gas sales at a convenience store or an automated, one bay car wash. Staff believes that it is reasonable to use the one space for each 250 sq. feet of gross retail floor space as the total parking requirement. The parking requirement for equipment rental is one space for every 2,000 sq. ft. of display area. There will be less than 500 sq. ft. of display area (two parking spaces). Using the one space for each 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area for the gas/convenience store with car wash bay and one space for the rental display area, the total spaces required by the existing parking code is 7 in addition to the 2 parking spaces to display U-Haul trucks or trailers. The site plan shows four spaces in front of the store along the east property line and 11 spaces along the south property line or at the rear of the store. Staff has been to the store several times and the rear spaces have been either empty or used by one of the two rental trucks. Also, only a few of the rear spaces are striped because the area behind the store is marked to improve flow to the car wash bay. Staff recommends that the first two spaces behind the store closest to TH 169 be used for the display of the trucks or trailers. The remaining three required spaces would be next to the two truck spaces. The remaining spaces behind the store could be eliminated. (Please note that the trash enclosure has been moved to the east property line near the entrance to the car wash bay on the south side of the store.) The owner states that the hours of operation for the store are 6 am to 11 pm each day. Staff does not think that there should be any restrictions on hours due to the location adjacent to TH 169. 2 FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION When considering the approval or denial of a CUP, City Code requires that findings be made on ten specified factors. Staff evaluation of the ten factors as they relate to the current proposal is as follows: 1. Demonstrated Need for the Use: The City's standard basis for determining need is that an applicant has identified a market for the proposed goods or services. In this case, the applicant has decided there is a market for truck and trailer rental. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Plan map identified the site for commercial uses. The property is also zoned Commercial. A gas/convenience store and equipment rental store are considered consistent with the land use designation. 3. Effect on Property Values in the Area: The adjoining areas are commercial. There are no residential areas abutting this property. The added display of two trucks on this site will not have a negative impact on property values in the area. , 4. Effect of any Anticipated Traffic Generation upon Current Traffic Flows and Congestion in the Area: Staff does not believe that the added business of renting two U- Haul vehicles will have a significant impact on the area. Medicine Lake Road is considered an arterial street and TH 169 is a freeway. 5. Effect on any Increase in Population: Since this is not a residential use, the population will not increase due to the truck or trailer rental. 6. Increase in Noise Levels: Staff does not believe that the truck or trailer rental will cause an increase in noise levels. The property is located adjacent to TH 169 that creates a significant amount of noise on its own. Because this property is not next to any residential areas, the noise caused by the two trucks should not be a problem. Many times during a week, there will be no trucks at the site because they will be out on rental. 7. Any Increase in Flies, Rats, or other Vermin Caused by this Use: The proposed use should not increase the number of animal pests in the area. 8. Any Odor from Dust, Gas or Vibration Caused by the Use: It is not anticipated that the proposed use would increase any of these nuisances. 9. Visual Appearance of Proposed Structure or Use: The appearance of the site would remain the same except for the parking of two trucks or trailers behind the store. With the removal of signs not permitted by the sign code, the visual appearance of the site will improve. 10. Other Concerns Regarding the Use: No other potential sources of impact on the general health, safety or welfare have been identified by staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff recommends approval of an amended CUP that would allow the existing gas/convenience store with car wash to rent up to two trucks or trailers. The trucks or trailers would be parked in the two westernmost spaces south of the store. Staff believes that there is adequate space on the site for this small equipment rental business in addition to the existing 3 uses. Due to the nature of the business at 9405 Medicine Lake Road, there is small parking demand. Most people that are using the convenience store are buying gas and leave the car at the pump while making inside purchases. There is more than adequate stacking for cars using the car wash even with a couple of cars parked south of the store. The following conditions are recommended for the amended CUP: 1. The site plan submitted to the City (titled "Parking Layout") shall become part of this permit. The plan is dated 9/1/95. The two equipment parking spaces shall be the two spaces south of the store and closest to TH 169. There shall be a total of 9 parking spaces for customers, employees and equipment display. 