Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2-25-13 Agenda Packet
AGENDA GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room, Monday, February 25, 2013 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — January 28, 2013 3. Section 10.32 Study A. Review Draft Report and Ordinance B. Discuss Lot Configurations 4. 2013 City Survey 5. 2013 City Council Priorities 6. 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 7. Commission Member Council Reports (Commissioners) 8. Other Business 9. Adjourn This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call 763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes January 28, 2013 Present: Commissioners Tracy Anderson, Rich Baker, Jim Stremel, Damon Struyk, Debra Yahle; Jeannine Clancy, Public Works Director; Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist; Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer; and Sheila Hayes, Office Clerk Absent: Commissioners Lynn Gitelis (attended via conference call) and Dawn Hill 1. Call to Order Baker called the meeting to order at 6:59 pm. 2. Approval of Joint and Regular Meeting Minutes — December 10, 2012 MOVED by Stremel, seconded by Struyk, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the December 10, 2012 meetings. 3. Section 10.32 Study The Commissioners reviewed the draft report and suggested some corrections/ modifications to the ordinance provisions. Seaburg will provide a break -down of the estimated 96 additional hours per year of staff time that would be required to administer the ordinance the ordinance, if the ordinance was amended to allow chickens. Clancy will define "impaired body of waters". Clancy and Eckman will re -work Paragraph 5.0 regarding the Environmental Commission's recommend - dation and provide it to Baker for distribution. Commissioners discussed whether the 0.5 acre parcel size was too restrictive. Eckman will run percentages for 0.4 acres and 0.25 acres, and create additional alternatives (maps) for properties eligible to keep fowl. This will help put different parcel sizes into perspective and better show how a typical, residential lot can accommodate a coop/run within the setbacks. 4. U of M Student Project Summary Eckman asked Commissioners to consider recommendations made by students from the U of M's Environmental Sciences, Policy, and Management program when developing future work plans. The Environmental Commission will include this work in their work planning effort in March. 5. Wood As Heating Source Anderson presented information on wood -burning fireplaces, stoves, and Outdoor Wood Boilers (OWB) being used as primary heating sources, along with the associated health effects and air pollution it creates. She would like to see permits required for new wood -burning fireplaces or stoves, more community education on the topic, and articles in the City Newsletter. Anderson will provide Clancy with a written summary of her concerns that can be presented to the City Council. Gitelis mentioned that she is a member of the Minnesota Clean Air Coalition and she will provide Anderson with additional information and contacts. Minutes of the Environmental Commission January 28, 2013 Page 2of2 6. Program/Project Updates Summary on -file. 7. Commission Member Council Reports Gitelis mentioned TMDL changes. 8. Other Business None. 9. Adjourn MOVED by Baker, seconded by Struyk, and the motion carried to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:50 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be February 25, 2013 at 7 pm. Sheila Hayes Office Clerk city of;, olden 11 va ey Date: February 20, 2013 Public Works Department 763-593-8030 / 763-593-3988 (fax) To: Golden Valley Environmental Commission From: Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer Subject: February Meeting Materials The following Section 10.32 materials are enclosed for review and discussion at this month's Environmental Commission meeting: • A red -lined version of the Section 10.32 with proposed changes; • Five "Lot Configurations" showing how the proposed setbacks would look on a typical lot; • Alternative lot size maps showing .25 -acre, .33 -acre, and .40 -acre lots and their eligibility; • An article from the Centers for Disease Control, provided by City Manager Tom Burt; • An updated "Summary' of the final report. Attachments G:\Environmental Commission\Chicken Study\February Meeting Materials.docx Section 10.32: Animals and Fowl Keeping, Transporting, Treatment, and Housing Subdivision 1. Definitions As used in this Section, the following definitions shall apply. A. Farm Animals: Cattle, horses, sheep, goats, swine, ponies, ducks, geese, turkeys, chickens, guinea hens, and honey bees. B. Animals: Includes farm animals and all other animals, reptiles and feathered birds or fowl except dogs, cats, gerbils, hamsters, hen chickens, and caged household birds. C. Impaired Waters: Any water deemed impaired by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The MPCA defines an impaired water as one which fails to meet the water quality standards described in Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Subdivision 2. Keeping of Animals It is unlawful for any person to keep or harbor any animal, not in transit, except (1) animals kept as part of a show licensed under the City Code, or, (2) animals used in a parade for which a permit has been issued, or, (3) animals kept in a laboratory for scientific or experimental purposes, or, (4) animals kept in an animal hospital or clinic