Loading...
11-26-12 Agenda PacketAGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room, Monday, November 26, 2012 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — October 22, 2012 3. Section 10.32 Study A. Review Draft Report and Be Prepared To Discuss Recommendation 4. 2013 Meeting Dates 5. Program/Project Updates (Staff) a) TMDL b) 1/1 c) Private Development Update d) Decola Ponds e) Recycling Update f) Wetland Management g) Bottineau Transitway 6. Commission Member Council Reports (Commissioners) 7. Other Business Reminder — December meeting is on December 10th with the U of M students and the Open Space and Recreation Commission 8. Adjourn GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes October 22, 2012 Present: Commissioners Tracy Anderson Rich Baker, Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill, Damon Struyk, Debra Yahle; Jeannine Clancy, Public Works Director; Mark Ray, Engineer; Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer, and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant Absent: Commissioner Jim Stremel 1. Call to Order Baker called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2. Approval of Joint Meeting Minutes — September 24, 2012 MOVED by Hill, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 24, 2012 joint meeting. 3. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — September 24, 2012 MOVED by Hill, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the September 24, 2012 meeting. 4. Section 10.32 Study Baker spoke to the commission, in his role as a DNR official, about wild life implications if Sec. 10/32 is amended. He does not believe the predator population will increase as a result of chickens. What could attract predators is food that isn't properly stored or waste that isn't cleaned up. He confers with other speakers that proper coop design and fencing will help to keep predators away. Seaburg presented a draft of the final report. The commission will review it at the next meeting and discuss the recommendation to the Council. Gitelis asked if staff could research what the penalties are for ordinance violations in other cities that allow chickens. She also asked for an estimate of additional staff time devoted to this ordinance if changed. 5. Maple Grove Yard Waste Ray presented a new service option, to contract with Maple Grove Yard Waste for residential yard waste disposal, to the Commission. Contracting with the Maple Grove Yard Waste Site would mean that continuation of two existing recycling programs, Fall Leaf Drop and Spring Brush Pickup programs, would need to be reevaluated for cost effectiveness. Information regarding the proposed service option is on -file. The primary concerns expressed by some of the commissioners were the need to transport material a further distance and the need to transport items on the highway. Some commissioners viewed the new service, with potential cuts to existing programs, as a loss of service for residents. Hill made a motion to decline a change to the current process. It was seconded by Gitelis. The motion was approved with one opposing vote by Anderson. Minutes of the Environmental Commission October 22, 2012 Page 2of2 6. Program/Project Updates Summary on -file 7. Commission Member Council Reports None 8. Other Business Gitelis reported that Minnesota Environmental Partnership (MEP) has started meetings in preparation for the upcoming session. Environmental Quality Board (EQB) is holding hearings looking forward citizen input on quality standards. She will send more information on both to the commissioners, via staff. Clancy reported that she participated in a third generation planning process meeting for the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission. They are looking for ways to get public participation. Clancy has suggested that BCWMC utilize the appropriate commissions that exist in the various cities as a way of getting public participation. The Environmental Commission will most likely see more on this next year. 9. Adjourn MOVED by Hill, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be November 26, 2012 at 7 pm. PROVISIONS General Number/ Types of birds ❑ Lots < 2 acres capped at 4 hens (Shoreview) ❑ Lots > 2 acres can have more than 4 hens with a C.U.P. (Shoreview) ❑ No persons shall keep more than 4 hens on a single-family or two-family residential property (Bloomington) ❑ Roosters not allowed (St. Paul) ❑ Lots > 2 acres, roosters allowed provided crowing is not a nuisance (Shoreview) ❑ Unlawful to keep more than 2 chickens without a permit (Robbinsdale) ❑ Unlawful to keep more than 3 chickens without a permit (New Hope) ❑ Not permitted on real estate with 3 or more dwelling units (Minneapolis, Bloomington) Permit Required ❑ Permit lasts 1 calendar year (Minneapolis, St. Paul) ❑ Initial permit fee is $50 (Minneapolis) ❑ Initial investigation of property required (St. Paul) ❑ Permit must state the number of animals — any increase requires new permit (St. Paul) ❑ Permit renewal is $40 (Minneapolis) ❑ Option to buy 5 -year permit for $150 (Minneapolis) ❑ City -option to deny permit request (Minneapolis, St. Paul) ❑ Permit granted by Animal Care & Control officer (Minneapolis) ❑ Permit granted by the City Council (New Hope) License Required ❑ License must be renewed every two years (Burnsville, Shoreview) ❑ City retains right to inspect licensed property at any time (Burnsville) Consent ❑ Written Consent of 80% of neighbors within 100 feet of applicants real estate (Minneapolis) ❑ Written Consent of 75% of neighbors within 150 feet of applicants real estate (St. Paul) ❑ No neighbor consent is required for neighbors on opposite side of street (St. Paul) Miscellaneous ❑ Chicken grains and feed must be stored in rodentproof container (Burnsville) ❑ Premises must be kept in a healthy, sanitary, and odor free state (Burnsville) ❑ Butchering of chickens prohibited (Shoreview) ❑ Chickens shall not be raised for cockfighting (Shoreview) ❑ The owner of the chickens shall live in the residence on the property (Bloomington) ❑ Feces, discarded feed and dead birds shall not be composted (Bloomington) ❑ Chickens must be in enclosure and not run at large (Bloomington) ❑ Owners cannot advertise the sale of chickens or eggs (Bloomington) Animal Enclosure General ❑ Chickens must remain within premise at all times in coop or run (Burnsville) ❑ Chickens are not allowed in any part of home and/or garage (Burnvsille) ❑ Coop/Run fencing must be consistent with building and zoning codes (Burnsville) ❑ No coop or run may be constructed prior to construction of principal dwelling (Burnsville) ❑ Chicken coops or runs cannot be in the front or side yard (Burnsville) ❑ Any pen or structure must have secure sides and a secure top (Robbinsdale) ❑ Any enclosure must be locked when occupied by the animal ❑ Pen or structure must have a secure bottom or floor attached to sides of structure, or the sides of the structure must be imbedded a minimum of 2' (Robbinsdale) ❑ Chickens shall be protected from weather and predators in a shelter or coop and have access to the outdoors in an enclosure of fenced area (Bloomington) ❑ Shelter shall not exceed 120 square feet in size ❑ Enclosure or fenced area for chickens shall not exceed 20 square feet per bird and shall include overhead netting to prevent attracting predators (Bloomington) ❑ Shelter must be constructed in a workmanship -like manner to deter rodents and predators (Bloomington) ❑ Chickens shall remain in coop from sundown to sunup each day to prevent nuisance and predators (Bloomington) ❑ Enclosure must be properly winterized to protect chickens from cold (Bloomington) Setbacks/ Height Restrictions ❑ Structure setbacks subject to building/zoning requirements (Bloomington) ❑ Structure must be closer to owner's dwelling than any adjacent dwellings (Bloomington) ❑ Coop or Run set back 50' from any residential structure (Burnsville) ❑ Coop or Run set back 30' from any residential structure (Shoreview) ❑ Coop or Run set back 10' from any property line (Burnsville) ❑ Coop or Run must be screened from view with solid fence or landscaped buffer with a minimum height of 4' (Burnsville, Bloomington) ❑ Coops must be elevated between 12" and 24" to ensure circulation (Burnsville) ❑ Shelter may not be located between the owner's dwelling and an adjacent street unless setback is at least 50' from property line adjacent to the street (Bloomington) ❑ Structure shall not exceed 6' in height (Bloomington) PENALTIES Bloomington ❑ Any violation of City Code is subject to a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1000 and / or imprisonment not to exceed 30 days. ❑ All continuous violations shall be considered separate violations, per day Robbinsdale ❑ Unless stated otherwise in City code (which it is not in this case), upon conviction, any violator is guilty of a misdemeanor and is subject to the maximum penalty for the same class of offense under state law. Burnsville ❑ Except as otherwise provided in this Code, any person violating any provision of this Code shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished according to penalties imposed by Minnesota statute for misdemeanor offenses. New Hope ❑ Same as Bloomington (Misdemeanor unless noted otherwise in Chicken section, which it is not). Minneapolis ❑ Animals and Fowl section of City Code subject to fines administered by the Animal Control Officer. ❑ $50 For Permit $500 for Animal Cruelty $50 Unattended Animals in Public $500 Failure to provide adequate feed, shelter, exercise and space $1000 Failure to provide veterinary care Nesbitt, Lisa From: City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufoo.com> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 8:25 PM To: Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Subject: Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#60] Name * Brian Bursch Address * 8101 Plymouth ave n City * Golden Valley Comments * Raising chickens, whats the harm, good fertilizer, little maintenance, fresh eggs, learning experience for kids, friendly little fowl, Chemical free weed and bug control. Minneapolis already allows them, they make no noise, and are not a bother to anyone, if maintained properly. I think they should be allowed in the city. I would like to see it legalized. Thank you. Nesbitt, Lisa From: City of Golden Valley <no-reply@wufoo.com> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 8:02 PM