2. The property may be used as a gas/convenience store with one automated car wash bay. Also, up to two trucks or trailers may be displayed for rent on the site in the location identified in the above Condition No.1. 3. All signage on the site will meet the requirements of the City's sign code by no later than August 31,2009. 4. "No parking" signs shall be installed alon9- the west side of the shared driveway adjacent to TH 169 by no later than August 31, 2009. 5. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. 6. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the CUP. Attachments: Location Map (1 page) Conditional Use Permit No. 95-67 dated October 17, 1995 (1 page) Memo to the Planning Commission dated September 22,1995 (5 pages) Memo to the City Council dated October 10, 1995 (2 pages) Photo of the Site (1 page) Site Plan dated September 1, 1995 (1 oversized page) 4 CITY ~F..GOLOi:,N".V~L~..EY OONQlTIC))NALLJ~ePERMIT No.' '95...67 J)iJ~ .gf4PPfQVal: 9~~~~~r.,~:r. ."1:~g'~.,~y,..t~e,ci~.9oqncil.tn...a,bc{jr~,~9,?~...~j1.~,~iF." ~1i~~:1,tl.l, cS~~,?(1!li\1~,~~j9Q.11.,~!t~tf;l~~;J!!~ 1$$ued'T'o: M~l"qeUind.ftiark ' ApPtQvedL.o~2,lti()n: 9$04~d:icil"1eLakeRoad.. Golden,V~Hey.Mlr)nesQ!~', I\lt'''9'l'cJOotr~iti()I1~1 Q~e: ' AJ19V:"t~eJ")~Qpet1y,tg ,98 'LJ~~~a.s,a ,9as/ccmvehien~e...storejfl. " the CorTimercial ZonIng District ' , , , '. --': .::' '-~ -. .~ ,'. .- . -. -' < . - - -., -,' '- .'" ., .. / -,' ~QI'I(litiQn$'of"APproval: 1. The site plan submitted to the City (entitled uParking Layout") shall become part of thi$ permit. The plan is dated 9/1/95. This shall include 15 parking spaces. 2. The property at 9504 Medicine Lake Road may be used for a gas/convenience store with one car wash bay. a. The parking lot to the south of the store will be repaved and concrete curb and gutter installed no later than July 1, 1996. 4. All signage on the site will meet the City's sign ordinance. 5. The owner shall install uno parking" signs along the west edge of the driveway shared with the two stores to the south. 6. The owner shall maintain, in good order, the driveway shared with the two stores to the south. 7. P-etitioner shall provide a Q-oPyclf the easement agreement to the City of Golden Valley no later than December 15, 1995. 8. All other applicable City and State raquirementssnallbe met. 9. Failure to. comply with one or rnore of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. I.$$ued By: Mark W. Grimes, DirectOrofPlanriing and Development Warning: MEMORANDUM Date: September 22,1995 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Informal Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - To allow the conversion of the Union 76 station at 9504 Medicine Lake Road to be used as both a service station and convenience store - Marcellino Hark, applicant. ~ Marcellino Hark has requested a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the Union 76 station at 9504 Medicine Lake Road to t>e used as both a gas station (gas pumps only) and a convenience store. Within the Commercial Zoning District, gas stations and convenience stores are only permitted with a CUP. In the past, this station has been a full service gas station with repair bays. Mr. Hark recently leased the site from Union 76 and has eliminated the service bays. He will, however, keep the car wash bay. The two service bays will be converted to the convenience store. When Mr. Hark signed a lease on the store with Union 76, within the past several months, he was unaware that a CUP was necessary to operate a gas station and convenience store in Golden Valley. The existing service station has been at this location for many years and has operated without a CUP. The gas station is considered a nonconforming use because it does not have a CUP. The gas station was built prior to the City requiring such a permit. The Inspections Department brought it to the Planning staff's attention that Mr. Hark was planning to change the service station by eliminating the service bays and converting the service bays to a convenience store. Nonconforming uses may not be changed without bringing them into conformity with the Code. In this case, a CUP would have to be issued to allow a gas station/convenience store. Staff then spoke to Mr. Hark and told him a CUP is needed. Mr. Hark was very concerned that this would delay his opening of the con~enience store and cost him money due to the delay. At his request, Mr. Hark has begun