for treatment by a licensed veterinarian. Subdivision 3. Keeping of Chickens No person shall own, harbor, or keep within the City a hen chicken unless a permit for such chicken has been obtained pursuant to the provisions stated herein. A. Permit a. A permit may be issued to single-family residential properties with an area of one-half acre or larger only. b. Permits must be obtained annually and have an expiration date of April 1. c. Permit application fees are due upon submittal of the permit application. The fee will be established by City Council ordinance. d. The City retains the right to deny or revoke any permit application or permit renewal application if it deems the applicant unable or unwilling to fulfill the provisions stated herein, for failure to comply with the provisions of this section, submitting an inaccurate or incomplete permit application, if the conditions of the permit are not met, if a nuisance is created, or if the public health and safety would be unreasonably endangered by the granting or renewing of such permit. e. An initial inspection of the property, coop, and run is required prior to issuance of a permit. A similar inspection is also required for permit renewals. f. The City retains the right to inspect the permitted property to ensure compliance with the provisions of Section 10.32 at any time for any reason. B. General a. The keeping of roosters is strictly prohibited. b. The keeping of chickens within 500 feet of an impaired body of water is strictly prohibited. c. No more than four (4) chickens shall be kept on any one property. d. Chickens must be confined on the permitted premise at all times, in a chicken coop or chicken run, and may not be kept in any part of the principal dwelling, garage, front yard, or side yard for any amount of time. e. The butchering of chickens is prohibited. f. All chicken grains and feed must be stored in a rodent proof container. R. The use of chickens for cockfighting is prohibited. C. Coop and Run a. All chickens must be provided access to both a coop and run. b. All fencing and electrical work associated with the chicken coop or run must be consistent with the building and zoning codes with all appropriate permits being obtained. c. Any chicken coop or run shall be set back at least fifty feet (50') feet from any principal dwelling on any adjacent lots and ten feet (10') from the property line. d. Any chicken coop or run shall be located closer to the principal dwelling of the permitted property than to any principal dwelling on adjacent properties. e. Chicken coops must have a maximum footprint area of ten (10) square feet per chicken and a minimum footprint area of five (5) square feet per chicken. f. Chicken runs must have a maximum footprint area of twenty (20) square feet per chicken and a minimum footprint area of ten (10) square feet per chicken. R. The coop must be elevated a minimum of 12" and may not exceed a height of six feet (6') as measured from the ground. h. No coop or run shall be located in any form of easement or right-of-way. i. The coop or run must be completely enclosed and rodent proof. i. The coop must provide adequate protection from the elements and must be winterized. D. Private Restrictions and Covenants on Property Notwithstanding the issuance of a permit by the City, private restrictions or covenants on the use of property shall remain enforceable. Private restrictions include but are not limited to deed restrictions, condominium master deed restrictions, neighborhood association by-laws, and covenant declarations. A permit issued to a person whose premises are subject to private restrictions and/or covenants that prohibit the keeping of chickens is void. The interpretation and enforcement of the private restriction is the sole responsibility of the private parties involved. Subdivision 4. Animals in Transit It is unlawful for any person to transport animals unless they are (1) confined within a vehicle, cage or other means of conveyance, or (2) restrained by means of bridles, halters, ropes or other means of individual restraint. Subdivision 5. Treatment It is unlawful for any person to treat any animal as herein defined, or any other animal, in a cruel or inhumane manner. Subdivision 6. Housing It is unlawful for any person to keep any animal as herein defined, or any other animal, in any structure infested by rodents, vermin, flies or insects, or inadequate for protection against the elements. Subdivision 7. Trespasses It is unlawful for any person to herd, drive or ride any animal over and upon any grass, turf, boulevard, City park, cemetery, garden or lot without specific permission therefor from the owner. Subdivision 8. Trapping It is unlawful for any person to, by means of any device or contrivance, catch, trap, snare, or restrain any animal. Provided, however, that the ^i"^r«^r of Public Safety Chief of Police or Director of Public Works may waive the prohibition in this Subdivision for the purposes or abating nuisances. Subdivision 9. Enforcement Licensed peace officers, reserve officers, and community service officers, employed by the Police Department of °u~are authorized to issue administrative citations in accordance with Section 4.60 Subdivision 3.6 of the City Cod for the violation of this Section. SECTION 10.32 SETBACK ANALYSIS TYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATIONS 1 OF 5 -.25 ACRE - EXISTING DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT 50.0' --*--10' PROPERTY LINE SETBACK 