To: Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric Subject: Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#59] Name * Laura Kueny Address 7303 Ridgeway Road * City * Golden Valley Comments * Chickens are a bad idea for Golden Valley. The city already has issues with housing and property maintenance. The city can't afford to monitor the proper keeping of chickens and their coops. Will those who will keep chickens take care of them and obey all the ordinances regarding their upkeep. Walk through one of our city parks and notice the wide disregard for the ordinances regarding leashed dogs and cleaning up after them. Our city services are already stretched too thin and the budget too tight to add anything like chicken keeping that will need monitoring. Chickens will attract more predators to our area that will threaten our pets and children. We are already having problems with Coyotes attacking dogs. Lastly, we are an suburb that that does not keep farm animals and our residents know this. If people want to keep chickens there are plenty of communities where they can move to that allow chickens. 1 Environmental Commission 2013 Meeting Dates January 28 February 25 March 25 April 22 May 20 (third Monday of the month) June 24 July 22 August 26 September 23 October 28 November 25 December 16 (third Monday of the month) GAEnvironmental Comm ission\Miscellaneous\Meeting Schedule\2013MtgSched.doc PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES — NOVEMBER 2012 TMDL No updates II On Tuesday, October 30, 2012, the City hosted an event called "Sewerfest: A Report on the State of Golden Valley's Wastewater Infrastructure." The event took place at City Hall between 4:30 pm and 7:00 pm. The event was held to inform Golden Valley residents of the issue of Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) in our community and how residents can help to reduce the flow of clear water into the City's sanitary sewer system. Information was provided on the history of 1/1 regulation in our community, sources of 1/1, incorrect/correct plumbing practices, the extent of Golden Valley's sanitary sewer system, citywide 1/1 compliance statistics, sanitary sewer flow reductions over the past few years, and programs that are available to help residents pay for the cost of these repairs if needed. Residents from 23 properties attended this event. PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS Olin Woods is a proposed single-family residential development in the 6900 block of Harold Avenue. The proposed subdivision is located between the Harold Avenue cul-de-sac and Glenwood Avenue and consists of combining two existing vacant lots and dividing them into three new lots. DECOLA PONDS At the request of the City of Crystal, Barr Engineering provided additional information regarding volumes and rates of storm water runoff from the study area to be used for calculating cost participation in the Phase 2 study. The Crystal City Council will discuss participation in the study at a future work session. RECYCLING UPDATE 2012 Fall Leaf Drop This year 2,202 vehicles came through the four leaf drop events at Brookview Park. The number of vehicles attending this year's fall leaf drop exceeded last year's participation by 10%. Preliminary analysis shows 1,216 unique vehicles made trips to Brookview Park. While attendance was up, trip analysis indicated that approximately 18% of eligible homes participated in the program this year. Curbside Recycling Curbside recycling from January through October 2012 is up 18.6% compared to the same time period in 2011. However, resale value of the recycled materials less than 2011 and thus the revenue from recycling is down significantly. For example, the resale value of paper is down 44% from last year. WETLAND MANAGEMENT The City issued a Notice of Decision for its proposed project to maintain (dredge) the City's pond located in the Bassett Creek Nature Area near Vale Crest Road. A recent survey showed that the pond has filled with accumulated sediment and has lost over 50 percent of its water quality treatment capacity. The project scheduled for this winter 2012-2013 will remove the accumulated material and restore the water quality efficiency of the pond. This pond is regulated as a wetland because, prior to the City's 2004 project which physically separated the pond from the creek, it was considered part of Bassett Creek. Other than temporary impacts associated with the removal of sediment, there will be no impacts to the wetland and no loss of function or value. The 30 -day appeal period for this decision ends December 5, 2012. BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY Mayor Harris has requested that the City Council review the Bottineau Transitway study and reconsider supporting the Golden Valley/D-1 Alignment as the "Locally Preferred Alternative". The City Council met with Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County officials to hear more about the study and Golden Valley's role in it. The Council requested that a public hearing be held to gauge community opinion about the Bottineau Transitway. The Council would then vote on whether or not to support the Golden Valley/D-1 Alignment as the Locally Preferred Alternative.