some of the work to convert the station with the understanding that he will have to abide by the decision of the City Council regarding the CUP. The City has received a letter from Mr. Hark indicating that he will agree to the City Council decision. Staff has received both a site plan and floor plan for the site. The site plan indicates the size and location of the store, parking and gas pumps. Union 76 replaced the tanks at this store in 1992 and also put a canopy over the fueling islands. It is my understanding that the car wash bay has been there for several years. Memo - Marcellino Hark, Applicant Page Two This is a unique site due to the 32 foot wide driveway easement over the west side of the property. This driveway easement serves the convenience store and liquor store south of this site. This easement was taken out of this property when Highway 169 was upgraded to freeway conditions. The liquor store and convenience store did have direct access to the old Highway 18. Because the gas station, liquor store and convenience store properties were all owned by the same party, this easement for access from Medicine lake Road was established. This easement does give quick access to the two stores south of the gas station from Medicine lake Road but it also provides a short-cut for some people trying to save a few seconds by avoiding the stop light at Medicin~ lake Road and Mendelssohn Avenue (near McDonalds). Unfortunately, the City cannot eliminate this easement without compensating the persons benefiting from it. The site is about one acre in area including the easement driveway area. Generally, the building and site meet setback requirements except along Medicine Lake Road. The driveway area north of the canopy is setback only 12.5 feet from the north property line and the canopy itself is setback 23 feet from the north property line. The required setbaok is 35 feet. (Within the Commercial Zoning District, the side and rear yard setback is 25 feet to building and 12.5 feet to parking. Any setback adjacent to a street is 35 feet to building or parking.) The existing building will not be added to for this conversion to a convenience store. As stated previously, the service bays are being eliminated to make room for the store. The car wash bay will remain. The total area of the building is approximately 1,850 sq.ft. Of that area, the store will occupy about 1,500 sq.ft. The car wash bay is about 350 sq.ft. in area. The attached floor plan indicates the layout of the proposed store. The parking required for a convenience store is one space for each 150 sq.ft. of retail space. With 1500 sq.ft. dedicated to retail sales, 10 parking spaces are required. The car wash portion requires 4 spaces plus one space for each three employees. Using these requirements, the site will require 15 total spaces. As indicated on the plan, there are 15 spaces. Staff believes that 15 spaces is more than adequate for this type of store. Most people that buy goods will have there car at the gas pumps and not need to use the parking spaces. Also, there is no more than two employees on site at any time. The car wash parking requirement is also excessive for this type of automated system. Mr. Hark and Union 76 will be repaving and putting in concrete curb and gutter where it is not now in place south of the store. They plan to do this work next Spring. They are also planning to enhance the landscaping in front of the store and along the sides and rear. Any change to the signs for the store will have to meet the requirements of the City's sign ordinance. Memo - Marcellino Hark, Applicant Page Three When reviewing a Conditional Use Permit application, the Planning Commission is charged with making certain findings regarding the application. These findings are then sent on to the City Council. The following is a list of those areas where findings are to be made and staff comments: 1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use: The City's position has been to not make a judgment if there is a demonstrated need and let the market forces make that decision. In this case, there may be some that would argue there is adequate convenience shopping is this area because of the existing convenience store to the south and the Super America to the east. This proposal is somewhat unique because it is the only store that will sell both convenience goods and gas. The Super America store tried to put is gas several years atJo but it was decided that there was not adequate space on the site for the pumps. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The Plan indicates that this area is desig~ated for commer9ial develoPI1J,ent. This use is consistent with this designation. 3. Effect on any Anticipated Traffic qeneration upon the Current Traffic Flow and Congestion In the Area: The proposed gas/convenience store will increase traffic somewhat but not enough to effect the capacity of Medicine Lake Rd. Staff believes that traffic will not be significantly affected by the proposed operation. 