50.0' #7024 5 ACRE) �i 175.0' PROPERTY WIDTH PLYMOUTH AVE NORTH RESULT: NOT POSSIBLE REASON: 50' SETBACK FROM PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE NOT MET u RESULT: REASON: SECTION 10.32 SETBACK ANALYSIS TYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATIONS 2 OF 5 - .3o ACRE - EXISTING DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT 39.7' #8520 (.30 ACRE) roo-- 105.0' PROPERTY WIDTH 23RD AVE NORTH NOT POSSIBLE --W--10' PROPERTY LINE SETBACK 50' SETBACK FROM PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE NOT MET SECTION 10.32 SETBACK ANALYSIS TYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATIONS 3 OF 5 - •35 ACRE - 150.9' PROPER Y DEPTH 50.0 0 #2360 LLJ w (.35 ACRE) 50.0' C� 0 50.0' D � m r- o r o m 50.0' 23.3' 50.0 z � - EXISTING qRAINAG UTILITY E SEMENT 10' PROPERTY LINE SETBACK vi I RESULT: POSSIBLE REASON: ALL SETBACKS ARE MET SECTION 10.32 SETBACK ANALYSIS TYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATIONS 4 OF 5 -.41ACRE - WOODSTOCK AVE N �-- 100.0' LOT WIDTH �I 1 10' PROPERTY LINE SETBACK = 50.0' a w 0 #5635 (.41 ACRE) 50.0' 50.0 j 39.3' j 50.0' 50. 0' 1 RESULT: POSSIBLE REASON: ALL SETBACKS ARE MET 10' EXISTING DRAI & UTILITY EASEME SECTION 10.32 SETBACK ANALYSIS TYPICAL LOT CONFIGURATIONS 50F 5 kzl moo• J300 (.51 ACRE) I V `10' PROPERTY LINE SETBACK 50.0' - .51 ACRE - `Or 6F050.0' ry I 50.0' �10' EXIST) & UTILITY RESULT: PLAUSIBLE 50.0' REASON: SETBACKS ARE MET, ACTUAL VIABLE AREA IS TIGHT CITY OF CRYSTAL — _ Alternative A >_ 0.25 Acre Properties I � do I■ lJ � CITY OI CITY OF NEW HOPE i CITY OF CRYSTAL isla,w«,d .�� I i CITY Of ROBBINSDALE —. as �� • _ ` .�� -- -. ..••�1 16 Vic ' fny F. 1 MetlbY � �-/ � M✓ i Nei ' H ; w 71 ,s IrNEI 0 M OR �.:. Gerreal MllhR zea��� �' • ••••• 'I ' ,Q\ �YM Mt ■a.yLr 7 _� i ®® 4W-. ® Theodore Wirth r \ � Regional Park ' � � ■, � � � ' ' ■ � � m. \ � (Mpls Park & Pee Board) Popp •� ■7 M 7 PIP �00 I Wi CP I ".© w� N L- 77 10 �, : r �► A.��c i I - l y n,;- ------------------------- CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK " rY.d CITY OF S'r. LOUIS PARR Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 5,288 Properties Eligible (80%) Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. Date: 113012013 Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for e Property Lines (2013). City of Golden Valley for all other layers 0 375 750 7.500 2,250 3.000 eet 7 dtcine [ake A0PE _1 t'I"PY OF NEW HOPEi CITY OF CRYSTAL -- "'Y OF CRYSTAL Alternative B _---- --- ��500' setback from `lo Z impaired waters ■ ,� r m >_ 0.25 Acre Properties j Geatr :J C �N 1 . • 1 � it MIA ■ r -� vstl- loom WIM 91k JY ��•' � � Poi' , , : 1 .J lop Po ,3 ���,� 9,�Nraw `' • F' oMW a t 7 AC i' CITY OF ROBBINSUALE • ; G�F ■ z \ •d IrrI��r ® j Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 816 Properties Ineligible 4,472 Properties Eligible (68%) 500 ft Restriction Zone around Impaired Waters \ ® Theodore Wirth �- Regional Park I Note- (Mpls Park & Rec Board) 4 I _ Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. r i • ; t� ■ j a �. � ■ l lil6irh La ke j� V� ® j - 0 G Q Z _... Ilion NOW C.IfY L0"U'.5 P.\RK U CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Date: 1/30/2013 i j Sources: i Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines . Valley e i City of Golden Valley for all other layers ir 0 375 750 1.500 2,250 3,000 Faet CITY OP S'T- LOUIS PARK i CITY OF NEW HOPE CITY OF CRYSTAL IM 46 Ak■ '1 ■ o ■■ L� ai 1 -- .1ir6 Ns R mch S,, ■ `• N&ure ` 1W jr NP ■ - _ &IL ■ , ■ "P I C L PC) g'JIM cmc�N U Pek "4171�1 t 1� 3 16� • r, ■ � r ■�� ., Jim .0. ,-- 1 0 A* F til. LUIIIq PARI: CRYSTAL___■___. ■--------------- j W Alternative C o >_ 0.333 Acre Properties GesrtPaMr � I -t ML :r` nk CITY OF ROBBINSDALF A e on % — r � 6S100 ■ CITY OP S'T. LOUIS PARK Theodore Wirth V j Regional Park i (Mpls Park & Rae Board) j I I Q j Brownie Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 2,620 Properties Eligible (40%) l Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. Date: 1/30/2013 Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for e Property Lines (2013). City of Golden Valley for all other layers 0 375 750 1.500 2,250 3,000 Feet dicine ake 1117 U1 "�14V ti'.11'1: C.I"I'Y OF CRYSTAL M N i � Parh o ti m Gearry , ■E Ir L i 7 o 't► �� �� Mc�rkY • � � � sarae�,a mnoa �.... � I-'� � 1 f'''., r_t1 " Lr �-r' � -;Zi �U110 J , LEON 1 ■ ® C7n ,a,,,rAre � —r w„�w�r, ■��� ��� �� � �.k ®,® mow r , was Hr t- j ✓ Ci' -- ``=..�jC) it 1- • .. sa `J rodry w W_Wr Vr `Y , varxec� ' 4 Ell L I r,4" �a CITY OF ROBBINSO — yrs A1 c,a„✓ew r 1 r �, � 1�' �--I � �,� _- -_-_ r �®® Alternative D 500' setback from impaired waters >_ 0.333 Acre Properties Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 527 Properties Ineligible 2,093 Properties Eligible (32%) 500 ft Restriction Zone around Impaired Waters Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. j LO1;15 I'A l2 k CITY of ST. rouls PARK �+ Date: 1/30/2013 i I Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for e i Property Lines (2013). Latif- City of Golden Valley for all other layers 1,500 2250 3,000 —__.._..___.—.._.---.._.. Feet l'ITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK s 7, W z >� y 0 � r F U Alternative D 500' setback from impaired waters >_ 0.333 Acre Properties Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 527 Properties Ineligible 2,093 Properties Eligible (32%) 500 ft Restriction Zone around Impaired Waters Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. j LO1;15 I'A l2 k CITY of ST. rouls PARK �+ Date: 1/30/2013 i I Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for e i Property Lines (2013). Latif- City of Golden Valley for all other layers 1,500 2250 3,000 —__.._..___.—.._.---.._.. Feet l'ITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK EM J n ■ q CITY OF ,NEW HOPE i CITY OF CRYS"I'AI NNW di � i°� Ba�IFreAYs LA,. ■ ilk, NHNvaatl -` �H min M1 L-�[-� d M 0 IN ME * - 4 ■ / a�� Nbsie II/ ■ ■ � o o 1 MLi PC, M a is h,. ■ !i 1 LY OF ti f. LOUIS PARI: CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK 4 MP CITY OF ROBBINSDALE IZ Z JL CIFY OF ST. LOUIS PARRK Alternative E >_ 0.4 Acre Properties Properties Eligible to keep Fowl Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 1,445 Properties Eligible (22%) Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. Date: 113012013 Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for e Property Lines (2013). City of Golden Valley for all other layers 0 375 750 1,500 2.250 3,000 le Feet CI"IY OF NEW HOPE r n CITY OF NEW HOPE j CITY OF CRYSTAL i ' a ®a■ 44 A Al oil IIr l� ! _y��I � � � �� ■ � ®�� I ■ s w pop ,� oak, -i LLL..311 V'v ® j �_- j� r�r _r =/ r- r• as G;0 NMI L rj Palkr9q fe .EE Mir=9. .;x O _[PY OF' iI-. LORIS PARK �- Y' CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK 40 MI M0 t �� 12-1-� CITY OFST. LOUIS P.1RK CITY OF ROBBINSDALE Alternative F 500' setback from impaired waters > 0.4 Acre Properties Properties Eligible o to keep Fowl � � r )l tri Single Family Residential Properties (6590 total) 328 Properties Ineligible - 1,117 Properties Eligible (17%) 500 ft Restriction Zone around Impaired Waters Note: Eligibility based only on parcel size, not setbacks or other criteria. zb 2 aw O Date: 113012013 Sources: Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2013). City of Golden Valley for all other layers 0 375 750 1,500 2,250 3,000 Feet CDC, a(ZTtCLT-- Health risks associated with raising chickens Many families raise a small number of chickens, particularly in rural areas. In recent years, however, raising chickens has become a popular hobby for people who live in urban areas as well. Information that promotes raising chickens touts the birds as being good pets, stress relievers, and easy to keep. Most people though, choose to keep flocks because they believe the meat and eggs they grow will be safer and less expensive than store purchased products. Whether they are pets or a source of food, there are some issues that need to be considered before deciding to raise chickens. In addition to the fact that many urban areas will not allow chickens to be raised within city/town limits, keeping chickens poses a potential health risk. Chickens, turkeys, ducks, and other poultry frequently carry bacteria that can cause illness to you and your family. Baby chicks may be especially prone to shed these germs and cause human illness. Young birds are often shipped several times before they reach a permanent home. Shipment and adapting to new locations causes stress on birds and makes them more likely to shed bacteria in their droppings. While anyone can become ill from exposure to these germs, the risk of infection is especially high for children, the elderly, and persons with weakened immune systems; for example, people receiving chemotherapy or who are HIV-infected. One of the most important bacteria you need to be aware of is Salmonella. Birds infected with Salmonella do not usually appear sick. Salmonella lives in the intestine of infected chickens, and can be shed in large numbers in the droppings. Once shed, bacteria can spread across the chicken's body as the bird cleans itself and throughout the environment as the chicken walks around. Therefore, it is especially important to carefully wash hands with soap and water after handling young birds or anything that has come in contact with them. If you ingest Salmonella, you may become ill. People accidentally ingest Salmonella in many ways, including eating after handling chickens or by touching their hand to their mouth while working with the birds. Typical symptoms of Salmonella infection are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. These symptoms generally develop within one to three days of exposure and may last for up to a week. Individuals with weaker immune systems commonly have more severe infections. There have been several outbreaks of human Salmonella infections resulting from handling baby chicks. See our CDC website: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/Mmwrhtml/mm4914al.htrn Many of the outbreaks involved young children and most occurred in the spring around Easter. Some outbreaks have been associated with keeping chicks in the classroom. I still want to raise chickens. How can I reduce the risks to myself and my family? 1. Keep baby chicks and adult chickens away from persons with weaker immune systems, including the elderly, pregnant women, diabetics, patients receiving chemotherapy, and people who are infected with HIV. 2. Do not keep chickens if a household has children less than five years of age. 3. Make sure that any interaction between chicks or chickens and small children is supervised and that children wash their hands afterwards. Children less than five years of age tend to put their hands and other potentially contaminated objects into their mouths. 4. Supervise hand washing for small children to make sure that it is adequate. See our CDC website for proper hand washing guidelines: 5. Always wash your hands with soap and water after touching chickens or anything in their environment. If soap and water are not available, use an alcohol based hand sanitizer. Bacteria on your hands can be easily transferred to objects and other people in your home. 6. Wash contaminated items with hot soapy water or with a mild bleach solution. 7. Do not eat or drink around your chickens. 8. Keep chickens away from food preparation areas. 9. Do not wash items from chicken coops like water and food dishes in the kitchen sink. 10. Do not allow chickens to roam freely around the house. 11. Frequently clean the area where chickens are kept. 12. Visit your physician if you experience abdominal pain, fever, and/or diarrhea. Additional resources: Salmonellosis associated with chicks and ducklings ---Michigan and Missouri, Spring 1999. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. April 14, 2000; 49(14):297-29. htip://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4914al.htin Salmonella serotype Montevideo iInfections associated with chicks - - Idaho, Washington, and Oregon, Spring 1995 and 1996. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. March 21, 1997 / 46(11);237-239. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00046940.htin Salmonella hadar associated with pet ducklings - - Connecticut, Maryland and Pennsylvania, 1991. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. March 20, 1992 / 41(11);185-187. http://www.edc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/000I6299.htm Summary Through its research, the Commission has heard of many situations in which raising chickens has been successful, such as a family with small children raising a flock in a well-maintained coop for the purpose of education. These examples can be found in cities such as Minneapolis and St. Paul, as well as in the surrounding suburban communities. In contrast, the Commission heard stories of animal hoarding, cockfighting, and un -kept coops that endanger the well-being of the birds. In order for this to be a successful ordinance, the City will need to allocate appropriate staff time to facilitate the fair and safe harboring of these animals. As estimated by City staff, the time necessary to process permits, provide property inspections, and follow up on complaints is approximately 96 hours annually. This is based on the assumption that the City might receive approximately 15 permits per year. This estimation is based on what other cities of Golden Valley's size have experienced as well as from feedback the Commission has received from residents. Appendix F of this report is the proposed revision to Section 10.32. The table below outlines summarizes issues that were raised by guest speakers who talked to the Commission about the proposed ordinance revisions: Pros for Changing the Ordinance Cons Against Changing the Ordinance Minimal number of requests No impact on property values Respect for private property rights Educational value Local food production Staff time • Permit reviews — 30 hrs • Initial inspections — 30 hrs • Follow-up inspections — 30 hrs • Animal complaints — 6 hrs Little anticipated interest Impact on neighbors Difficulty of enforcement Cruelty "Livestock in the City" Disposing of old chickens Slippery slope Uneven treatment of lot size After careful consideration, the Environmental Commission recommends that the City Council amend Section 10.32 of the Golden Valley City Code to allow keeping of hen chickens on residential property. The vote was 4-3. While the prevailing vote was to recommend a modification to Section 10.32, the Environmental Commission feels that the ordinance revisions be crafted carefully so as to protect the rights of property owners who are adjacent to those who desire to keep chickens, as well as to protect individual property rights of those who wish to raise hens on their property. PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES — February 2013 TMDL No updates II No updates PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS See memo from Joe Hogeboom DECOLA PONDS No updates RECYCLING UPDATE No updates WETLAND MANAGEMENT Administrative Audit - In late 2012, the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) notified the City of Golden Valley that it was among the many cities chosen to participate in the annual administrative audit regarding Wetland Conservation Act compliance. Staff believes this is the first time that Golden Valley participated in such an audit since the Wetland Conservation Act was passed in 1991. The audit was performed by BWSR staff in December 2012, and involved the review of files going back six years. BWSR staff indicated that Golden Valley is appropriately administering the WCA and the full report is attached to this update. BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY Golden Valley staff discussed Bottineau Transitway future project communications with Hennepin County staff. Going forward, Hennepin County intends to provide updates to all of the communities impacted by the Bottineau Transitway, including Golden Valley, on a monthly basis. Staff will provide the County's updates to the City Council as part of the City Council's regular meeting agendas. Staff is currently working to determine the timing and level of commitment from the County with regard to station area planning initiatives. Staff intends to generate a schedule of events surrounding station and land use planning later this spring. The events would work to achieve the goals discussed by the City Council at its 2013 Workshop. These goals include: • Identify the impact of the Bottineau Transitway on local streets, sidewalks and trails. • Identify parking issues and availability. • Establish long-term land use goals for the corridor. • Meet with residents and institutional uses (Courage Center, churches, etc.) near the corridor and identify issues and concerns. • Develop a communication plan to Golden Valley property owners. • Propose local solutions that address issues caused by the Bottineau Transitway. city of go ldenly va ey Date: February 13, 2013 MEMORANDUM Planning Department 763-593-8095 / 763-593-8109 (fax) To: Environmental Commission From: Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Subject: Development Project Update The following information is a summary of development projects currently underway in Golden Valley. I have also included information about the Theodore Wirth Park master planning exercise. Please feel free to contact meat 763-593-8099 or ihogeboom@goldenvalleymn.gov if you have any questions, or if you would like me to provide further information about any of the current projects. The Arcata Apartments The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Final Plan for the Arcata Apartments, located on the southeast corner of Xenia Avenue and Golden Hills Drive. To address the City's concerns, the developer has increased onsite parking, enhanced onsite stormwater treatment areas and rearranged internal site traffic circulation. If approved by the City Council, the developer hopes to break ground on this 173 -unit facility this spring. Jewish Housing and Programing (J -HAP) Jewish Housing and Programing (J -HAP), an agency that provides housing options to developmentally disabled adults, is considering developing the properties at 9300 and 9310 Golden Valley Road. The site currently contains a vacant single family home and a small office building. In March, the Planning Commission will consider recommending approval for land use and zoning changes to the site that would accommodate this development. If approved by the City Council, the developer will likely apply for a PUD Permit in the future. Meander Woods A developer has applied to subdivide 228 Meander Road to create two residential lots. The lot, which is located adjacent to the Canadian Pacific Railroad Corridor, is currently undeveloped. The developer is not seeking any variances for this proposal. This will go before the Planning Commission in March, and is expected to go before the City Council in April. The 3.9.4 Apartments The developer responsible for the 3.9.4 Apartments has made application for approval of its Final PUD Plan. Staff is currently reviewing this submittal to ensure that it is complete and addresses all of the items that were brought forward during the Preliminary PUD Plan phase. This plan will likely go before the Planning Commission and City Council in March and April. MINI Cooper The owners of 701 Louisiana Avenue are proposing to demolish the former Jim Lupient Oldsmobile building and development a MINI Cooper dealership in its place. This development is governed by a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan, and as such, the PUD Plan must be amended to allow the dealership to be constructed. The City Council recently approved the Preliminary PUD Plan. The developer has since made application for its Final PUD Plan, which is expected to go before the Planning Commission in March. If approvals are granted as expected, construction would begin on this site in late spring. Theodore Wirth Park Update During the past several years, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) has been working on creating a Master Plan for Theodore Wirth Park. This has involved an extensive community engagement process that has led to the creation of a conceptual design and prioritization of elements that will guide park investment over the next twenty years. The concept design was approved by the MPRB Board in July 2012. MPRB staff is currently finalizing the Master Plan document for the park that will illustrate the planning process and builds an implementation framework around the conceptual design. The draft Master Plan will be presented for public comment in late 2013. According to the MPRB, the following projects have recently taken place at Theodore Wirth Park as a result of the planning process: Tree plantings: Two tree planting events in the storm damaged areas are taking place this fall. The first planting event adding 75 trees north of Hwy 55 near the Luce Line trail was completed on Saturday, September 29th by the Loppet Foundation. The second tree planting on three corners of the Glenwood/Wirth Parkway intersection by Xcel Energy volunteers occurred on October 10th. This planting area was identified by the Wirth CAC as a reforestation priority. • Storm Seeding: A seeding contract was executed on July 11th and the first of a multiple step process is underway to re -seed areas damaged by the 2011 tornado/clean-up activities. The first step is removing heavy woodchips, controlling weeds and seeding a cover crop. Next spring the project will continue with ongoing weed control and seeding of appropriate native seed mixes. Wirth Beach Parking Lot and Trails (Phase 3): Though most of this work was completed in 2011, a few things remain to be completed. Excavation of the stormwater (biofiltration) pond and reestablishing plants at its perimeter was completed in October. Railings along the Glenwood Ave trail and two boardwalks will be removed and re -painted. Wirth Beach Playground and Volleyball (Phase 2): This project is now completed and the final payment was approved on September 19th. Wirth Pavilion Rehabilitation: The Pavilion Rehabilitation project began in mid-October. The contractor who was awarded the job is CM Construction. The base bid for the rehabilitation is $810,500.00. This project will include complete renovation of the kitchen and restrooms in the building, re -wiring of all electrical, new heating and air-conditioning and new water service, fire protection and sanitary sewer connections. Once complete, this building will be available for year-round use. • Winter Recreation Hilton Fund: The last of this fund, which is dedicated to Winter Recreation improvements, will be spent over the next 6-8 months. Many project options for this funding have been analyzed with a decision being made to complete underground electrical service to the existing snowmaking loop and to replace two small and aging golf cart barns with a new structure that will be more functional and, in addition to storing golf equipment, will accommodate indoor storage of ski trail grooming equipment. Wirth Ski Trail Improvements: Minor realignment of the snowmaking ski loop has occurred this past fall. These changes do not impact golf holes and are consistent with the approved master plan. In addition to other planning initiatives within Theodore Wirth Park, the MPRB is also hosting two public meetings that will highlight planning and design exercises that will focus on the Bottineau Transitway and possible transit station locations at Plymouth Avenue and Golden Valley Road. The Environmental Commission, as well as any interested citizen of Golden Valley, is encouraged to attend these meetings. The dates and times are as follows: Wirth Park/Bottineau Transitway Community Meeting Wednesday, February 27 6 pm MPRB Headquarters (2117 West River Road, Minneapolis) Wirth Park/Bottineau Transitway Open House Saturday, March 2 12-2 pm MPRB Headquarters (2117 West River Road, Minneapolis) There is more information about the Theodore Wirth Park Master Planning project on MPRB's website. You may also sign up for email updates about Theodore Wirth Park, the Master Planning process, and other events at the park. For more information, please visit www.minneapolisparks.org. Mir�sgta mgsoa rues February 12, 2013 Jeff Oliver Eric Eckman City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Dear Messieurs Oliver and Eckmam: This letter summarizes the results of the Board of Water & Soil Resources (BWSR) "spot check" of the City of Golden Valley's administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). Purpose of Spot Checks BWSR conducts spot checks as part of our oversight responsibilities for administration of the WCA. The spot checks provide a relatively fast and efficient way to evaluate WCA administration by local government units (LGUs) as compared to a full audit. These spot checks are not intended to criticize, or admonish, but rather to identify oversights and errors in administration, and most importantly to offer advice and guidance for improving WCA administration in the future. Methods The City of Golden Valley's spot check was on 12/14/12. The first part of the spot check included a question and answer session with city staff on general WCA administration. Topics reviewed were, adoption of the WCA, record retention, application notices, monitoring procedures, TEP involvement, and staff roles. The second part of the spot check reviewed project files to examine application process documentation, such as notice of applications, TEP findings, and decisions. Results The results of the spot check are based on review of specific files and answers provided by city staff. If any of the reported results are in error, the city may provide further information where BWSR would review, then modify the report accordingly. The following is a bullet -point list of findings and recommendations related to the City of Golden Valley's administration of the WCA: mi,/ji 91d1.110d Pn/ar//r rifypr.%Fier'/., A1d,,Ail/ New i//iu r,-,hcst,s �,fitpt! wl 711 Minnesota Awnuc 1601 Minnesota Drive 394 S. Lake Avenue IIXl4 Frontier frail 1400 E. Lynn Street 261 Highrra% 15 S. 331x) Sihcr Crock 52O 1 ataccuc Road N Suite 234 Brainerd, MN Wit Rtwnn 403 Fergus Falls. MN 56537 Box 267 Neo tilm. MN 5tiO73 Road N.E. Saint Paul, MN 55155 Bennidii. MN 56601 phone t218) 828-2383 Duluth. MN 55802 phone 1218) 7365445 Marshall. MN 56258 phone (507) 359-6)74 Rmhemer. MN 559p6 photic (6511'_96.3767 phone (218) 755-4235 lax 1218) 828-6136 phone (218) 723-4752 fax (218) 736-7215 phone (507) 537,6(6,) fax 15071359-6018 phone (507) 281.7797 tax 1651) 297-4615 fax 0181 755-4201 fax (218) 723.4794 fax 1507) 537-6368 fax (507) 2857144 11'ch xvnxxv.MxSrstate.aut.us TTL': 18001627.3529 .An equal opportunity employer ®Primed on recycled pallor • The City of Golden Valley properly adopted the WCA in 1994. • LGU's record retention exceeds the 10 -year rule, whereas everything is stored permanently. • City has staff makes decisions on exemptions, delineations, sequencing, replacement, and banking. However, the city does not have a delegation resolution on file. A resolution will need to be approved by the city council defining staff decision-making authority. • The TEP is consulted on every WCA related project. • Deric Deuschle of SEH, is the city representative administrating WCA. He is a certified wetland delineator, and regularly attends WCA administrative training. • All noticing procedures are followed including noticing for exemptions and no -loss determinations. • The TEP looks at all monitoring reports and certifies the completion. • The city council makes the decision to release surety. • Currently there is no local appeal process. The city will need to set up an appeal process, once the staff delegation resolution is approved. Specific file reviews (underlined items are deficiencies identified in the file): Wetland delineations/determinations: • Breck School • Received report 8-19-08. Date approved 9-10-08. • Complete report was in the file. • Delineation not noticed, however, it didn't need to be in 2008. • The Notice of Decision was properly sent out. • Decision was made within timeline. • There is a location map and map of approved delineation within notice. • St. Croix Circle • Received report 7-10-12, resubmitted 10-1-12. Date approved 10-30-12. • Complete report was in the file. • Notice of Application was not properly noticed. • No TEP meeting was held to review delineation. • The Notice of Decision was properly sent out. • Decision was made within timeline. No official extension letter within file, however, there was a memo from the City to the developer indicating more information needed in delineation report. This memo is considered acceptable for an extension. ileh axxxx.bxxxtr.aatcntn.u> 7 IN: t0b 027-3529 An equal opportunity cmploxer ®Primed tin rcocicd paper • There is no location or approved delineation map within notice. However, the map was included in the report submitted with the Notice of Application. A11141 Fn./n.. r,,r//.% manshad New 1 //n, R vh,,.%ki }, Imt T, r, d 701 Minneuua A%enue 1601 Minnesota Drixc 394 S. lake Axenue RX 4 Frontier Trail 140Q G. Lyon Street 261 Highway 15 S. 231X) Sheer Creek 520 Lab%cur Read N Suite 234 Brainerd. MN 56401 Rtwm 403 Fergus Falb, MN 56537 Box 267 NeH Ulm, MN 5W73 Road N.fi_ Saint Paul. %IN 55155 Bemidii, MN 56601 phone (218) 828-2383 Duluth. MN 55802 phone (218) 736-5445 Marshall. MN 56259 phone (507) 359-NJ74 Rochester, MN 559t6 phone (651) 296 3767 phone (_'1817554_135 tax 1218) 828-6036 phone 1218) 7234752 fax (218) 736.7215 photo (507) 537 ((KN) fax 4507) 359-6118 phone 1507) 281-7797 fax 4651) 297-5615 fax 1218) 755.4201 tax (218) 7234794 fax (507) 537-6309 tax (507)'_85.7144 ileh axxxx.bxxxtr.aatcntn.u> 7 IN: t0b 027-3529 An equal opportunity cmploxer ®Primed tin rcocicd paper Exemption/No-loss Determinations: • Lakewest Development • Received report 11 -3 -11. Approved 12-1-11. • Complete report was in the file. • Notice of Application was properly noticed. • No TEP meeting held, but comments were considered. • Decision was made within the required timeline. • Notice of Decision was properly noticed. • There was a location map within notice. • Map of approved delineation within notice. • North Tyrol Park • Received 10-7-11. Approved 10-10-11. • Complete report was in the file. • No TEP meeting held. • The Notice of Decision was properly sent out. • Notice of Decision was properly noticed. • There was a location map within the notice. Replacement Plan Determinations: • Wirth Lake Improvement • Received application 11-24-10, approved 2-18-11. • Complete application in file. • Delineation reviewed and approved with replacement plan. • Notice of Application was properly noticed. • There was TEP meeting and recommendations documented in file. • An extension letter was sent out on 1-13-11, extension to 3-22-11 • The Notice of Decision was properly noticed. • Decision was made within the proper timeframe. • There was a location map within the notice. Recommendations for Improvement 1. The city needs to insure that decisions are made within the 60 day period without an extension. If extension is necessary then that will need to be sent to the applicant before the 60 day period ends. 2. The city needs to adopt a resolution delegating staff to make decisions on WCA applications. 3. The city needs to setup a local appeal process. h'nunli, Sniff lod P14/14111 re„pt+hr//% Alonsh,rl/ NewI//ru ,owt i"ull 701 %inttesota Avenue 1601 Minnesota Drive 394 S. Lake Avenue 10(13 Frontier Trail 1400 G. Lyon Street 261 Highway 15 S. 231X) Sihrr Crock 520 Lalevene Read N Suite 233 Brainerd, MN 56301 R(x)m 403 Fergus Falls. MN 56537 Box 267 New Ulm. \IN 56(173 Road N.t:, Saint Paul, MN 55155 13enudii. MN 56601 phone (218) 828-2383 Duluth, 11N 55802 phone ( 21817365345 Marshall, MN 56258 phone (5071 3596074 Rochester, MN 55105 phone j651 296-3767 phots 1218) 755.4235 fax (218) 828-6036 phone 1218) 7234752 fax 1218) 7367215 phone (507) 537-0,160 fax 1507) 359.6018 phone (507) 281.7797 far 1651) 297-5615 fan 1218) 755-4201 fax (219) 723-4794 fax (5071 537.6368 fax 007) 285 7134 1krh dxwu hw.r.xiaue nut.u. -11Y: (8W) 627.3529 An equal oppt)nunil\ entplo\er ®Printed on rewdlc(1 pallor Summary Overall, the city is appropriately administering the WCA. BWSR thanks you for your cooperation in this spot check and looks forward to working with you in the future to effectively implement the WCA. Please contact me (612-201-9806) if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Lynda Peterson Wetland Specialist MN Board of Water & Soil Resources Saint Paul, MN Cc: Dennis Rodacker, BWSR Senior Wetland Specialist Stacey Lijewski, Hennepin Conservation District Jim Haertel, BWSR Metro Supervisor h',ffmIf, 01,riff,.nl olds' , F, ni,f. r,Jl, A1,ush,rJl Not, R"' /h"110 [;