4. Effect upon Property Vaiue~"i".tl:aeN,lghborl"g Area: This adjoining areas are zon~d yommerci~!.': 1'heprQ.PPs~~4P'graCling,'of the bliilding and site would have a positiVe effect 'qri' propeijy values: i~ fhe' ~rea. 5. Effect of any Increases in Population and Density upon Surrounding Areas: The proposed use will not add any additional population to the area. 6. Increase in Noise Levels to be Caused by the Proposed Use: The proposed use will not add significantly to the noise in the area. There may be some reduction due to the elimination of auto repair previously done in the repair bays. 7. Any Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas, or Vibration to be Caused by the Proposed Use: It is not anticipated that the proposed use would increase any of these nuisances. 8. Any Increases in Flies, Rats, or Other Animal or Vermin in the Area to be Caused by ,thE) Prqp9,~d lJ~e: Th~ propq~ec;f use should not increase the number of '~nimal, P~$ts J.~ the{ ~re~;~ ,~rQP~f~~ortat~9n',measures are maintained. .. . 1 ....: . .:."';' J: .' , 9. Visual Appearance of the Proposed structure or Use: The existing building will not be significantly altered from its existing state except two of the service bay doors will be eliminated and replaced with windows and brick. There will be new doors into Memo - Marcellino Hark, Applicant Page Four . the building as per the attached plan. These changes will be an improvement to the appearance of the building. 10. Any Other Effect Upon the General Public Health, Safety, and Welfare of the City and its Residents: The staff does not believe there are other findings that need to be made. Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the gas station at 9504 Medicine lake Road to be converted to a,gas/convenience store. The proposed plans provide for more than adequate parking on-site. Mr. Hark and Union 76 will also be doing improvements to enhance the site such as additional landscaping and paving. The existing gas station has been brought up to code as far as the tanks are concerned. The tanks were all replaced in 1992. The canopy was also built at that time to provide a better environment for the customers. Several persons have called me, that I know, and have indicated that Mr. Hark is a good operator of both gas and convenience stores; he has several others in the Twin Cities. Mr. Hark has told me that he wants to make this a first class operation and it appears that he and Union 76 are willing to spend money to insure that this happens. Staff knows that there may be some comments regarding the abundance of convenience stores in the area. How many does Golden Valley need? As stated in the findings, the City has decided not to involve itself in determining if there is too much of any use in the area. In the past, the City has had locations with three or four gas stations at one comer with each thriving. There are many areas in the Twin Cites where there are several convenience stores close to each other. In this area, there is a lot of multiple-family housing that benefit from these types of stores. Also, the proposed store is somewhat different from the other two stores in the area because it will be the only one that sells both gas and goods. We have all grown used to this convenience. On the negative side, the two service bays will be eliminated which means one less place to get our vehicles serviced. The following conditions are recommended for the Conditional Use Permit: 1. The site plan submitted to the City (titled "Parking Layout") shan become part of this permit. The plan is dated 9/1/95. This shall include 15 parking spaces. 2. The property at 9504 Medicine lake Road may be used for a gas/convenience store with one car wash bay. Memo - Marcellino Hark, Applica,nt Page Five 3. The parking lot to the south of the store will be repaved and concrete curb and gutter installed no latter than July 1, 1996. 4. All signage on the site will meet the City's sign ordinance. MWG:mkd Attachments: Location Map Letter dated September 1, 1995 regarding the "start of Improvements" Narrative Letter dated September 1, 1995 regarding "Purpose of Construction and Additional Information" Site Plans (Interior and Parking Layout) MEMORANDUM Date: October 10, 1995 To: William S. Joynes, City Manager From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - To allow the conversion of the Union 76 station at 9504 Medicine Lake Road to be used as both a service station and convenience store- Marcellino Hark, applicant At the September 26,.1995'Planning Commission meeting, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the Union 76 gas station at 9504 Medicine lake Road to be used as a gas/convenience store. I am enclosing a copy of my memo to the Planning Commission dated September 22, 1995 for your information. Also enclosed is the Planning Commission minutes that outlines the discussion that occurred ~t the meeting. Also attached is a letter received regarding the request by the owner of the convenience store and liquor store to the south. At the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Hark agreed to additional conditions that will be made part ofthe.Conditional Use Permit. He agreed to place "no parking" signs along the west side of the driveway that he shares with the two stores to the south. There is a concern by the other store owners that persons using the convenience store will park along the driveway. Mr. Hark will also add two or three parking spaces at the west end of the building for customers. There was concern that the parking behind the proposed store would not be that convenient to customers and that closer parking to the front door should be made available. There was also discussion about the maintenance of the shared driveway along the west side of the Union 76 station. There appears to be some misunderstanding about who is responsible for maintaining the driveway. Mr. Hark said that he and the owners of Union 76 would maintain the driveway on his property and that he would be checking the easement agreement about maintenance. I will have this information at the City Council meeting on October 17 I 1995. Recommended Action The Planning Commission and staff recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow Mr. Hark to operate a gas/convenience store at 9504 Medicine lake Road. The Commission and staff are recommending the following conditions which are also found on the proposed Conditional Use Permit and ordinance approving the CUP: Page Two 1. The site plan submitted to the City (entitled "Parking Layout") shall become part of this permit. The plan is dated 9/1/95. This shall include 15 parking spaces. 2. The property at 9504 Medicine Lake Road may be used for a gas/convenience store with one car wash bay. 3. The parking lot to the south of the store will be repaved and concrete curb and gutter installed no latter than July 1, 1996. 4. All signage on the site will meet the. City's sign ordinance. 5. The owner shall install "no parking" signs along the west edge of the driveway shared with the two stores to the south. 6. The owner shall maintain, in good order, the driveway shared with the two stores to the south. 7. All other applicable CitY and State requirements shall be met. 8. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. MWG:mkd Attachments: Staff Memo dated September 22,1995 (and attachments) Planning Commission Minutes dated September 26, 1995 Letter from R. Halseth received September 25, 1995 ORDINANCE NO. 421, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Approval of Amended Conditional Use Permit No. 09-67, Amendment NO.1 9405 Medicine Lake Road George Kabalan, Applicant The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" is amended in Section 11.10, Subd. 2, and Section 11.30, by approving a Conditional Use Permit Amendment for certain tracts of land at 9405 Medicine Lake Road, thereby allowing the rental of U-Haul Trucks in the Commercial Zoning District. This Conditional Use Permit is approved based on the findings of the Planning Commission pursuant to City Code Section 11.80, subd. 2(G), which findings are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by reference. This Conditional Use Permit is subject to all of the terms of the permit to be issued including, but not limited to the following specific conditions: 1. The site plan dated 7/21/09 shall be made a part of this permit. The two equipment parking spaces shall be the two spaces south of the store and closest to TH 169. There shall be a total of 9 parking spaces for customers, employees and equipment display. The parking spaces on the property shall be clearly designated and striped and the two spaces for the rental trucks shall be clearly marked 2. The property may be used as a gas/convenience store with one automated car wash bay. Also, up to two trucks or trailers may be displayed for rent on the site in the location identified in the above Condition NO.1. 3. All signage on the site will meet the requirements of the City's sign code by no later than August 31,2009. 4. "No parking" signs shall be installed per the Fire Marshal along the west side of the shared driveway adjacent to TH 169 by no later than August 31,2009. 5. All other applicable local, state, and federal requirements shall be met. 6. Failure to comply with one or more of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the CUP. Section 2. The tract of land affected by this ordinance is legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Halseth Addition, according to the plat thereof on file in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2009. IslLinda R. Loomis Linda R. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: IslSusan M. VirniQ Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk