The URL can be used to link to this page

03-19-13 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Vaitey City Hall 78Q0 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber March 19, 2013 6:30 pm The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7 pm 1. CALL TO ORDER PAGES A. Roll Call 6. Pledge of Allegiance C. Certificate of Recognition: Eagle Scout Ethan Meirovitz 3 D. State of the City Presentation 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 Workshop - January 9, 2013 and Council/Manager - 4-10 February 12, 2013 B. Approval of Check Register 11 C. Licenses: � 1. General Business Licenses 12-13 2. Rental Property Licenses 14 3. Therapeutic Massage Certificate - Lee Elizabeth Langer 15 4. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Sons of the 16-20 American Post 523 5. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Tru Breed 21-23 Motorcycle Club 6. 3.2 Liquor License Renewals 24 D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission - January 14, 2013 25-30 2. Board of Zoning Appeals - January 22, 2013 31-37 3. Human Services Fund - January 14, 2013 38-39 4. Environmental Commission - January 28, 2013 40-41 5. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - January 17, 2013 42-49 E. Call for Public Hearing - Platted Drainage and Utility Easement Vacations - PUD #63 - 50-55 Saturn Addition - 701 and 801 Louisiana Avenue South - 4/3/13 13-14 F. Proclamation for National Public Works Week 56-57 G. Authorization to Sign Agreements for 2013 Pavement Management Program 58-75 Sanitary Sewer Repair Program H. Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under Internal 76-78 Revenue Code - Highway 55 West District #1 13-15 I. Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under Internal 79-82 Revenue Code - Douglas Drive Street Reconstruction 13-16 3. CONSENT AGENDA - CONTINUED J. Approval of Fire Department Relief Association By-Law Amendment Regarding 83-84 Pension Increase K. Approval of Fire Department Relief Association By-Law Amendment Regarding 85-87 Approval to Allow the Board to Set Interest Rates up to 5% 13-17 L. Authorizing Issuance and Sale of: 88-91 1. $4,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2013A 13-18 2. $7,330,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2013B 13-19 M. Approval of Extension of Variances - 410 Rhode Island Avenue Narth 92-102 N. Approval of Extension of Variances - 7650 Harold Avenue 103-113 ; O. Receipt of December 2012 Financial Reports 114-116 P. Authorizing 2012 General Fund Transfer and Assignment of Fund Balance 13-20 117-119 ' Q. Proclamation for Rotary Club of Golden Valley 120 R. Board/Commission Appointments 121 S. Bottineau Transifinray Update 122-123 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Announcements of Meetings B. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT Gl��1 C)� Cifiy Administration/Cauncil 763-593-8003/763-593-8109 tfax) ��°�� .•° � �q�G��R � .��,..�.v��,��;�Wv�. ,.... . -. . -�:. ��,� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 1. D. State of the City Video Presentation Prepared By Thomas Burt, City Manager Summary The State of the City video that has been prepared by staff will be presented at the meeting. 2013 City Council Workshop January 9, 2013 Present: Mayor Harris and Council Members Clausen, Pentel, Scanlon and Schmidgall Staff: City Manager Tom Burt, Finance Director Sue Virnig and Assistant City Clerk Jeanne Andre Guests: Christopher Gise The Meeting began at 9 am. City Manager Burt gave a brief introduction to the workshop. Finance Dire.ctor Virnig made a PowerPoint presentation providing background on the City's fiscal position, reviewing 2012 financials and the anticipated fiscal environment for 2013 and 2014, based on currenfi projects and conditions. Assistant City Clerk Andre explained the process to be used to discuss issues presented by Council Members as possible priorities for the upcoming year. Issues presented by individual members had been consolidated and placed into three groups: Community � Planning and Projects, Initiatives and Ordinance Changes and Commissions and Community Relations. Discussion of items in each group occurred, followed by the Council Members using colored dots to vote for their individual top three priorities within the group. After discussion and prioritization of issues within each of the three categories, each Council Member selected the top three priorities across all of the categories. The Summary of Workshop Priorities that resulted from this process is attached. During the prioritization process certain background information was provided and informal discussion helped frame the issues that were placed on the list as potential priorities. Some issues discussed were not listed as potential priorities, often because work is already underway to address the issue. The following tist identifies some of information that was part of the discussion. Council Actions (prior and upcoming) • The Council has already established a legislative priarity to seek funding for improvements to TH 169 in Golden Valley. • Work on Downtown Golden Va!!ey streetscape elements is inctuded in the 2013- 2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for upcoming years. • The 2014 CIP includes $100,000 to start a community center needs assessment. • DeDe Scanlon challenged the Council to approach local organizations and businesses to cover the cost of an electronic sign for City Hall. The sign is estimated to cost $40,000 and the Golden Valley Women's Club is willing to contribute $15,000 to help pay for the sign. • Staff will be recommending Performance Zoning for the northeast quadrant of Douglas Drive and Highway 55 in order to be more flexible and responsive to the market. • The City Manager will be recommending Administrative Fines to help make existing housing maintenance ordinances more effective. 2013 City Council Workshop January 9, 2013 Page 2 Commission/Community Issues • The desire for evening recreational events (perhaps intergenerational or impromptu) will be presented to the Open Space and Recreation Commission for discussion as it considers new programming. • Commissions could consider meeting in various locations in the community as appropriate to their schedules. • There is some interest in finding additional outlets for community input. Some examples are a business council, a neighborhood advisory group, and a budgeUfinance advisory group. • Joanie Clausen and Shep Harris will work with Cheryl Weiler to help define the role of the Envision Connection Project Board of Directors in the future. This work will commence in May or June. No changes will be made in the interim. • Common Place can serve as a public forum for community discussion. • Tom Burt will ask staff members who support senior activities to attend a Council/Manager Meeting to review current programs and services and how they are promoted to the senior audience. The meeting ended at noon. Jeanne Andre Assistant City Clerk 2013 City Council Workshop January 9, 2013 � Page 3 Summary of Workshop Priorities Top Three (Major) Priorities: * Douglas Drive (5)***** Identify redevelopment opportunities along the Douglas Drive Corridor between Highway 55 and Medicine Lake Road to see if there are cost-effective ways to redevelop pockets of land along the corridor that will be impacted by transportation improvements proposed in 2016 to prepare a Comprehensive Douglas Drive Redevelopment Plan. • Bottineau (4)*** Study the impact of the proposed Bottineau LRT Line on local transportation links (streets, sidewalks and trails), parking and land uses. Interact with the community, institutions and adjacent property owners to define issues and propose local solutions that complement the implementation of LRT in the community. • Organized Hauling (4)*�`* Start the state statutory public hearing process to consider implementing single hauler garbage/recycling collection in Golden Valley. Other issues with major priority votes: • Reconsider ways to select members for and interact with Commissions (2)* Review the way that Commission Members are selected to serve, and consider using a wait-list for future openings. Schedule an annual meeting with each Commission to give direction, get feedback and jointly confer on the Commission's mission and priorities. • Curbside Cleanup Day (2)* Institute a curbside cleanup day that would replace Mighty Tidy Day. • Develop solution to the Schuller's Bar request to develop a patio (2)* Other issues with priority votes: • Encourage Neighborhood Meetings at public locations in lieu of ineeting in private homes, which are not accessible. (4) • Help sort out the relationship between Golden Valley Fund and Golden Valley Community Foundation. (3) • Consider Teen involvement in commissions, either as members of existing commissions or the creation of a separate Teen Commission. (2) • Start new Highway 55 Corridor Study, working with the Minnesata Department of Transportation on infrastructure improvements and evaluating local land uses adjacent to the highway. (2) • Review minimum lot size in subdivisions to see if lot density should be reduced. (2) • Change City Elections to occur on even years. (2) • Explore senior citizen needs in the community and consider appointing a Senior Citizen Task Force to study local needs and possible responses to those needs. (1) *Identifies votes to establish major priority (1) Identifies votes in earlier round of priority consideration (three rounds) 2013 City Council Workshop January 9, 2013 Page 4 • Help raise money for and awareness of Golden Valley Historical Society. (1) • Fix Downtown Golden Valley infrastructure, replacing damaged walks, light poles, banner poles, railings and landscaping. Install finrinkle lights. (1) • Consider implementing a Golden Valley Housing Program that would help to maintain homes and keep them marketable over the long term. The Program could involve housing maintenance regulations and provide and promote financing opportunities for home improvements (i.e. St. Louis Park Program). (1) • Consider ways to allow chickens in the community. (1) Other issues raised and discussed: • Collaborate with adjacent communities to seek improvements to Highway 169. • Ask Planning Commission to study light commercial district. • Encourage Hennepin County to undertake Glenwood Avenue improvements (especially sidewalks). • Start Community Center Planning. (2014). • Study options for new park improvements and budget for them (i.e. warming houses, dog parks, trails). • Plan outings for City Council to get out into the community and interact informally with citizens. "Identifies votes to establish major priority (1) Identifies votes in earlier round of priority consideration (three rounds) Council/Manager Meeting Minutes February 12, 2013 Present: Mayor Harris and Council Members, Clausen, Pentel, Scanlon and Schmidgall, City Manager Tom Burt, Assistant City Manager Chantell Knauss, Finance Director Sue Virnig, Chief of Fire and Inspections Mark Kuhnly, Golf Operations Manager Ben Disch, Fire Relief Association President Ryan Magnuson, Fire Relief Association Trustee Chris Gemlo, Director of Military Outreach, MN Department of Military Affairs Annette Brechon Kuyper and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. The meeting began at 6:30 pm in the Council Conference Room. Yellow Ribbon Community Wide Recognition Program Mayor Harris stated that he has been approached by the Mayors from Crystal, New Hope and Robbinsdale about Golden Valley's interest in forming a Yellow Ribbon Community Wide Recognition program. He introduced Annette Brechon Kuyper, Director of Military Outreach, MN Department of Military Affairs. Kuyper stated that Yellow Ribbon communities unite key areas within a community to create a comprehensive network that connects and coordinates agencies, organizations, resources and employers for the purpose of creating access to resources that meet the needs at the local level of service members, veterans, military families and employers. She explained that each community will develop a sustainable action plan of support that demonstrates their commitment to service members, veterans and military families. She handed out a packet of information that included examples of minimum service ideas and best practices suggestions. The Council discussed various examples of what other communities do as part of their action plans and noted that the next step in the process is the Yellow Ribbon Kick-off Event on March 6, 2013 at the Golden Valley VFW. The Council directed staff to inform the Envision Board of this event. Fire Department Relief Association By-Law Amendments — Deferred Retirement Services Pension Interest and Annual Pension Interest Sue Virnig stated that Bryan Magnuson and Chris Gemlo from the Fire Department Relief Association are in attendance to talk to the Council about considering two changes to their by-laws. The first change is the interest rate on the Deferred Retirement Benefit and the second is to increase the lump-sum pension. Chris Gemlo and Ryan Magnuson discussed the mission and budget af the Golden Valley Fire Relief Association. They also discussed the historic municipal contributions and retirement benefit levels. They asked the Council to consider increasing the benefit level from $6,700 to $7,000 and to set the interest rate on the Deferred Retirement Benefit at 5%. The Council consensus was supportive of the by-law changes and to further review these items because there could be a levy in the future. The resolutions will be brought forward to a future Council Meeting. Council/Manager Meeting Minutes February 12, 2013 — Page 2 Deputy Fire Chief Position Tom Burt stated that with the recent retirement of the Deputy Fire Marsha! he is recommending a reorganization of the Fire Department which would include creating a Deputy Fire Chief position to perform the duties of the Deputy Marshal position in addition to acting in the absence of the Fire Chief. He said he is also considering a Community Development director position to oversee the Inspections and Planning functions. The Council discussed the salary, examples of the job duties and the hiring process of the new Deputy Fire Chief position. Burt stated that an amended salary resolution will be placed on the next regular City Council agenda for consideration. Request for Proposal for Food, Beverage, and Alcohol Services at Brookview Golf Course and Brookview Community Center Ben Disch explained that in order to stay competitive with other golf courses and event centers staff is recommending developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to seek an exclUSive relationship with a vendor to provide food, beverage and alcohol services at Brookview Golf Course and exclusive alcohol services and preferred catering services for Brookview Gommunity Center. The Council discussed some of the parameters in the proposed RFP, the potential costs involved, potential employee structure and how it would be advertised. After discussion, the consensus of the Council was to go forward with the RFP process. Human Rights Commission Proposed Amendments Chantell Knauss stated that the Human Rights Commission By-laws and the Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils have been updated for the Council to review. Council Members Pentel and Scanlon discussed the changes that have been made to the By-laws, many of which came from the Human Rights Commission Task Force report. The Council discussed the changes they would like made to the draft By-laws and Guidelines documents. The amended section of City Code pertaining to the Human Rights Commission will be considered at the next regular City Council meeting. The amended By-laws and Guidelines documents will considered at a future City Council meeting. Bottineau Transitway Tom Burt discussed the process for the upcoming Theodore Wirth Regional Park/Bottineau Transitway Forum. He stated that Hennepin County has agreed to provide monthly updates to all of the cities in which the Bottineau Transitway is located. The Council reviewed a letter that Mayor Harris wrote to the Metropolitan Cauncil and the Hennepin County Board expressing concern about the upcoming forum and the desire to have better communication. After discussion, the Council agreed that the letter should be sent. Council/Manager Meeting Minutes February 12, 2013 — Page 3 The meeting adjourned at 9 pm. Lisa Wittman Administrative Assistant �� Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) � �� ° � .,__. k -�+�..,--�r',�.,.'v'��»,-:: ,�.�:s�'�".ia�,'�,�,�',u�*'��.�m�.+'4�;S��Xii�l6rci;r u?' :�.- .�:�Qi4'm�,-..:-.. .is.�a��'��RU,...�.,-.:. , x'�". �,.::->.�Ms�i'�,i�!.��1me�-'.�..'' Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. B. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. (,��' �� Fire Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8A98(fax) _ - ��:_:R. ��,� �:�� >:�� , �4�� _ Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 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. #6346 Mendota Valley Amusement 3 Amusement Devices $ 60,00 220 Hardman Avenue South at 8040 Olson Memorial Highway #6349 Mendota Valley Amusement 3 Amusement Devices $60.00 220 Hardman Avenue South at 7775 Medicine Lake Road #6348 RZMP Corporation 1 Amusement Device $30.00 7345 Country Club Drive #6356 RZMP Corporation Dancing/Entertainment $375.00 7345 Country Club Drive #6342 Budget Waste Systems 2 Refuse/Garbage Vehicles $100.00 3516 East Lake Street #6340 Brown Bear LLC 4 Refuse/Garbage Vehicles $200.00 5315 Sunset Lane d/b/a Garbageman, Inc, #6330 Waste Management of Minnesota 2 Recycling Vehicles $100.00 10050 Naples Street NE #6335 Waste Management of Minnesota 9 Refuse/Garbage Vehicles $450.00 10050 Naples Street NE #6333 Allied Waste Services 11 Refuse/Garbage Vehicles $550.00 9813 Flying Cloud Drive #6329 Allied Waste Services 8 Recycling Vehicles $400.00 9813 Flying Cloud Drive #6336 Michael P. Hall, Inc. 4 Refuse Vehicles $200.00 3119 150th Lane NW #6341 Suburban Waste 1 Refuse Vehicle $ 50.00 15718 Village Woods Drive Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of licenses as recommended by staff. L'Z��' L�� Fire Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) ��`,�r.a.�?.. ��.,,�^°'�. ��`,�.�._,� -��a�`��4"�?'��-��"�;��'h�q�u�� =`':... ..?�,��"",,.. .:: .. ��°��"�a�l� ��`_".._ .. �. �.'r�, - '. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Rental Property Licenses Prepared By Jill Lund, Administrative Assistant Summary As per City Code, some businesses are required to be licensed by the City. Listed below are the license number, applicant and fee of those who have submitted an application for approval for multiple family rental licenses. TRIPLEX #5871 6212 Golden Valley Road $ 190.00 Recommended Action Motion to authorize the issuance of license as recommended by staff. L'l�� . � Police Department 763-593-$079/763-593-8098(fax) �� : �, �b� � ��.�,. �.�x�. �. .�� :-�:�: �� .Rw�;�� .,..,.. �� ,�: : :��..�.z..� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. C. 3. Therapeutic Massage Certificate- Lee Elizabeth Langer Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Jim Roberts, Sergeant Summary Lee Elizabeth Langer has applied for a therapeutic massage certificate for the 2013 license year. This is the first application for Ms. Langer in the City. Ms. Langer will be employed at Massage Envy, located at 7704 Olson Memorial Highway. Ms. Langer has had a massage certificate in the City of Maple Grove. A background investigation including record checks was completed and Ms. Langer meets City Code requirements. Recommended Action Motion to approve the issuance of a therapeutic massage certificate to Lee Elizabeth Langer at Massage Envy, 7704 Olson Memorial Highway. �� '�� i A minisfir tion Council ��.. � C ty d a / 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) �� ,._ ��. ��...:�...��:; .��.�=:� �� .� ��:. . ��g-;�:�� ,_��..: _ - ;.m,� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. C. 4. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement- 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 th� permit has been approved or denied by the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the 30-day waiting period. Attachments • Application for Exempt Permit (4 pages) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for the Sons of the American Legion Post 523. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 1/13 Page 1 of 2 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: App�iCat1011 f@@ (non refundable) - conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and -awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. If application is postmarked or received 30 days or If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the licensing more before the event$50; otherwise$100. specialist assigned to your county. ORGANIZATION iNFORMATION Organization name Previous gambling permit number Sons Of the American Post 523 Minnesota tax ID number, if any Federal employer ID number (FEIN), if any Type of nonprofit organization. Check one. �Fraternal �Religious �Veterans �Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City State Zip code County 200 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley MN 55422 Henn Name of chief executive officer [CEO] Daytime phone number E-mail address David Jenkins 612-618-3330 emailchico(c�aol.com NONPROFIT STATUS ' Attach a copy of ONE of the following for proof of nonprofit status. �Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55103 � Phone: 651-296-2803 IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact athe IRS at 877-829-5500. IRS-Affiliate of national, statewide,or international parent nonprofit organization [charter] If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both of the folfowing: 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. GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION Name of premises where the gambling event will be conducted. For raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place. Chester Bird American Legion Address [do not use PO box] City or township Zip code County 200 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley 55422 Henn Date[s] of activity. For raffles, indicate the date of the drawing. Sell 4-1-2013 to 6-22-2013 Drawing held 6-22-2013 dusk C�each type of�ling activity that your organization will conduct. ❑ Bingo* � Raffle �LPaddlewheels* � Pull-tabs* Tipboards* *Gambling equipment for bingo paper, paddlewheels, pull-tabs, and tipboards must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state,mn.us and click on Distributors under the WHO'S WHD?LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-639-4000. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit 1/13 Page Z of 2 LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT`ACKNOWLEDGMENT CiTY APPROYAL COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises located within city limits located in a township �The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days period, and ailows the Board to issue a permit after 30 [60 days for a ist class city]. days. _The application is denied. The application is denied. Print city name �"1D�f��l�] Ua/I��7 _^ Print county name Signature of city personnel � Signature of county personnet Title �jn 1�� Date � � � Title Date TOWNSHIP. If required by the county. On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny an application, per Minnesota Statutes 349.166.] Print township name Signature of township ofFicer Title Date CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and returned o the Board within 30 days of the event date. Chief executive officer's signature � ' Date � �� )� Print name �qV�-� �C��1. 'F 1 �� REQUIREMENTS Complete a seQarate application for: Financial report and recordkeeping required • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days, or A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your • all gambling conducted on one day. permit,or use the online fill-in form available at Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings WWw.gcb.state.mn.us. are conducted on the same day Within 30 days of the event date, complete and return Send app)icatio�with� the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. _a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and Questions? _application fee (non refundable). Make check payable to Call the Licensing Section of the Gambting Control 8oard "State of Minnesota." at 651-639-4000. To• Gambling Control Boar'd This form will be made availabte in alternative format(i.e.large print,Braille) . 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South upon request. Roseville, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: The information requested on this All other information provided will be pri- General; Commissioners of Administration, form (and any attachments)will be used by the Gambling vate data about your organization until the Minnesota Management&Budget,and Control Board(Board)to determine your organization's Board issues the permit. When the eoard Revenue; Legislative Auditor,natio�al and quali�cations to be involved in lawful gambling activities in issues the permit,all information provided international gambling regulatory agencies; Minnesota. Your organization has the right to refuse to will become public. If the Baard does not anyone pursuant to court order;other indi- supply the information; however, if your organization issue a permit, atl information provided viduals and agencies specifical�y authorized refuses to supply this information,the Board may not be remains private,with the exception of your by state or federal law to have access to able to determine your organization's qualifications and, organization's name and address which will the i�format+on; individuals and agencfes as a consequence, may refuse to issue a permit. If your remain public. Private data about your for which law or legal order authorizes a organization supplies the information requested,the Board organization are available to: Board mem- new use or sharing of information after this will be able to process the application. Your organization's bers,Board staf#whose work requires notice was given;and anyone with your name and address will be public information when received access to the information; Minnesota's written consent. by the Board. Department of Public Safety;Attorney MINNESOTA LAWFUI,GAMBLING �/�s Pa9e � of 2 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organization that: App�ICat1011 fee (non refundable) -conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and -awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. If application is postmarked or received 30 days or If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the licensing more before the event$50; otherwise $100. specialist assigned to your county. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization name Previous gambling permit number SONS OF THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 523 Minnesota tax ID number, if any Federal employer ID number(FEIN), if any 7ype of nonpro�t organization. Check one. �Fraternal �Religious �Veterans �Other nonprofit organization - Mailing address City State Zip code County 200 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55422 HENN Name of chief executive o�cer [CEO) Daytime phone number E-mail address DAVID JENKINS (612) 618-3330 EMA(LCH(CO@AOL.COM NONPROFIT STATUS Attach a copy of ONE of the following for proof of nonprofit status. � Nonprafit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of Good Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100, St. Paut, MN 55103 Phone: 651-296-2803 �IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization o�cer contact the IRS at 877-829-5500. �IRS-Affiliate of national, statewide, or international parent nonprofit organization [charter] If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of 6oth of the foftowing: a. IRS ietter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and b. the charter or letter from your parent organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate. GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION ` Name of premises where the gambling event will be conducted. For raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place. GOLDEN VALLEY AMERICAN LEGION Address [do not use PO box] City or township Zip code County 200 NORTH LILAC DRIVE GOLDEN VALLEY 55422 HENN Date[s] of activity. For raffles, indicate the date of the drawing. 11/22/2013 Check each type of ambling activity that your organization will conduct. �Bingo* �Raffle �Paddlewheels* � Pull-tabs* �.Tipboards* *Gambling equipment for bingo paper, paddlewheels, putl-tabs, and tipboards must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTION: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gc6.state.mn.us and click on Distributors under the WHO'S WHO?LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-639-4000. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit �i�s Page 2 of 2 LOCAL UNIT QF GOVERNMENT'ACKNOWLEDGMENT CITY APPROVAL COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises located within city limits located in a township ,[�The appiication is acknowiedged with no waiting period. The application is acknowiedged with no waiting period. _The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting The application is acknowiedged with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 [60 days for a lst class city]. days. The application is denied. The application is denied. Print city name V�Gfi+�� v�/�� Print county name Signature of city personnel Signature of county personnel Title Date�/✓ Title Date TOWNSHIP. If required by the county. On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny an application, per Minnesota Statutes 349.166.] Print township name Signature of township officer Title Date CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and returned to the Bo d within 30 days of the event date. ��', �_ -I 3 ._��3 Chief executive officer's signature s' Date � Print name DAVID JENKINS REQUIREMENTS ' Complete a separate application for. Financial report and recordkeeping required • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days, or A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your • all gambiing conducted on one day. permit, or use the online fill-in form available at Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings www.gcb.state.mn.us. are conducted on the same day Within 30 days of the event date, complete and return Send application with• the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. _a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and Questions? _application fee (non refundable). Make check payable to Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board "State of Minnesota." at 651-639-4000. TO' Gambling Control Board This form will be made available in alternative format(i.e.large print,Braille) . 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South upon request. Roseville, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: The information requested on this AII other information provided will be pri- Ge�eral; Commissioners of Administration, form (and any attachments)will be used by the Gambling vate data about your organization until the Minnesota Management&Budget,and Control Board (Board)to determine your organization's Board issues the permit. Whe�the Board Revenue; Legislative Auditor,�ational and qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activitie�in issues the permit,all information provided intemational gambling regulatory agencies; Minnesota. Your organization has the right to refuse to will become public. If the Board does not anyone pursuant to court order;other indi- supply the information; however, if your organization issue a permit,all information provided viduals and agencies specifically authorized refuses to supply this information,the Board may not be remains private,with the exception of your by state or federal law to have access to able to determine your organization's qualifications and, organization's name and address which will the information; individuals and agencies as a consequence, may refuse to issue a permit. If your remain public. Private data about your for which law or legal order authorizes a organfzation supplies the information requested,the Board organization are available to: Board mem- new use or sharing of information after this will be able to process the application. Your organization's bers,Board stafF whose work requfres notice was given;and anyone with your name and address will be public information when received access to the information; Minnesota's written consent. by the Board. Department of Public Safety;Attorney Cl��1 U� �A:. City Adminisfiration/Cauncil 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) ..�„�- �. _mm,� w_ _ _ � � _ � _.: s ,��E�� :,� �m ...��- _-_ . �7.=M�— � ,...-�: _. � Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. C. 5. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement-Tru Breed Motorcycle Club Prepared By Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant Summary As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit an application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or denied by the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the 30-day waiting period. Attachments • Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for the Tru Breed Motorcycle Club. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 1/13 Page 1 of 2 LG220 Application for Euempt Perm�t An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit organi2ation that: App�ICdt1011 fee (non refundabie) -conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days,and -awards less than$50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. If application is postmarked or received 30 days or If total prize value for the year will be$1,500 or less,contact the licensing more before the event$50; otherwise$100. specialist assigned to your county. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization name Previous gambling permit number TRU BREED MOTORCYCLE CLUB X-36639-12-001 Minnesota tax ID number, if any Federai employer ID number(FEIN), if any Type of nonprofit organization. Check one. �Fraternal �Religious �Veterans �Other nonprofit organization Mailing address City State Zip code County 1568 BELMONT AVE PRIOR LAKE MN 55379 SCOTT Name of chief executive officer[CEO] Daytime phone number E-mail address MATTHEW ALLEN 757.503.1718 DK@TRUBREEDMC.ORG NONPROFIT STATUS Attach a wpy of ONE of the following for proof of nonprofit status. �Nonprofit Articles of Incorporation OR a current Certificate of 600d Standing. Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from: Secretary of State, Business Services Div., 50 Empire Drive, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55103 ❑ Phone: 651-296-2803 IRS income tax exemption [501(c)] letter in your organization's name. Don't have a copy? To obtain a copy of your federal income tax exempt letter, have an organization officer contact � the IRS at 877-829-5500. IRS-Affiliate of national,statewide,or internationai parent nonprofit organization [charter] If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of both 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. GAMBLING P�tEMISES INFORMATION Name of premises where the gambling event will be conducted. For raffles, list the site where the drewing will take place. Golden Valley VFW Post 7051 Address [do not use PO box] City or township Zip code County Address: 7775 Medicine Lake Road Goiden Valley 55427 HENNEPIN Date[s] of activity. For raffles, indicate the date of the drawing. 4 MAY 2013 C�each type of�ling activity that your organization wili conduct. l_/I Bingo* �rJ Raffle �Paddlewheels* �Pull-tabs* � Tipboards* *Gambling equipment for bingo paper, paddlewheeis, pu11-tabs, and tipboards must be obtained from a distributor licensed by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board. EXCEPTTON: Bingo hard cards and bingo number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization authorized to conduct bingo. To find a licensed distributor, go to www,gcb.state.mn.us and click on Distributors under the WHO'S WHO?LIST OF LICENSEES, or call 651-639-4000. LG220 Appiication for Exempt Permit ��3 Page 2 of 2 LOCAL UNIT OF GOVE�NMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT CITY APPROVAL COUNTY APPROVAL for a gambling premises for a gambling premises �� located within city limits located in a township The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. The application is acknowledged with no waiting period. _The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting The application is acknowiedged with a 30 day waiting period,and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days period,and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 [60 days for a ist class city]. days. _The application is denied. The application is denied. Print city name U/l�b(eL�n �� Print county name Signature of city perso el �( � � Signature of county personnel ��r� Title t � Date� � Title Date TOWNSHIP.If required by the county. On behatf of the township,I acknowledge that the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny � an application,per Minneso�Statutes 349.166.] Print township name Signature of township officer Title Date CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE The information provided in this application is compl te and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and returned t t Board ithin 30 days o�the event date. � ,.�,. Chief executive officer's signature , �� ' ��----- Date 10 MaP 2013 Print name MattheW Allell �i``' REQUIREMENTS Complete a separate application for: Financial report and recordkeeping required • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days, or A financial report form and instructions will be sent with your • all gambling conducted on one day. permit,or use the online fill-in form available at Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings �^'WW•9cb.state.mn.us. are conducted on the same day Within 30 days of the event date,complete and return Send application with• the financial report form to the Gambling Control Board. _a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and Questions? _application fee (non refundable). Make check payable to Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board 'State of Minnesota." at 651-639-4000. TO: Gambling Control Board This form will be made available in alternative format(i.e.large print,Braille) 1711 West County Road B,Suite 300 South upon request. Roseviile, MN 55113 Data privacy notice: The information requested on this All other information provided will be pri- General;Commissioners of Administration, form(and any attachments)will be used by the Gambling vate data about your organization until the Minnesota Management&Budget,and Control Board(Board)to determine your organization's Board issues the permit. When the Board Revenue;Legislative Auditor,national and qualifications to be involved in lawful gambling activities in issues the permit,alI information provided international gambling regulatory agencies; Minnesota. Your organization has the right to refuse to will become public. If the Board does not anyone pursuant to court order;other indi- supply the information; however,if your organization issue a permit,all information provided viduats and agencies specifically authorized refuses to supply this information,the Board may not be remains private,with the exception of your by state or federal law to have access to able to determine your organization's qualifications and, organization's name and address which will the information; individuals and agencies as a consequence,may refuse to issue a permit. If your remain public. Private data about your for which Iaw or legal order authorizes a organization supplies the information requested,the Board orga�ization are available to: Board mem- new use or sharing of information after this will be able to process the applitation. Your organization's bers,Board staff whose work requires notice was given;and anyone with your name and address will be public information when received access to the information; Minnesota's written consent. by the Board. Department of Public Safety;Attorney �� Police Department 763-593-8079/763-593-SQ98(fax) �=_�.. ��._ _.._ _ Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. C. 6. 3.2 Liquor License Renewals Prepared By Amanda Johnson, Administrative Assistant Summary The following establishments have applied for renewal of their 3.2 liqucar licenses for the 2013- 2014 license term. The applicants meet City Code and State requirements for the renewal of their licenses. Off-Sale Northern Tier Retail, LLC d/b/a SuperAmerica #4497 Northern Tier Retail, LLC d/b/a SuperAmerica #4443 On-Sale Davanni's Inc d/b/a Davanni's Pizza Brookview Golf Course Theadore Wirth Chalet Recommended Action Motion to approve the renewal of the respective 3.2 liquor licenses for the applicants listed above for the 2013-2014 license term. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, January 14, 2013. Chair Waldhauser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Kluchka, McCarty, Segelbaum and Waldhauser. Also present were Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes November 26, 2012 Regular Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the November 26, 2012 minutes as submitted. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Preliminary Plan Review— Planned Unit Development (PUD) — Saturn Addition PUD #63, Amendment#2 Applicant: Penske Automotive Group/UAG Minneapolis B1, LLC Address: 701 Louisiana Avenue Sauth Purpose: To allow for the construction of a Motorwerks MINI Cooper auto dealership. Hogeboom stated that the applicant, in coordination and with approval of all property owners within the PUD, is proposing to remove the existing used cars building, reconfigure the property lines and construct a new MINI Cooper auta dealership on the site. The auto collision repair facility and the former Saturn dealership buildings will remain. He referred to a site plan and explained the proposed new location of the property lines that will reduce the number of lots within the PUD from four to three. Kluchka asked why the application is not being considered as a Minor PUD amendment. Hogeboom explained that one of the criteria for consideration as a Minor PUD amendment is that the building footprint won't expand more than 3%. In this case the footprint is expanding more than that. Segelbaum asked if the standards used in cansidering a PUD amendment are the same standards used when considering a new PUD. Hogeboom said yes. The criteria and the findings are the same for a PUD amendment and a new PUD. Waldhauser noted that the applicant is proposing to have 72% impervious surface on the site. She referred to the requirement that allows 65% impervious surface and questioned if that language is found in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district, or in the Commercial Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 Page 2 zoning district. Hogeboom stated that the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district allows 65% impervious surface. He added that this PUD development pre-dates the current requirements in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district. Grimes added that there will be no difference in the amount of impervious surface than what is currently on the site. Cera questioned how many parking spaces would be lost if the applicant reduced the total amount of impervious surFace to 65%. Segelbaum questioned if reducing the size of Lot 2 (former Saturn dealership) would make it less desirable. Hogeboom explained that the property owner understands and is aware that this PUD amendment changes the former Saturn site. Grimes stated that he has concerns about the cross parking agreements no longer being in affect as part of the amended PUD. The former Saturn dealership property will have to stand on its own with no on-street parking in that area. McCarty asked why the cross parking arrangement is being eliminated. Hogeboom said there are security needs at certain hours that affect the current parking arrangement. Segelbaum asked if the City has heard any concerns from Boulevard Collision about the loss of shared parking. Hogeboom said it is his understanding that Boulevard Collision wasn't part of the existing parking agreements and they agreed to the new PUD arrangement. McCarty asked if auto uses are allowed in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district. Hogeboom stated that it would depend on the size of the building and the site. He stated that generally, permitted uses in the Commercial zoning district are allowed in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district with a Conditional Use Permit. Nolan Redding, Regional Project Manager, Penske Automotive, explained that they feel this will be good location for them and said this will be the anly MINI store in the state (to be relocated from Bloomington). He showed the Commissioners the proposed site plan and stated that some allowance has been made for additional parking for the Boulevard Collision site and the former Saturn dealership site. He reiterated that the amount of impervious surface will not change from what it is today and added that they really need the amount of parking they are proposing. He discussed several of the energy efficient items they are proposing including LED lights and using reclaimed water in the car wash. Cera asked Redding if they've considered pursuing LEED certification. Redding said they will not be pursuing LEED certification on this project. He elaborated on the energy efficient items they are proposing including occupancy timers, using waste oil for some of the heating of the property, using high efficiency heating and air conditioning units, using a high insulation value and having a reflective roof. Waldhauser questioned the slight decrease in the size of the parking spaces. Redding stated that the proposed smaller parking spaces are for their display cars. The parking spaces for customer parking will be standard size. Cera said he understands that the applicant wants to keep all 204 parking spaces they are proposing but questions if they have computed how many spaces they would lose if the brought the amount of impervious surface down to 65%. Redding explained that their Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 Page 3 goal was to not increase the amount of impervious surface, but to stay within the existing amount. Kluchka asked about the types of building materials being propased. Redding showed the Commission some renderings of how the building will look. He stated that the materials will be mainly black metal panels and a lighter colored concrete block with a stucco finish for contrast. Kluchka recommended that the applicant bring examples of the proposed materials to their next public hearing. Waldhauser referred to the landscaping on the north side of the building and stated that she would like that fa�ade to be more people friendly. Kluchka stated that the presentation of a large black box isn't very pleasing especially in an area the City is trying to revitalize. He said he is concerned about creating an alley and a large, flat, dark wall that has no human scale. Redding stated that the look of the building is driven by the auto manufacturer however they can give further consideration to visually breaking up the walls with some bands of a different color or something similar. Grimes added that enhancing the landscaping would also help. Kluchka said there is opportunity to increase the pervious surface with the addition of a green roof which would help the applicant get to the goal of having 65% impervious surface. Grimes explained that the applicant will be doing some enhancements to the stormwater system on the property and they will be improving the water quality leaving the site. There will also be stormwater maintenance agreements in place. Kluchka asked the applicant if there is a parking arrangement with Menard's in place. Redding stated that they are currently feasing parking spaces on the vacant Saturn site to Menard's. Kluchka suggested that the applicant install bicycle racks. Redding said they would consider installing bicycle racks. Kluchka noted that there is an access roadway connecting Market Street and Laurel Avenue and asked if there are issues with people using that access to cross from one street to the other. Redding explained that all four parcels in the current PUD and the three parcels in the proposed PUD amendment need to have access to all three streets and they are trying to leave the curb cuts and traffic patterns the same as they are currently. Grimes added that auto dealerships aren't typically peak hour traffic generators, most of their traffic is in the evenings and on the weekends. Segelbaum asked if there will be a security fence along the perimeter of the entire property. Redding stated that there will be gates at the entrances and slightly taller than normal curbing around the perimeter with some bollards in the corner landscaping. Segelbaum asked Redding if he has any concerns about the vacant former Saturn dealership or concerns about what type of use will go there. Redding said they would rather there be someone in the space than to have it sit vacant but they don't have any Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 � Page 4 real concern about who is in the space because it will more than likely be a commercial use. Greg Hayes, Lupient, stated that he has had a number of people look at the former Saturn property and he currently has a couple of prospects. He stated that it is an attractive site that will more than likely be a retail use. He added that there are approximately 100 parking spaces on the Saturn site which would be fairly standard for a retail use. Waldhauser referred to the applicanYs narrative regarding there being 45 employment opportunities at the MINI Cooper dealership and asked Redding to elaborate. Redding said there will be a mix of full and part time positions for sales, technicians, administrative, parts and detailing. Waldhauser opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to camment, Waldhauser closed the public hearing. Cera said his concerns are the amount of impervious surface and the view from the north and west. He said he would like to see more landscaping and more detailed renderings of the building. Segelbaum agreed with Cera's comments. He said he feels the proposal is a tremendous improvement to the area. He suggested adding a condition to the Planning Commission's recommendation to require the applicant to study and provide the additional information on the concerns that have been discussed at this meeting. McCarty said he thinks the proposal is a fine re-use of the property and he supports the applicant's request. He agreed that it would be worthwhile for the applicant to address the Planning Commissioners concerns that have been mentioned. Kluchka agreed that the proposed use is an ideal use for the property. He said he would like to add a condition regarding Planning Commission review and approval of the materials being used, the design appeal and the vertical interest. He would also like to see some improvement on the north and west facades before the Final PUD plan approval. He added that he feels there is an opportunity for the City to influence how the access road connecting Market Street and Laurel Avenue is designed and that there are opportunities to improve the overall design and to increase some physical transparency and pedestrian transparency. Segelbaum agreed that he would like to see the site be more pedestrian friendly. Grimes said he would talk to the Engineering staff about the sidewalk requirements and future sidewalk plans. McCarty said he agrees that sidewalks should be considered if this were an application for a new PUD, however this is already an auto-centered use. Grimes stated that the City doesn't encourage mid-block crosswalks so consideration really needs to be given to where pedestrians should be. McCarty said he feels sidewalks should be considered when other uses come forward but he'd like to leave the condition regarding requiring sidewalks out of the Commission's recommendation. Waldhauser agreed. Cera said the applicant is replatting the entire property so he feels it is an appropriate time to look at the pedestrian access on the entire site. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 Page 5 MOVED by Cera, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plan for Lupient (MINI Cooper) PUD No. 63, Amendment No. 2, subject to the following findings and conditions: Findinqs: • The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. • The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. • The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. • The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. • The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. • The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions: 1. The plans submitted with the application shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from Deputy Fire Marshal Ed Anderson to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated December 20, 2012, shall become part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from City Engineer Jeff Oliver to Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development, dated January 8, 2Q13, shall become a part of this approval. 4. All signs on the property must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code. 5. An example of the proposed building materials shall be shown to the Planning Commission for their approval at the public hearing for the Final PUD Plan. 6. External bicycle racks shall be added to the property. 7. Consider visual enhancements to the building with emphasis on the north and west-facing facades. 8. Ways to improve pedestrian access to the dealership as well as thraugh and around the property shall be considered. 9. Ways to reduce the amount of impervious surface shall be considered. 10. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. --Short Recess-- 3. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No reports were given. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission January 14, 2013 Page 6 4. Other Business Kluchka suggested that the review and approval of building materials be added as a standard condition of approval when reviewing PUD applications. He said he would also like the staff report to note every variance being requested. Hogeboom gave an update on the Bottineau Transitway process and stated that the Minneapolis Park Board will be having a charrette at the end of February. Kluchka said he is interested in considering a TIF district for the 3.9.4 apartment proposal for the same safety reasons that TIF is being considered for the Tiburon project. Grimes said that would be a City Council decision and that he would talk to other City Staff to determine if that has been a possible consideration. 5. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm. David A. Cera, Secretary Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Nelson called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members, Boudreau-Landis, Johnson, Maxwell, Nelson and Planning Commission Representative McCarty. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom, Director of Public Works Jeannine Clancy, WSB Consultant Jupe Hale and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes — December 19, 2012 Regular Meeting Boudreau-Landis referred to the first paragraph on page five and stated that the word "if' should be changed to the word "it" in the first sentence. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Boudreau-Landis and motian carried unanimously to approve the December 19, 2012 minutes with the above noted correction. II. The Petition(s) are: 309 Turnpike Road Dmitri Rebrov, Applicant (13-01-01) Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback Requirements • City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area for houses over 15 feet in height. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and noted the location of the existing house and the proposed location of the new house. He stated that architectural drawings are not required as part of the variance application process but his understanding is that the applicant has drawings available to show to the Board. Nelson asked about the dimensions of the proposed new house. McCarty noted that the dimensions of the existing house are 38.9 feet by 50 feet. Nelson noted that the existing home meets the side yard setback requirements. Hogeboom explained that houses over 15 feet in height require an increased side yard setback. He added that the front of the house can be 28 feet in height. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 2 Dmitri Rebrov, applicant, stated that the height of the side walls will be 21 feet. He noted that the proposed house would meet the side yard setback requirements on the north side however he would like the south side of the home to be located 12.5 feet away from the property line instead of the required 15.5 feet. He also noted that the front and the back walls of the proposed house would meet the articutation requirements but the side walls would not. He showed the board illustrations of the proposed house and said he could break up the look of the walls visually, but he feels the lot is too narrow to articulate the side walls. Nelson asked about the length of the walls. Rebrov stated that the side walls are 54 feet in length and the front and back walls are 48 feet in length. He stated that he had a design that included articulated walls however the articulated portions were too close to the side yard property lines so he would have then needed to request variances from the side yard setback requirements. He added that the south wall of the praposed new house would be in the same locatian as the existing house. Boudreau-Landis referred to the proposed balcony and asked if that would be considered articulation. Hogeboom said no, the entire wall needs to articulate. Maxwell said he is not sure what is unique about the property that would require the requested variances. Rebrov said the size of the property is unique and he feels he needs this size of home for his family. McCarty said the property seems to be a fairly standard size. He asked Rebrov if he had any floor plans he could show ta the Board. Johnson asked why the application states that they are alsa requesting a variance for the size of the garage but the staff report and agenda do not. Hogeboom stated that the original plans for the house indicated a larger garage that would have needed a variance. The applicant has since revised his plans so a variance regarding the size of the garage is no longer needed. McCarty said he is concerned about the Board not having plans to review and said it is difficult to approve a variance request without plans or elevations, all they have to make their decision in this case is a box drawn on a survey. Nelson asked the applicant about the timeline for his project. Rebrov said he would like to start construction in May. Johnson asked for clarification regarding the section of the application where it states that the location of the proposed new house would not have a negative impact on the property to the south in regard to sunshine and privacy. Rebrov stated that the proposed new house would not block any more sun than the existing house currently does. Johnson said he's concerned about impinging on the neighbor's privacy. McCarty said he is not sure if the Board can address privacy concerns. Hogeboom stated that the impact to the surrounding area is something the Board can consider. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 3 Johnson asked the applicant if he had any alternative plans that the Board could look at. McCarty asked the applicant to explain why other options didn't work on this property. Rebrov stated that the house in alternate plans was too big and just didn't fit the lot nicely. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Nelson said she doesn't feel like she has enough information and would like to see more plans. Maxwell agreed and said he would be inclined to table the propasal in order to see more detailed plans. Boudreau-Landis added that he thinks it would be best to see and discuss one plan rather than multiple plans. Johnson said the application seems incomplete. He also questioned the impact af the proposed garage having two doors. Hogeboom stated that the City Attorney has cautioned against adding conditions to variance approvals. He explained that an applicant's plans can change as long as they stay within the parameters of any variances given. He suggested the Board consider a variance for 3 feet off the side yard setback requirement (15.5 ft. side yard setback) which would ensure that house could only be built to 21 feet in height. McCarty said he does not see a hardship with this property. He added that it is a nice, , flat, standard sized lot and that a house could be designed to fit on it without any variances. Boudreau-Landis added that there is also plenty of room to build toward the rear yard property line. He added that he doesn't think the proposal meets the criteria the Board uses when considering variances. Nelson noted that the applicant would be building the new house basically in the same footprint as the existing house however she agreed that there really aren't any unique circumstances on this property. Johnson agreed that there is nothing about this property that wouldn't allow a house to be built following the requirements of the Zoning Code. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to deny the variances as requested. 1410 Tyrol Trail Timbercraft Remodelina, Applicant (13-01-02) Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(B) Height Limitations • 2.5 ft. taller than the allowed 25 ft. for a total height of 27.5 ft. Minutes of the Galden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 4 Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and noted that it received a variance in September to construct a second story addition closer to the side yard property line than allowed. He explained that during the building permit plan review process it was discovered that a portion of the second story addition would be 2.5 feet taller than allowed. He stated that this neighborhood is difficult when it comes to measuring building height because of the topography and the way the front yards slope toward the street. McCarty questioned where the height of the roof exceeds 25 feet. Hogeboom referred to elevation drawings and showed where the portion of the roaf exceeds 25 feet. Peter Murlowski, TimberCraft Remodeling, stated that this property and this neighborhood have unique topography and unique homes. He said he is attempting to make a bland, under-developed property fit in with the rest of the homes in the neighborhood. He explained that he was aware that the house was not supposed to exceed 25 feet in height it was just calculated incorrectly because it is difficult to determine which fa�ade is the front. He stated that he thinks having more than one flat roof line will be more pleasing. He clarified that he is not proposing to build any ctoser to the side yard (west) property line. Nelson asked Hogeboom if variances would be required if this weren't a flat roof. Hogeboom said no because pitched roofs can be 28 feet in height. Murlowski showed a map noting the differences in grade around the perimeter of the house. He added that the portion of added roof height will not negatively affect anyone. Nelson opened the public hearing. Douglas Kline, 1509 Alpine Pass, said he came to meeting to support his new neighbor. He stated that they have a tight-knit neighborhood and he along with other neighbors are supportive of this variance request. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Johnson stated that this is a unique property. Maxwell agreed and added that he would have liked to have seen all of the variance requests at the previous meeting. Nelson agreed that it is a very unique property and that the proposal meets the criteria that the Board considers when reviewing variance requests. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance as requested. 1950 Douglas Drive North Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 5 Golden Vallev Conqreqation of Jehovah's Witnesses (Michael Cave), Applicant (12-12-17) (Continued Item1 Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Side and Rear Yard Requirements. • 2 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 48 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (north) property line. • 19 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at the building's closet point ta the rear yard (east) property line. • 9 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a distance of 16 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the side yard (north) property line. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Front Yard Setback Requirements. • 15 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 20 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the front yard (west) property line. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 9 (2) Accessory Structure Requirements. • 25 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 25 ft. at the storage shed's closest point ta the side yard (north) property line. Request: Section 11.46, Subd. 9 (B)(1) Accessory Structure Requirements. • The proposed storage shed will not be located completely to the rear of the principal structure as required by City Code. Request: Waiver from Section 11.73, Subd. 3 Minimum Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces. • 11 spaces off the required 68 spaces for a total of 57 required parking spaces. Hogeboom reminded the Board that this applicant's request was tabled at last month's meeting in order to have the applicant consider alternate options that would be less impactful on the neighboring properties to the north and east. He showed the Board the applicant's proposed new site plan that places the building further south on the lot. He explained that this proposal, versus the previous proposal, includes a variance request from the required amount of parking spaces because the building size has increased therefore the number of parking spaces required increases as well. He stated that Douglas Drive is proposed to be reconstructed in the future and noted that Director of Public Works Jeannine Clancy and WSB Consultant Jupe Hale are in attendance ta answer questions from the Board. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 6 Clancy explained that a couple of years ago there was a planning study of Douglas Drive done to envision what it should be because it has not been reconstructed in over 50 years. There was identification by the community to improve pedestrian access, improve the signalization, to accommodate the traffic that was there, but to also recognize that Douglas Drive accommodates a lot of varying land uses. She explained that since the planning study was completed the City has been working with Hennepin County to advance the project. She stated that a grant was received from Transit for Livable Communities to complete a 30% design. She referred to the Jehovah's Witnesses property and explained that on the Duluth Street side of their property the right-of-way acquisition is approximately 29 to 30 feet, which is significant. She stated that she appreciates the opportunity to work with the Church on finding a solution so the City doesn't end up acquiring properties in total and can allow land use to remain as is. McCarty referred to the proposed storage shed and asked where it could be located without variances. Hogeboom stated that the shed would need to be located completely to the rear of the building unless it was built with frost footings. Tom Fournier, representing the applicant, stated that the shed would be built on a floating slab, not with frost footings. McCarty asked how much larger the proposed building will be than what was shown on last month's proposal. He also asked why it is larger. Fournier stated that the size of the building is driven by the needs of the congregation. Hogeboom stated that the size of the proposed building has increased by 200 square feet. Johnson asked if the proposed portico will remain. Fournier said yes. Johnson asked if the height of the building increased. Fournier said no. Johnson noted that the applicant doubled the amount of setback area along the north property line in the proposed new plan and added a fence so the building will be less intrusive on the neighborhood. McCarty asked if the fence would be 8 feet in height. Fournier said he didn't know at this point. Hogeboom said they can build an 8-foot tall fence but any fence over 6 feet in height will require a building permit. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to speak Nelson closed the public hearing. Nelson said she thinks this newly proposed plan did a good job of addressing the Board's concerns. Maxwell said he doesn't like to see sheds located in front yards but there really is nowhere else for it to go without requiring a variance. He said given the unique features of the property and considering what is being taken for the road construction, he supports the variance requests. He added that the proposal is in harmony with the intent of the Zoning Code, it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, it is a Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 22, 2013 Page 7 reasonable request, there are significant unique circumstances that are not created by the landowner and it won't alter the essential character of locality. Johnsan questioned if there will be enough parking on the site and if the City has to have a plan if there isn't enough. Hogeboom stated that there will not be any on-street parking available. Maxwell said he assumes there will only be a few times a year when parking could be an issue. Fournier stated that there is adequate parking for the majority of ineetings they have and the parking lot is rarely full. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve the variances as requested. III. Other Business Hogeboom said he would arrange for the City Attorney to come to a Board meeting and talk about placing conditions on variance approvals. IV. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm. Nancy J. Nelson, Chair Joseph S. Hogeboom, Staff Liaison Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF) Meeting Minutes January 14, 2013 Present: Hilmer Erickson, Kathryn Frommer, Brenda Hayle, Alan Ingber, Cannie Sandler, Toots Vodovoz and Peggy Watkins. Also present: Joanie Clausen, Council Liaison, and Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison. Not Attending: Katie Hart, Elissa Heilicher, Diane Nimmer Call to Order: Sandler called the meeting to order at 6:47 p.m. Agenda Changes or Additions: Two items were added to the agenda: Request for funds from the GVCF Pink Courage race November 12 minutes: Erickson moved and Vodovoz seconded the motion to approve the minutes from November 12. The motion passed unanimously. Run the Valley: Run the Valley is set for Saturday, April 13. Twa entries were submitted for the t-shirt design contest. Members liked both entries. The winning design was submitted by Golden Valley resident Jessi Brummer. Letters for funding will go out this week. Vodovoz will contact agencies for volunteers. Sandy Werts, Volunteer Coordinator for the City of Golden Valley, will publicize volunteer opportunities for the public. Fackler has been working with the Communications Department on the brochure and posters. The city website, Active.com, Zap.com and Raceberry Jam websites have been updated and registration has started. The Public Works and Engineering Department have started working on the route. Calendar Review: Fackler passed out the 2013 meeting and event dates. Sandler has been in contact with the director of the TCGMC and Breck School. Possible dates are April 19, May 31, June 1, June 21. Commission members felt the April 19 date did not give members enough time to advertise. Sandler will pursue the later dates and ask about a September date. Other Business: December 4 Council Meeting: Sandler reported on the presentation to the City Council. Council members thanked the Commission for their hard work and dedication. Community Foundation: Sandler reported the GVCF sent 16,500 solicitation letters to residents and businesses late December. So far, $17,000 has been generated from the letter for all organizations listed on the letter. Request for Funds: Sandler has sent a letter requesting $1,624 from the GVCF. This is the amount designated to the GVHSF from the 2012 GVCF solicitation letter. Pink Courage: Fackler reported that city staff is meeting with a representative from Pink Courage to discuss a race proposal in June. The event is named "Run in the Valley". Commission members felt the name is too close to "Run the Valley" and would like to discourage the group from using the name. Fackler will be attending the meeting and will let the organizers know of their concern. Adjournment: Erickson moved to adjourn the meeting, Vodovoz seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m. RespectFully submitted, Jeanne Fackler, GVHSF Staff Liaison 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 Reqular Meetinq 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 Studv 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 Proiect 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 Heatinq 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 2 of 2 6. Proqram/Proiect Updates Summary on-file. 7. Commission Member Council Reports Gitelis mentioned TMDL changes. 8. Other Business None. 9. Ad'ourn MQVED 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 4t�� r�'�'�t BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes i ��vk - 8�� r��l� Water�hed Man��ment ��.i�i��+�n Minu��=c��1�� Reg�ar N�ee�ing c�n:�anuary 17y�013 Commissioners and Staff Present: Crystal Commissioner Dan Johnson Robbinsdale Commissioner Wayne Sicora Medicine Commissioner Ted Hoshal, St. Louis Park Commissioner Jim de Lambert, Vice Lake Secretary Chair Minneapolis Alternate Commissioner Lisa Goddard Administrator Laura Jester Minnetonka Jacob Millner Counsel Charlie LeFevere New Hope Alternate Commissioner Pat Engineer Karen Chandler Crough Plymouth Commissioner Ginny Black, Chair Recorder Amy Herbert Note: City of Golden Valley was not represented Technical Advisory Committee(TAC)Members and other Attendees Present: Derek Asche,TAC, City of Plymouth Guy Mueller, Alternate Commissioner, City of Crystal Pat Byrne,TAC, City of Minneapolis Jeff Oliver, TAC, City of Golden Valley Linda Loomis, Golden Valley resident Liz Stout, TAC, City of Minnetonka Richard McCoy, TAC, City of Robbinsdale Jim Vaughan,TAC> City of St. Louis Park l. CALL TO ORDER AND RULL CALL On Thursday,January 17, 2013, at 11:35 a.m., Chair Black called to order the meeting of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) and asked for roll call to be taken. City of Golden Valley was absent from the roll call. 2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No citizen input 1 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes 3.AGENDA Commissioner Hoshal requested the removal of item 4E—Boone Avenue Convenience Center and Retail Building: Golden Valley—from the Consent Agenda and onto the Agenda. Chair Black added it to the agenda as item SE and requested the addition to the agenda of item 6E—Discussion of budget and schedule for the XP- SWMM model. Alternate Commissioner Goddard moved to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Millner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously 8-0 with eight votes in favor [City of Golden Valley absent from vote]. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Commissianer de Lambert moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Alternate Commissioner Goddard seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously 8-0 with ei�otes in favor [City of Golden Valley absent from vote]. [The following items were approved as part of the Consent Agenda: the December 20, 2012, BCWMC meeting minutes, the December Financial Report, payment of the invoices, and Resolution 13-01 Designating Official Depositories for BCWMC Funds.] The general and construction account balances reported in the January 2013 Financial Report are as follows: Checking Account Balance $457,485.31 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $457,485.31 TOTAL CASH & INVESTMENTS ON- $3,103,682.95 HAND (1/9/13) � � CIP Projects Levied—Budget Remaining ($2,659,720.04) Closed Projects Remaining Balance $443,962.91 2012 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $11,196.24 Anticipated Closed Project Balance $455,159.15 2013 Froposed &Future CIP Project Amount $l 96,000.00 to be Levied 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion of Slate of BCWMC Of�cers for 2013. Chair Black announced that at the February BCWMC meeting,the Commission will select its officers for the year and any commissioner interested in serving as an officer should send an e-mail about it to Administrator Jester. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification about the officer positions and Chair Black said the positions are Chair, Vice Chair,Treasurer, and Secretary. Administrator Jester said that she would send an e-mail about this to the commissioners and alternate commissioners who are absent from today's meeting. 2 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes B. Next Steps for Considering Letters of Interest for Legal, Engineering and Technical Services. Chair Black reported that the Commission received eight letters of interest for Engineering and Technical Services and two letters of interest for legal services. Chair Black said that the letters of interest are hard copies and she requested that in the future the Commission request to receive submittals in electronic format. The Commission discussed having the TAC review the Engineering and Technical Services proposals at the February TAC meeting, a Commission subcommittee concurrently reviewing the proposals, and recommendations from both groups presented to the Commission as a whole at its February meeting. The Commission decided to expedite the process by directing the TAC to review the proposals at its February 7`h TAC and inviting any interested commission members to attend that meeting and join the discussion. The Commission directed the TAC to bring a recommendation to the February BCWMC meeting. Chair Black directed staff to make PDF copies of the proposals and make them available to the TAC and commission members and requested commission members to provide comments to Administrator Jester by February ]st if they wanted their comments to be considered at the TAC meeting and by February 14`h if they want their comments included in the Commission meeting packet. Alternate Commissioner Goddard asked if the Commission is asking the TAC for a recommendation on which firms the Commission should contact to request a more formal proposal. Chair Black said yes,potentially, or the TAC could recommend that the process go no further. C. TAC Recommendations i. Review Draft BCWMC CIP 2015-2019. Mr. Asche reported that the TAC met on January 3"� k0 discuss the five-year CII'(Capital Improvements Program). He said the TAC's intent was to create a draft CIF for 2015—2019, get the Commission's comments on that draft today, then take those comments and finalize the draft to bring back in front of the Commission at its February, March, or April meeting. Mr. Asche commented that the Commission needs to be operating two years ahead of its CIP in order to be on schedule with its CIP projects. Mr. Asche highlighted the updates to the CIP, including the addition of a water quality improvement and flood reduction project BC-2/BC-8 for 2019 in Golden Valley near the intersection of Sandburg Road and Louisiana Avenue. Mr. Oliver provided an overview of the project and answered Commission questions. There was discussion about the project deseriptions listed on the draft CIP and Ms. Chandler stated that projects already ordered by the Commission would maintain their project description as listed in the Watershed Management Plan and the newer projects, originally envisioned to be ponds, will be more broadly described. Commissioner Johnson asked how the TAC derived the list and prioritized the projects. Mr. Asche explained that the CIP table is a working table. He said that projects come from the Tables 12-2 and 12-3 in the Commission's second generation Watershed Management Plan and those tables are reviewed each year by the TAC. He said that the TAC reviews whether the projects listed in those tables are apprapriate for today and then the TAC proposes to add or remove projects based on that review. There was a discussion of the Main Stem channel restoration project slated for 2015 in Golden Valley from 10`"Avenue to St. Croix Avenue. Ms, Chandler pointed out that the project happens to be the project used in the example CIP description page. Mr. Asche went through the revised CIP table with the Commission. Ms. Chandler provided additional information on project NL-1 "Construct Pond NB 29A, B, and pond west of Northwood 3 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes Lake,just east of Highway 169"in the Northwood Lake watershed in New Hope. She said that there may be two locations involved in that project and she would like to see both of those move forward. Mr. Asche answered questions about the proposed Four Seasons Mall project and reported that he had met with Northwood Lake residents to update them about proposed projects and water quality projects around the lake. Mr. Asche said that the TAC would like to take ane last laok at the revised CIP and would like to consider any Commission comments if there are any. Ms. Black said that if there are no objections, then the TAC is directed to bring a final proposed CIP to the Commission at the February or March meeting and for the TAC to work with the Administrator regarding scheduling the item on a Commission meeting agenda. ii. Review Draft Budget Document Information. Mr. Asche said that the Commission had directed the TAC to look at revising the presentation of the CIl'information and he presented the draft document. He said that the new format is typical to how a municipal CIP works. Ms. Jester said she thinks this would work nicely with a map on the Web site linking to online sections for each project and including before and after photos. Mr. Byrne said that it would be nice for links to be included that go to the project information on the Web site. The Commission approved the TAC continuing to work on developing the rest of the CIP budget documents. iii. Schedule Future TAC Meetings. Chair Black announced that the next TAC meetings will be held on February 7`h, March 7`h, and Apri14`h. D. Met Council Call for Members of Watershed Organization Technical Advisory Committee. Chair Black announced that the BCWMC received a letter from the Metropolitan Council inviting membership to a watershed organization technical advisory committee. Administrator Jester provided details. The Commission discussed the invitation. Commissioner Hoshal recommended that the Administrator not be part of the Committee since she will be so busy with the other Administrator tasks. Mr. Asche said he would be interested. The Commission approved. Mr. Asche said he will contact the Metropolitan Council. E. Boone Avenue Convenience Center and Retail Building: Golden Valley. Commissioner Hoshal asked why the Commission is reviewing this project now when construction is already underway. Mr. Oliver said that a surcharge plan for compacting soils was previously reviewed and administratively approved by the Commission Engineer and the City. Mr. Oliver indicated that the approved work has started. Mr. Oliver said that it is the City's understanding that the building will not be demolished and a remodel of the building is a couple of years out. He said that the building will be added onto this spring. Mr. Oliver described the environmental filter manhole on the site to treat existing runoff. He said that a new filter manhole will treat the new developed area and will discharge into the pond. Commissioner Hoshal said that the City will need a maintenance agreement. Mr. Oliver agreed. Ms. Chandler described the way the filter in the environmental manhole works. She emphasized the importance of maintenance of the filter and explained that in its project memo the Commission Engineer has recommended two conditions related to the maintenance. There was discussion of the type and size of inedia to be utilized in the filter. There was discussion of the site location, fill and mitigation of fill. Commissioner Johnson recommended approving the project based on the conditions in the Engineer's Memo. Commissioner Hoshal seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously 8-0 with eight votes in favor [City of Golden Valley absent from vote]. 6. OLD BUSINESS 4 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes A. WMWA Requests. Mr. LeFevere provided an explanation of WMWA's (West Metro Water Alliance) requests. He said that the request that the Commission carry over 2012 funds into 2013 can't be met since the Commission has spent its fu112012 WMWA budget. Mr. LeFevere described the type of work that WMWA is proposing for educational activities. He said that if WMWA staff did the work, it would be considered routine administrative services as described in the agreement between the BCWMC and WMWA,but since WMWA proposed to hire outside staff to do the work, it is out of the ordinary and WMWA is requesting the consent of the organizations. Mr. LeFevere said that if the Commission is agreeable to this request, he has structured language for a motion and it is in his memo provided to the Commission. Mr. LeFevere described the next WMWA request regarding raising the cap on WMWA's reimbursement request to the BCWMC from $2,000 to$4,500 far 2013. Commissioner Hoshal moved to approve expenditure by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission of funds paid by Bassett Creek to WMWA in 2012 for preliminary work on its K-12 Project. Commissioner Millner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously $-0 with ei�ht votes in favor [City of Golden Valley absent from vote]. Chair Black directed the Administrator to look at the 2013 budget and to come back with informatian at the Commission's February meeting. Commissioner Hoshal said that if the Commission does approve raising the cap then the Joint Powers Agreement between the BCWMC and WMWA would need to be revised. Mr. LeFevere confirmed. [Commissioner Millner departs the meeting.J B. Next Generation Plan Update. Commissioner Sicora brought up the new change to the plan process schedule that identifies that the Commission will adopt the new plan in April of 2015, which is later than the previously scheduled date and past the September 2014 deadline and expiration of the Commission's current Watershed Management Plan. He asked how that change is being perceived by the agencies. Ms. Loomis said that the Commission hasn't asked for input on it yet but she presumes that the Commission would need to request an extension. Ms. Chandler said that the current plan stays in place until the Commission adopts a new one. Administrator Jester reported that she had spoken to Brad Wozney about the public input process and he said that after the issues are identified, the public needs to prioritize how the issues are addressed in the plan. She said she thinks it would be good to do the prioritization process in the public input process' second large group meeting. Ms. Jester said that the Commission needs to identify who is responsible for the tasks documented in the plan process schedule and also identify how much each task will cost so that the Commission knows if it can afford what it is proposing. Chair Black raised her concerns about the large group meetings and said that the large group meetings seem like they would expend a lot of time and effort without resulting in much feedback. The Commission discussed different approaches such as utilizing the traditional Citizen Advisory Committee method, holding small group meetings, and holding separate meetings with the different agencies. Chair Black said that she likes the ideas of the small group meetings and the survey. Commissioner Sicora asked Administratar Jester about comments from Brad Wozney on the public participation process. She said that Mr. Wozney is fine with the process proposed as long as the Commission incorporates the public prioritization process. Commissioner Sicora said that he supports Administrator Jester's suggestion of expanding the project matrix 5 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes to identify the responsible party and cost per task and he would like to see the endpoint tied in as well. He said that this refinement to the matrix needs to happen extremely soon and then it should come back to the Commission next month. Ms. Jester said that she would like authorization to work with Ms. Loomis and Ms. Chandler to refine the plan process document and would like direction on who will be developing the plan. Chair Black said that Barr and Administrator Jester should work together to develop the plan. Ms. Loomis updated the Commission on the status of facilitator training and said that she is waiting on a call from John Shardlow about doing the training. She said he does work with the cities and he wanted to know if there were any concerns with conflict of interest. Mr. LeFevere indicated that he didn't see any conflict. The Commission decided to meet on Monday,January 28`h from 4:30 p,m. to 6:30 p.m. at Golden Valley City Hall to review the Gaps Analysis. The Plan Steering Committee arranged to meet at 3:30 p.m. for an hour priar and then to stay for the Gaps Analysis meeting. The Commission discussed the status of the survey. Ms. Loomis said that a small group needs to sit down and work on the survey. Administrator Jester suggested that a draft of the survey be done by January 28`h, the day of the next Plan Steering Committee meeting. Commissioner Sicara suggested that Administrator Jester touch base with the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission about the public outreach piece and he suggested that if people have comments on the draft plan process documents being reviewed today then they should get those comments to Administrator Jester. Chair Black asked that the issue regarding the difference in standards between watersheds be included in the gaps analysis if it isn't already. G. Update on Member City Assessment Payments Received to-date for Fiscal Year 2012. Chair Black reported on the member city assessment payments received to-date and asked the remaining eities to check to make sure their cities are in the process of getting the payments in prior to the February 1"deadline. D. TMDL Implementation Reporting Update. Ms. Chandler said that the Commission Engineer anticipated preparing a reporting template by the end of 2012. However, she said,they are waiting for renewal of the MPCA's MS4 permit. Ms. Chandler said that the permit renewal will be going to the MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency) board at the end of this month for approval. She said that if the permit approval doesn't go ahead in the end of January, then the Commission Engineer may want to get together with the cities to discuss TMDL implementation reporting. She said that she will provide updates on this issue in the coming months. E. XP-SWMM Schedule and Budget.Ms. Chandler said that at last month's Commission meeting the Commission approved $S,OpO toward additional work on the XP-SWMM model to incorporate the new street crossings into the model. She said they are still gathering data from the cities and it would be helpful to have an extension on the work schedule because it would be hard to get all of the data in and to calibrate the model by the end of January. The Commission discussed using fiscal year 2Q12 funds in fiscal year 2013. Mr. LeFevere explained the information that he received from the Commission's Deputy Treasurer Sue Virnig. He said that the funds not expended in 2012 go into the Commission's fund balance, so if the Commission wants to use those funds then it needs to communicate to Ms. Virnig about which payments are to come out of the fund balance. He suggested that the Commission keep a running memo to track the budget items and the decisions that the Commission makes about those items. Chair Black said that she likes to see the budget items tracked on the financial report. She said that she and Administrator Jester will have a conversation with Ms. Virnig to see how it can be tracked. Commissioner Sicora recommended that they talk 6 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes to Ms. Virnig and get her recommendation and implement it. Commissioner de Lambert said that there are a number of items that the Commission didn't fully expend in 2012 and he recommends that the Corrunission move over into 2013 the remaining 2012 funds for the XP- SWMM Model,the P-8 Water Quality Model,the Next Generation Plan, and the Administrator. The Commission Engineer was directed to continue working on the XP-SWMM model. Commissioner de Lambert moved to approve the Commission Engineer continuing its work on the XP-SWMM and the P-8 models during the 2013 fiscal year and up to the amount budgeted and approved by the Commission. Alternate Commissioner Crough seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously 7-0 with seven votes in favor [Cities of Golden Valley and Minnetonka absent from vote]. 7. COMMUNICATIONS A. Administrator i. Administrator Jester said that she would like to meet individually with anyone who would like to sit down with her and discuss history and any concerns or suggestions. ii. Administrator Jester said that in today's Administrative Services Committee meeting it was decided that she will be the first point of contact for the Commission and she can forward on items to others as needed. B. Chair i. Chair Black reported that the homepage of the Commission's Web site now features some of the watershed photos taken by Commissioner Dan Johnson. ii. Chair Black reported that the City of Minnetonka has reappointed Commissioner Jacob Millner and Alternate Commissioner Tony Wagner for a three-year term on the Commission and the City of New Hope has reappointed Commissioner John Elder and Alternate Commissioner Pat Crough for a three-year term on the Commission. iii. Chair Black reported that the Commission received a reimbursement request from the City of Crystal for the North Branch restoration project. She directed the Commission Engineer to review the request for action at the February meeting. C. Commissioners i. Commissioner Dan Johnson said that he had stopped at the Bassett Creek restoration project in Crystal and had asked the onsite project engineer if he has had any resident feedback or concerns and he said that there has been none. D. Committees i. Commissioner Hoshal asked if a link to the WMWA WaterLinks Newsletter could be posted on the Commission Web site. The Commission agreed. Commissioner Johnson asked if WMWA could put some of the WaterLinks stories in the form of a press release and submitted to the Sun newspapers. ii. Commissioner Hoshal said that he received an e-mail request today about BCWMC participation in the Green Yard workshops, formerly MetroBlooms. He asked for authorization to talk to Administrator Jester about the 20]3 budgeted funds for education and outreach to see if funds would be available. Chair Black approved. 7 BCWMC January 17, 2013, Meeting Minutes iii. Commissioner Hoshal said that the Metropolitan Council's 2011 Lake Water Quality Report has come out and Ms. Herbert sent out to the Commission the link to the report. Administrator Jester requested that the pages about the lakes in the Bassett Creek Watershed be posted on the Commission's Web site in the water quality section. Commission agreed and directed Ms. Herbert to post the pages. iv. Mr. Asche provided an update on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Metro Chloride project and the meeting that occurred two days ago. He said that the MPCA is looking at raising its chloride standards and this could potentially affect the Next Generation Plan. E. Legal Counsel i. Mr. LeFevere announced that the Commission's Joint Powers Agreement(JPA) expires on January 1, 2015. He said that all the cities need to sign the new agreement and if the Commission approves, then he can get the process started. The Commission directed Mr. LeFevere to start the process and to draft the necessary resalutions to bring in front of the Commission. F. Engineer: No Engineer Communications 8. ADJ�IIRNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:19 p.m. Chair Date Amy Herbert, Recorder Date Secretary Date 8 ��1 t�� Public Works Department 763-593-803q/763-593-3988(fax) «�-�ss�....�.,�.x�-��x.r��`a`,��'��..�.s�.`E`�.�e;a`��'�i:�,- ,,,-: �.K, «x+»�-,a , _' � .+a : .. . �a`sakm. .. `x y._.-�eiiM!li� ,<,.,� .w.. . .. . ..�,,;� .._,y-._��.��;,wa'�<w. - _��.a�, .�.. .�tm s. .. . !ri^m .. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. E. Call for Public Hearing to Vacate Easements in the Plat of Saturn Addition PUD No. 63 (701 and 801 Louisiana Avenue South) Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Summary A developer has proposed a new development (MINI Cooper) at 701 and 801 Louisiana Avenue South which would combine three existing parcels to create two new parcels. During the platting process, it was determined that existing easements on the property need to be vacated before the final plat is approved. Consistent with City Code, the preliminary plat includes the dedication of drainage and utility easements on each lot. In general, the proposed easements are similar to the existing easements, except where modified to accommodate the existing and proposed public utilities. Staff has sent a letter to all private utility companies requesting their review and comment. It is anticipated there will be no objections to this easement vacation. No notice to the Commissioner of Natural Resources is required for this vacation. If City Council approves the call for public hearing, staff will publish and post a notice of public hearing and send letters to all affected property owners consistent with state statute. Attachments • Easement Vacation Sketch (showing easements to be vacated) (1 page) • Plat of Saturn Addition PUD No. 63 (1 page) • Preliminary Plat for MINI Cooper PUD (showing proposed easementsj (1 page) • Resolution Establishing a Public Hearing on April 3, 2013 to Consider Vacation of Certain Platted Drainage and Utility Easements in the Plat of Saturn Addition PUD No. 63 and a Drainage and Utility Easement Reserved in Document 246056 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Establishing a Public Hearing on Aprit 3, 2013 to Consider Vacation of Certain Platted Drainage and Utility Easements in the Plat of Saturn Addition PUD No. 63 and a Drainage and Utility Easement Reserved in Document 246056. � � ° �' � o �.c$ �° � *�` N > � �+ Q � �i.,... '� pC�i ,. «^v �z .��oC�'r.. � � "pp�ryJ�� „�" � �"Y �Ci�O+".yY�Cd d.�e�V�� 4� M p ii � O � � ""'md�CJOd�41� W S. �'� � J � prTr� 1( � 7''7'�'v p�'�O�W wn'Qp��U7 G1 t� J� N}vp� t��yQ � ��w1 � � ��¢.'�p �O��,C 0 }� C,.�„ � f� 4 �".✓ "� � .��+Q'��C�T�� .0 W�+t- p ? bC O v �Q d1 � � p � �''� b 'O � D� �O g � '4.� � �y .��.y`N�5,,.c�_, .T.°� �m ^� cn x� '° 5�� d °��..:� �-R`'u� �i ° w\�_ y��p�o O +=i� �3'�J y tn"J �'�'' ra� S} �r,., l �O t+a p��+ ry�'�T� V� J��C J .�c� C � 03 r'� ��!.y:,3, :��z��..iz `m m`�i �°riE�"�'a �tp � a� � E � � � ��q O @:Cs� ��N �L �C p q � W � � by 4 aVSa23tl1 gmN —��•T' O � CA tX. u � �� fYYj OQ � U�W � '3"IY.�S � �r� G7�G/f�i�(!� �l�/IjG' /�YIJAA,IV4Y 3r�l4IY/Y..7/� ��f"iL l�aG''�r�o+� � ��--- _.,........_ ,�.."� �� I �� ( ��•�R ,�� __ ____ ____� � � i � � r` ° r ---� �'io�', ,�� 1 )N ri � ( ' � J� i + � � � 1 � �� I � c� � � � �� i j w � ��.� �� t I � � �� `� � �� } � � `� i �, •�� i � � �` � � � � � � � a9�ra a, `'� �., � �.. �'i ,�,oz�oons , � � . �u � . �� w _ � � � � �� - � g � � �� ` � , � �� -�, �� .� �, ,. , y � � � � � �� •. � �� c+ � � � � p �TU � � " � � � �� •e �� I � I � .;� .� � � .* fS 08�6 3„LS',//,e,'N � Y' .�'J"N.�6' 6'N�'!5`A?07 � s ! � o " � w� � x� � � �� g � �' S � � R 3 �� g� x v � � � : ` ° � � b $ �* _ �� . � �,�,, a a 1 � -°� "' x'� I Q +� � e e � � ; �� » � � F � �� S p�� s� � � � } I c.� ��7 � � � � �� & � o �y � �s � � „ � � � °��" � ° � � � �, ., ' � � ��r ��r e � � t� �� d �� '� �� x� � � � � � � a�u � � � �� ' �$� � � o �$� � � � �� K ;� � � ,� s �s � �' �� .i g4. S � � �g� � �� 'M�Sr��` fi � 7[� � � *� � q � g � � � p� � �A��• ^�g�� i C � � �k a � d� �' � ' b G� �� '�E� R � I "` � � � �' � � � lt �6�; � � "�I� � � � .! 8� C � � � .' �� .�p j ��;,� � � C � �' � � p �S ■■�M � � � e � �{ � a .. � , �¢ � �, � �F ° w �� o � - � � �a�� rn '' � � � t � A B+d � `� M � �� B ,�n�� " � � � �� ° �� a � a � ��1"� � "i-� �p� p � '� -� � � � � � � � �� ' g '�� g� � .�-. S �� I g 7� � � ' � A 7 � � s�� { � � �� g s� �� ik r.;rt'$ �� s�� S �,__�.. :N" � � �: � �µ �.,.�,m C �2 � p �� I � o � � � � � � � � �� Par � � r �� • � � �� . � � �"� � �� s �� o 0 � � a $ �� ` � g �� " � � � � � � � ' � �' ' k � � �� . � � � f � � � � � =� � � � � � � � �� g � a � � � . � � � vg y �� . � � S . � �� $ � � ` � � �� '� •°�S � � ��R � � � � � � + ��. �� a � �� ' �� a�� » �ra '�ti�s a35a3r � i V�t i I r""!r'1�r � �, � v'7v-� � �� F I.a.,l\,I V V � I""!'"1/1 c 1 "...." � aii .Lv b V[_ Y 1�: nV�:lv Il./\/ "" �9�YJ09 Mir�s,�'0.7..5 .....-,.. [�/1I�\ ! ,r y ' ' I 1 �� 1 R --i0'Di-' .c� a f � rn� � ( �—"_-'j��—,,._.�. .c l l � ' ......._-... � ( y .J y ( �/�`�i �t"S�� L�•1 —�-- ��i� a �€�� _� I ai 'T' , f,,_ .,. I ^' � �� y c� I W � � "a � �� ...i / � � I `� � I - _, I '�' � C� � K� j I +�. � �� ' i �~"��: ^- °° W ( � t 4 � � n. F. � f-- �` , � �' _ � � 4 '� W ( � !Z � I�., ,� `'a " 4 W "' Z � > � � Y y � ! �� . ! � 'r 1 <C I�,. � v ^, I '� � � � wy,, � � +v I ,�, ...�.. t_m�!a_..��Z!�._ � —r �s i .,,, � � � � �� —�� '�� „�„ '��a � ;� �~� � Q � „ -� __� '�� , w �j [(� � � \ ',�i � �` �1�,.-. - c7 � � � � � ��! I ��„'� � ,o�� ,� ,� �1 � I �. ; '"� W g � � � � 'J �� E � � � �I ��_ t9 I � ° � s � • � I in ` r� � + ! ,c� .., I <t �, � I �.� I � ti. � � � ;`� � � I � � � j Lr� I ��J -a -.� � � �' "� j �(� i,,,, � � ° fi ; i� � ±� w R� L[ � �� j �� C � S� 0�1.�..��^7 y � f.^�--� OIR y�j.. O' � � � aG t!i "� I 1 I p �� i ._.J + "_'^� � , �...... � �-`:---- —.�i ��—t—( � �� —. ,� i Z4'008, us w� 3 ! • ow � � �� o,-.� �Z��i' ) t ++�.o sn.wr� uLS,I I.ZN ._.._.. � Q '^:' -�r-�n�--�nv � � �-'-= ..�� ,�v_„ �v vh,vfrir,n•, ,�a� p v t Y v i,,_,�i i�„r r 8 y �B� ' �-- -- ..._ �e B ' o,� >> v � � ( ;�cyvr; � '�`-'�� + ^nr-rni, ". "'I � � v it_�..:� iv�v� 1 °' �^ �.�"�y�wryl c(_�J. I V ..., � p � � ��x� � � W � � b B �� °� 3 � btt � � t a.r '' � � � � �� 6 �� S �r � � �yo � � _ , ;�3. 3Y,y�$ £ . ` � ; ; � s � � j �3� kTE� I .� I ... �� .� � ` .. � �4. �� : � � � ;, �,�fi �� € ; � � �� w,,,q � �i� ; !; � � w ' � �� i � ' �� t �� i ,�� ° B i � � �� % I � ' 11I� � �� '��$g " i ' � �� ' $ a � � �� m� y� E,.' �� 1 � �� $ �� ° { q� I x i E� S a '� � .� i�A ��i.:��x ±$ � j A3 E�' � g � g I � ± �# �� gqy� '�! � � ii ( 7`,". t r� P '' � �{� u^� = z � ' � 5� "� & �� i I� � (x�S =Y�� 'd� �� { 4 i � �� 8 � YI R �. � � �� !" a �� I i ,� ' � �� .. �� ¢ " ! 4- � �gB � � i iw �� 1 e R� �tiz � �f � 6� R i � I Y:^ �{_�� R I� I �li�' I � % �n $ �. 4 � a o � �� a �$�� $��3 � �; x � � � s � � p� a � � � � 3 � � x i # � �� i i �� i�« � ! � 1 � � � [ �� .�.�p � . � �� #, �' � � x g 8} � � � � � � �� aj �_ ;� :I � � s g{ Y f � � �` � { �� a 6� +` ��. ;� 's � ��" iC � �� j� � x i �. �� g �� '�� s� i � � � �� g � � �._ � f � � � � �Y �� ¢�� = �s � � �� ( � �� s � �� 6 i� G� �ifi ..�$4s � w� : � €E0� 6 .w �"r �3 3 al � 6 � �& 9 -� ' -�� Y'�nl!'t t 'y'!"1' � �VVitlVVYI V/l\1\,yAr..��A1 �'J�_ 6'_'�_i._..%Y��I�V C: ' Vl] .'Jf I n�� -.,�-.._—...,....,..............._--......-.�..�w'�.'v'.. . PC7'9C2 M.�iO.i'S �"r'i"a"a�ni _. I / . ._,.......,.,-.,....� � , _.— ","'_ , ...�_._.........._..___.._-,.--.. ., �. � T--._ __. w�,z,., �,+�. R -� e 1 e� -,1-.••••^°�.---- __.__._,t i � ' � i� �g � � � �� i � i ,._..e w ',�`�� I � � _N� tC j r� I i I' + � _, ,,, �_� � r� �� ----�--�-�� I ° F? t> � i � 107 ; � ��a I � ' . h�� I I <� � 1 r `_�y I � I � � I � � � u� p �� . � � � � �' + �> �@' �" �� g i b �;. � �� ( �� I � �� i� ; n iu�iaoe �� I I ci) � �' � ` ' tl97Ctz @� �' �,` J� § �� i � M.OL,JO.AS �� .�am g � � 4j � � C� � M1 �� `- � h +u.m,.e.wn � � i �� awe .�,�a,as �� ... ! ( ' x''^� � \ �i 'u � C] � ' I ' � � � �` �`\�.'+ /�f I � -a ��..' � w �� , `�� , � �`� ;�; , � � �: I � '� i �, `�'�� g ,,�`;'e � �_�:` Resolution 13-14 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 3, 2013 TO CONSIDER VACATION OF CERTAIN PLATTED DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN THE PLAT OF SATURN ADDITION P.U.D. NO. 63 AND A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT RESERVED IN DOCUMENT 2426056 WHEREAS, the City desires to consider vacation of all platted drainage and utility easements dedicated in the recorded plat of Saturn Addition P.U.D. No. 63, legally described as follows: Lots 1, 2 and 4, Block 1, SATURN ADDITION P.U.D. NO. 63, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the City desires to consider vacation of the existing drainage and utility easement in Lot 4, Block 1, SATURN ADDITION P.U.D. NO. 63, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Doc. No. 2426056), legally described as follows: That part of Tract P and Tract M of Registered Land Survey No. 648, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which is included in the North half of a circle 120 feet in diameter, the center of the circle being a point in the East line of said Tract P, a distance of 60 feet northerly from the southeast corner thereof. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Golden Valley hereby schedules a public hearing on April 3, 2013, at 7 pm to consider vacation of the easements. Shepard M. Harris, 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 his signature attested by the City Clerk. �i�y o4 f Public Works IJepartment 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988{fax) �.', _ . �>�"�'��i� ='`>`` ?.....,'�;��;��e€i�ic",�s�°�iS��Y�w'�.:a '��`i�'oi��sm . ,:.��t �SS"�� i��i�7hui.:: Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. F. Proclamation of National Public Works Week Prepared 8y Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Summary To recognize the Golden Valley Public Works Department employees during National Public Works Week, please consider adoption of the attached proclamation for National Public Works Week on May 19 through May 25, 2013. Attachments • Proclamation For National Public Works Week (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt the Proclamation For National Public Works Week. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK WHEREAS, public works services provided in the City of Golden Valley are an integral part of our citizens' everyday lives; and WHEREAS, the support of an understanding and informed citizenry is vital to the efficient operation of public works systems and programs such as water, sanitary and storm sewers, streets and highways, forestry, public buildings, solid waste collection, and maintenance of parks; and WHEREAS, the health, safety and comfort of this community greatly depends on these facilities and services; and WHEREAS, the quality and effectiveness of these facilities, as well as their planning, design, and construction, is vitally dependent upon the efforts and skill of public works employees; and WHEREAS, understanding the role that public infrastructure plays in protecting the environment, improving public health and safety, contributing to economic vitality, and enhancing the quality of life of every community of the United States is in the interest of the residents and those who visit our community. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Shepard M. Harris, Mayor of the City of Golden Valley, do hereby proclaim the week of May 19 through 25, 2013 as "NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK" in the City of Golden Valley, and I call upon all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and to recognize the contributions which public works officials make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the great seal of the City of Golden Valley to be affixed this 19th day of March 2013. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor �Z��1 a� � �,. �,T Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) �.�.:- �=W:_E�� _. .e-_.. . __ �. _ ��x. . � : . _ Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. G. Master Agreements for 2013 Sanitary Sewer Repair Program Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE. City Engineer Mitch Hoeft, EIT, Engineer Summary The City of Golden Valley Pavement Management Program (PMP) includes a voluntary program to allow residents in the project area to rehabilitate their sanitary sewer service, with the goal of becoming compliant with the Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance. This program allows property owners to obtain competitive bids from pre-approved contractors, and provides the property owners the opportunity to have the costs of sewer rehabilitation specially assessed against the property if they choose.This is a 10-year assessment. Now in 2013,this program has also been expanded to offer residents throughout the City the ability to assess sanitary sewer repairs in non-PMP areas if they are working to achieve I/I compliance. This program will work exactly like the past PMP sanitary sewer repair program; however, this assessment would be only over a five-year period. The prequalification process for private sewer service repair contractors included the ability to perform excavation and/or liner repairs, the contractor's history of performing service repairs in Golden Valley,the availability of equipment, and financial resources. Based upon the criteria,the following three private sanitary sewer service repair contractors have qualified for this program: � Gene's Water and Sewer • Highview Plumbing • Ouverson Sewer and Water Each of these contractors is required to enter into a Master Agreement with the City of Golden Valley to perform private repairs as part of the PMP program. The contractors will be responsible for contacting each of the residents in the PMP who are interested in having their repair costs specially assessed, and providing them with estimates for the repair. When property owners have selected a contractor for their repairs, a three-party agreement between the City, property owner, and private contractor is signed by all parties. Following completion of the repairs, the property owner may opt to have the costs specially assessed to the property. Attachments • Master Agreements for Sanitary Sewer Service Repair between the City of Golden Valley and Gene's Water&Sewer, Highview Plumbing, and Ouverson Sewer & Water (12 pages) • Sample Private Sanitary Sewer Service Work Order agreement between the homeowner, City, and contractor for 2013 sanitary sewer repair (4 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize entering into Master Agreements for the 2013 Sanitary Sewer Repair Program with the following companies: 1. Gene's Water and Sewer 2. Highview Plumbing 3. Ouverson Sewer and Water CONTRACT Nt�. 13-1A MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY AND GENES WATER & SEWER SANITARY SEWER SERVICE REPAlR TH1S MASTER AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made this 5�```day of F�.b�K�,- , aa c3 , py and between the City of Golden Valley, a municipal carporation City"), and Gene's Water & Sewer ("Contractar"), under the laws of the State of Minnesata. WHEREAS, City operates a voluntary sanitary sewer infiaw and infiitration ("I 8� I") program along with its Pavement Management Program each year; WHEREAS, in 2013 the Pavement Management Program {PMP)will result in the reconstruction of several miles of City streets and rehabilitation of the sewer and other uti(ities within the street rights-of-way within the fo(lawing roadways: Yosemite Ave North (T.H. 55 South Frontage Road to Yosemite Circle), Woodstack Ave (Yosemite Ave North to Turners Crossroad North), Loring Lane (Yosemite Ave North to Turners Crossroad North}, Yosemite Circie (Yosemite Ave North to Loring Lane), and T.H. 55 South Frontage Road (265' East of Schaper Road to cul-de-sac} WHEREAS, there is also a public need to eontinue to support property owners who wish ta address Inflow and Infiltration issues within their private sanitary sewer service on a Citywide level: VIIHEREAS, a homeowner residing within the City of Golden Valley as well as #he 2013 PMP boundaries and availing themselves of the voluntary ( & I program may wish ta repair their lateral sewer line or related items in connection with their sanitary sewer system; WHEREAS, this Agreement, Special Provisions and General Conditions attached hereto as Exhiblt A and made a part of this Agreement, provide certain terms and canditions for: {i) special assessrnent of an owner's real property for repairs necessary to bring property in compliance with the City's I & I ordinance; and {ii} payment by the City for the pertarmance by certain pre-qualified private contractors in making necessary repairs, replacements or rehabilitaion of private sanitary sewer service lines general(y from residences to the sanitary sewer main line in the street right-of-wa�l. WHEREAS, a Private Sanitary Sewer Service Work C}rder ("Wortc Order"}, a form of which is attached here#o as Exhlbit B, shal! be executed by Contractor, City and the property owner and shall incorpora#e by reference the terms and conditions of this G:lUserslmhoef#1AppDatalLocallMicrosoftlWindowslTemporary Intemet Files\Content,0utlooklCQTS60JT1Master Agreement GenesWater.doc this Agreement including witFtaut limitation the Special Provisions. Once a residentia( property awner selects the contractor from the City's list of pre-qualified contractors to make such repairs to the owner's sanitary sewe� service Jine, the awner and the Contractor shall agree on the Work C3rder and it will be attached to this Agreement and made a part hereof with respect to the Property named in the Work Order to form the entire Agreernent affecting the City, Contractor, and property owner and the Work {defined below} on the Property identified. WHEREAS, the Work covered by the Work Qrder snall be completed by the Contractor in a timely and professional manner and in accordance with a!I appiicable laws and regulations. NOW, THEREF4RE, it is agreed by and between Ci#y and Contrac#or that each 2013 I & I related project to be specialiy assessed which is undertaken by Contractor shall be subject ta the fotlowing terms and conditions including withaut fimitation the Special Provisions and the terms of any applicable Work Order between Contractor, City, and the awner af the subject praperty: ARTICLE 1. The Contractar hereby c�venants and agrees to furnish all materials, all neeessary taols and equipment, and to do and perform all the work and labor necessary to complete the work in accardance with this Agreement, the Special Provisions, Standard Detaifs attached hereta as Exhibit C, and any applicable Work Qrder. The Plans and Specifications, the proposal of the Contractor (the "Praposal") and the Cantractor's bond, the Work Order and the Specia( Provisions, together with this Agreement, sha(I tagether constitute the en#ire Agreement between the parties as if set forth herein. ARTICLE 2. The Cantractor agrees ta commence said Wark and eonclude the same in accordance with the Propasal heretafare filed with the City and in accordance with the Work Order executed by the City, Contractor, and the subject property owner, including without limitation the Bid Price as set forth in the Work Order and in accordance with the time schedule far cammencement and campietion of the Wark set forth in the Special Provisions, time being af the essence in this Agreement, and to complete said Work in every respect to the satisfaction and approval of the City and the property owner. ARTiCLE 3. The Contractar further agrees to make, execute, and deliver ta the City, corporate surety bonds, ar letter of credit, approved by the City Attorney in the minimum sum of Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) which are hereby incorporated into this Agreement far the use of said City and of aEl persons doing Work or furnishing skill, toals, machinery or materials under ar for the purpose af this Agreement, to secure the faithful perforrnance and payment under this Agreement by said Contractor and to be conditioned as required by law for work undertaken in 2013 in cannection with the 2013 sanitary sewer infiaw and infiftration improvements. The Contractor also agrees that any time the value of the wark performed under this contract exceeds the $25,000 contract lirnit, the City shall have the option to modify this cantract and adjusted upwards in G:\PROJECTS12013 PMP1Sanitary Sewer RepairslPrivate SSR Program�Agreements\Master Agreement_GenesWater.doc $25,000 increments and the Contractar shafl provide new carporate surety bonds, vr letter of credit, approved by tha City Attorney, in the amaunt that the cantract has been increased and neither this original Agreement nor the upwardly adjusted agreements shall become effective unless and until said bonds have been approved by the City Attarney. ARTICLE 4. fn consideration of the covenants and agreements stated above, the City agrees ta pay the Contractor as set farth in Section 12 of the Special Provisions. ARTICLE 5. It is understood and agreed by the Contractor that the City, through its autharized agents and the property owner shall be the sale and final judges of the fitness af the work and its acceptability, and na payment shali be made to the Contractor hereunder un�ql the work shall have been fqund acceptabie by the City through its authorized agents and the property owner. ARTICLE 6. ft is understood and agreed by the Contractor that, with respect to a!! work, the Cantractor will keep as complete, exact, and accurate an account of the labor and materials used as is possible, and in submitting the final statement will itemize and allocate the costs of said work. ARTICLE 7. Ail payments to the Cantractor shall be made payable to the order af the Can#ractor and the City does not assume and shall not have any respansibility for the aElacation of payments ar obiigations of the Contractor to third par�es. ARTICLE 8. The City reserves the right to cancel the award of any contract at any time before the execution of the Agreement by al! parties including without limitation any subject property owner without any liability against the City. ARTIC�� 9. The City may by written notice terminate this Agreement ar any portion thereof when it is deemed in the best public, state or national interest to do sa; or the City is unable to adequately fund payment for the Agreement because of changes in state fiscal policy, reguiations ar law; or after finding that for reasans beyond the Cantractor's contro! the Cantractor is prevented fram proceedEng with or completing the Work within a reasonable period of time. In the event that any Work is terminated under the provisions hereof, all completed items or units af wark will be paid for at the Agreement Bid Prices. Payment far partially completed items or units of work will be made in accordance with the procedures attached at Exhibit D and as otherwise mutualfy agreed to by both parties. Terminatian of this Agreement or any portion thereaf shal! not relieve the Contractor of responsibility far the completed Work, nor shall it relieve the Contractor's Sureties of their obligations for and cflncerning any just daims arising out of the Work performed. G:IPROJECTS12Q13 PMP1Sanitary Sewer Fiepalrs\Private SSR ProgramlAgreements\Master Agreement_C#enasWater.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been duly authorized, made and entered inta as of the date first set forth above. THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALL.EY BY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor BY Thomas D. Burt, City Manager CONTRACTOR: � BY �'► ITS +- BY ITS Q;IPFtOJECTS12013 PMP�Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Private SSR ProgramlAgreementsiMaster Agreement GenesWat�.doc CONTRACT NO. 13-1 B MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY QF GOLDEN VALLEY AND HIGHVIEW PLUMBING SAIdITARY SEWER SERVICE REPAIR THIS MASTER AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is rnade this.�"aday of '��►� _, ae� , by and between the City of Golden Valiey, a municipai corporation ' City"}, and Highview Plumbing ("Contractor"), under the laws of the State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, City operates a voluntary sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration ("I & !"} program along with its Pavement Management Program each year; WHEREAS, in 2013 the Pavement Management Program (PMP)wili resuit in the reconstruction of several miles of City streets and rehabilitation of the sewer and other utilities within the street rights-of-way within the following roadways: Yosemite Ave North (T.H. 55 South Frontage Road to Yosemite Circle), Woodstock Ave (Yosemite Ave North to Turners Crossroad North}, Loring Lane (Yosemi#e Ave North to Tumers Crossroad North}, Yosemite Circle (Yosemite Ave North to Laring Lane), and , T.H. 55 South Frontage Road (265' East of Schaper Road to cul-de-sac} WHEREAS, there is also a public need to continua to support property owners who wish to address Inflow and Inflltration issues with(n their private sanitary sewer service on a Citywide level: VI/HEREAS, a homeowner residing within the City of Golden Valley as well as the 2093 PMP boundaries and availing themselves of the voluntary I & I program may wish to repair their (ateral sewer line or related items in connectian with their sanitary sewer system; WHEREAS, this Agreement, Special Provisians and Genera! Conditions attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of this Agreement, provide certain terms and conditions for: (i) special assessment of an owner's real property for repairs necessary to bring property in compliance with the City's I & I ordinance; and (ii) payment by the City for the perFormance by certain pre-qualified private contractors in making necessary repa+rs, replacements or rehabilitaion of private sanitary sewer service (ines generally from residences to the sanitary sewer main line in the street right-of-way. WHEREAS, a Private Sanitary Sewer Service Work Order ("Work Order"}, a form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, shall be executed by Contractor, City and the praperty owner and shall incorporate by reference the terms and conditions of this C:lUserslmhoeftlAppDatalLocaltMicrosoftlWlndowslTemporary Irrtemet FileslContent.DutlooklCOTS60JT1Master Agrsement Highview.�c this Agreement including without limitation the Speciai Provisions. Once a residential property awner selects the contractor firom the City's list of pre-qualified cantractors to make such repairs to the owner's sanitary sewer service line, #he vwner and the Contrac#or shall agree on the Work Order and it will be attached ta this Agreement and made a part hereof with respect to the Property named in the Work Order#a form the entire Agreement affecting the City, Contractor, and property owmer and the Work (defined betow) on the Property iden�fied. WHEREAS, the Work covered by the Wark Order shal! be comple#ed by the Contractor in a tirnely and professionaJ manner and in accordance with all applicable laws and r�ul�tions, NC3W,THEREFC7RE, it is agreed by and between City and Contractor that each 2013 I & I related project to be specially assessed which is undertaken by Contractar sf�all be subject to the foflowing terms and condi#ions ir�cluding without limitation the Special Provisions and the terms af any applicable Work Order between Contractar, City, and the owner pf the subject property: ARTiCLE 1. The Contractor hersby Gouenants and agrees to furnish al( materials, all necessary tools and equipment, and to do and perform all the wark and labor necessary to complete the work in accordance with this Agreement, the Special Provisions, Standard Details attached hereto as Exhibit G, and any applicable Work Order. The Plans and Spea�cations, the proposal of the Contractor{#he "Proposal"} and the Contractor's band, the Work Order and the Special Provisions, tagether with this Agreement, shall together cansfitute the entire Agreement between the parties as if set forth herein. ARTICLE 2. The Corrtrac#or agrees to commence said Work and canclude the same in accordance with the Proposal heretofa�e filed wi#h the City and in accardance with the Wvrk Order executed by the City, Contractor, and the subject praperty owner, including without lirnitation the Bid Price as set#orth in the Work Order and in acc:ordance with the time schedule far oammencement and completion of the Work set#or�h in the Special Provisians, time being of the essence irt this Agreement, and to cornplete said Wark in every respect to#he satisfaction and approval of the City and the property vwner. ARTICLE 3. The Cantractor further agrees to make, execu#e, and deliver to the City, corporate surety bonds, or letter of credit, approved by the City Attorney in the minimum sum of Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) which are hereby incorpor�ted into this Agreement for the use of said City and of all persons doing Work or furnishing skifl, taals, rnachinery or materials under ar for the purpose of this Agreement, to secure the faithful performance and paymen# under this Agreement by said Contractor and to be conditioned as required by law for work undertaken in 2013 in connection with the 2013 sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration improvements. The Contractor alsa agrees that any time the vaiue of the work pertormed under this contract exceeds the $25,000 a�ntract limit, the City shall have the option to modify this contract and adjusted upwards in G:\PROJECTS12013 PMF'13anitary Sewer RepairslPrlvate SSR ProgramtAgreemerits�tAaster Apreemen�Highvlew.doc $25,OQ0 increments and the Contractar shall provide new corporate surety bonds, or letter of credit, approved by the City Attorney, in the amount ihat the contract has been increased and neither this origina( Agreement nor the upwardly adjusted agreements shail become effective unless and un#il said bonds have been approved by the City Attorney. ARTICLE 4. in consideratian of the covenants and agreements stated above, the City agrees to pay the Con#ractor as set forth in Section 12 of the Special Provisions. ARTICLE 5. it is understood and agreed by the Contracior mat the City, thraugh its authorized agents and the property owner shall be the sale and final judges vf ihe fitness of the work and its acceptability, and no paymer�t shafl be made to th� Contractor hereunder until the work shall have been found acc�table by the City through its authorized agents and the property owner. ARTICLE 6. It is understoad and agresd by the Contractor that, with respect to a11 work, the Contractor wil! keep as complete, exact, and accurate an account af the labor and materiais used as is possib{e, and in submitting the final statement wilt itemize and alloc�te the costs of said work. ARTICLE 7. All payments to the Contractor shall be made payable ta the order of the Contractor and the Ciijr daes not assume and shalf not have any rssponsibiiity far the allocation of payments or obligativns of the Contractor to third parties. ARTiGLE 8. The City reserves the right#a cancel the award of any contract at any time before the executian af the Agresrr�nt by all parties including withaut lirnita�on any subject property owner without any liability against the City. ARTICL.E 9. The City may by written notice terminate this Agreement or any partion thereof when it is deemed in the best public, state vr natior�al interest to do sp; or the City is unable to adequately fund payment for the Agreement because of changes in state fiscal policy, regulatians or law; or after finding that for reasons beyond the Contractor's control the Contractor is prevented from prc�ceeding wi#h ar completing the Work within a reasonable period of time. In the event that any Work is terminated under the pravisions hereof, all completed items or units a#wark wilf be paid for at the Agreement Bid Prices. Payment far partialfy comple#ed items or units of work will be made in accordaRCe with the procedures attached ai Exhibit D and as otherwise mutually agreed to by both parties. Termination of this Agreement or any portion thereof shail not relieve the Cantrac#or of responsibility for the completed Work, nor shall it retieve the Con#ractor's Sure#ies of their obiigatians for and conceming any just claims arising out of the Wark performed. G:1f'ROJECTSt2013 PMP\Sanitery Sewer RepairstPrivate SSR Prog�amWgreementslMaster Agresment Highvlew.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, th�s Agreement has been duly authorized, made and entered into as af the date first set forth above. THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor BY Thomas D. Burt, City Manager COPITRAGTQR: BY ,� � �� (TS,,,��►�PV1� BY ITS G:�PROJECTS\2013 PMPtSanitary Sewer Repaks\Prnafe SSR ProgramWgreementslMaster Agreement_Fiighv+ew.doc CONTRACT NO. 13-1 D MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ClTY (}F GOL.DEN VALLEY AND OUVERSt3N SEWER AND WATER SANITARY SEWER SERVICE REPAIR THIS MASTER AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made this��day of �Q�y`a-''� , �•s 3, by and between the City of Golden Valley, a municipai corporation ("City"), and Quverson Sewer and Water ("Contractor"}, under the laws of the State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, City operates a voluntary sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration {"I 8� I") program along with its Pavement Management Program each year; WHEREAS, in 2013 the Pavement Management Program (PMP)will result in the reconstruction of several miles of City streets and rehabilitation of the sewer and other utilities within the street rights-of-way within the following roadways: Yosemite Ave IVorth {T.H. 55 South Frontage Road to Yosemite Circle), Woodstock Ave (Yosemite Ave North to Tumers Crossrvad North), Loring Lane {Yosemite Ave North to Turners Crossroad North), Yosemite Circle {Yosemite Ave North to Loring Lane), and T.H. 55 South Frontage Road (265' East af Schaper Road to cul-de-sac} WHEREAS, there is also a public need to continue to support property owners who wish to address Inflow and infiltration issues within their private sanitary sewer service on a Citywide level: WHEREAS, a homeowner residing within the City of Golden Valley as well as the 2013 PMP boundaries and availing themselves of the voluntary I & I program may wish to repair their lateral sewer line or related items in conneetion with their sanitary sewer system; WHEREAS, this Agreement, Special Provisions and Genera! Conditions attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of this Agreement, provide certain terms and conditions for: (i) special assessment of an awner`s rea( property for repairs necessary ta bring property in compliance with the City's I & I ordinance; and (ii) payment by the City for the performance by certain pre-quali�ed private contractors in making necessary repairs, replacements or rehabilitaion of private sanitary sewer service lines generally from residences to the sanitary sewer main line in the street right-of way. WHEREAS, a Private Sanitary Sewer Service Work Order ("Work Qrder"}, a form of which is attached hereta as Exhibi# B, shall be executed by Cantractar, Gity and the property owner and shall incorporate by reference the tarms and conditions of this C:tUserslmhoefflAppDatalLocallMicrosoftlWindowslTemporary l�temet FileslContent.0utlodc\COTS60JT1Master Agreement Ouverson.doc this Agreement including without limita�on the Special Pravisions. 4nce a residential property owner selects the contractor from the City's list of pre-quafified c�ntractors to make such repairs to the owner's sanitary sewer service �ine, the owner and the Contractor shall agree an the Work Order and it will be attached to this Agreement and made a part hereof with respect ta the Praperty named in the Work Qrder to form the entire Agreement affecting the City, Contractor, and property awner and the Work (defined beEow) on the Properiy identi�ied. WHEREAS, the Work cavered by the Work Order shall be completed by the Contractor in a timely and prafessional manner and in accordance with alE applicable laws and rsgulations. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between City and Contractor that each 2013 I & I related project to be specially assessed which is undertaken by Con#ractor shail be subject to the follawing terms and conditions including without iimitation the Specia! Provisions and the terms of any applicable Work Order between Contractar, City, and the owner of the subject property: ARTICLE 1. The Contractor hereby covenants and agrees to fumish all materiais, a!I necessary tools and equipment, and to do and perform all the work and fabor necessary to cornple#e th�work in accordance with this Agreement, the Special Pravisions, Standard Details attached hereta as Exhibit C, and any applicable Work Order. The Plans and Specifications, the praposal o#the Contractor (the "Praposal") and the Contractor's band, the Work Order and the S�cia! Provisions, together with this Agreement, shall together constitute the entire Agreement between the parties as if set forth herein. ARTICLE 2. The Contractor agrees to commence said Work and condude the same in accardance with the Propasal heretofore filed wi#h the City and in accorctance with the Work Order �xecuted by the City, Contractor, and the subject property owner, including without limitation the Bid Price as set forth in the Work Order and in accordance with the time schedule for commencement and completion of the Work set forth in the Speciat Provisions, time being of the essence in this Agreement, and to complete said Work in every respect to the satisfaction and approval of the City and the property owner. ARTIC�E 3. The Contractor further agrees to make, execute, and deliver to the City, corporate surety bands, or letter of credit, approved by the City Attamey in the minirnum sum of Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,0�) which are hereby incorparated inta this Agresment for the use of said City and of all persons doing Work or fumishing skill, tools, machinery or materials under or for the purpose of#his Agreement, to secure the faithful performance and payment under this Agreement by said Contractor and to be conditioned as required by law for work undertaken in 2013 in connectian with #he 2013 sanitary sewer infEow and infiltration improvements. The Gontractor also agrees that any time the value af the work performed under this contract exceeds the $2�,OOQ contract limit, the Gity sha(I have the option to modify this contract and adjusted upwards in G:IPROJECTS12013 PMP1Sar�tary Sewer RepairslPrivate SSR ProqramlAgreements\Master Agreement Ouverson.doc �- $25,000 increments and the Contractor shall provide new carparate surety bonds, or letter of credit, approved by the City Attorney, in the amount that the contract has been increased and neither this ariginal Agreement nor the upwardly adjusted agreements shall become sffeckive unless and until said bonds have been appraved by the City A#tarney. ARTICLE 4. In consideratian af the covenants and agreements stated above, the City agrees to pay the Contractor as set forth in Section 12 of the Special Provisions. ARTICLE 5. It is understood and agreed by the Contractor that the City, through its authorized agents and the property owner shall be the sole and final judges of the fitness of the work and its acceptabiliry, and no payment shal! be made to the ' Contractor hereunder until the work shal( have been found acceptable by the City thraugh its autharized agents and the property owner. ARTICLE 6. It is understood and agreed by the Contractor that, with respect to a!I work, the Contractor will keep as complete, exac#, and accurate an account of the labor and materials used as is possible, and in submitting the final statement will itemize and aliacate the casts of said wark. ARTlCLE 7. AN payments to the Contractor shall be made payable ta the order of the Contractar and the City does not assume and shall not have any responsibility for the aflocation af payments or obligations of the Con#ractor to third parties. ARTlCLE 8. The City reserves the right to cancel the award of any car�tract at any time before the executian of the Agreement by all parties including wi#hout limitatior� any subject properly owner without any liabifity against the City. ARTICLE 9. The Ci#y may by written notice terminate this Agreement or any portion thereof when it is desmed in the best public, state or national interest to do so; or the City is unable to adequately fund payment for the Agreernen# because af changes in state fisca! policy, regulations or law; or after finding that for reasons beyond the Contractor's cantrol the Cantractor is prevented from proceeding with or completing the Work within a reasonable periad af t�me. !n the event that any Work is terrninated under ihe provisions hereof, a!I completed items ar units of work will be paid for at the Agreement Bid Prices. Payrnent for partially carnpfeted items or units of work will be made in accordance with the procedures attached at Exhibit D and as otherwise mutualfy agreed to by both parties. Terminatian af this Agreemen# or any portion thereof shafl not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for the campieted Work, nor shali it relieve the Contractor's Sureties of their ol�igations for and eoncerning any just claims arising out of the Work performed. G:\PROJECTS12013 PMP15anitary Sewer RepairslPrivate SSR ProgramlAgreements\Master Agreement_Ouverson.doc IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been duly authorized, made and �ntered into as of the date first set forth above. THE CITY OF GQLDEN VAL�EY BY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor BY Thnmas D. Burt, City Manager CONTRACTOR: BY ITS ��`��°`'� BY fTS G:IPROJECTS12013 PMP\5anitary Sewer RepairslPrivate SSR Program�4greementslMaster Apreement Ouverson.doc PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER SERVlCE 1NORK ORDER Property �wner: Property Address: I "Propert�r C}wner" hereby acknowtedge the informatian � have provided is complete and accurate and that I am the fee owner of the property. I also acknowledge that I desire that the work contained in this dacument be performed on the Property identi�ed abave � (the "Pro e "), and on the sanitary sewer service line providing service to the Property, by Contractar identified on the attached Pavement Management Program - Private Sanitary Sewer Service Work Order {uWork (Jrde�'). ! grant permission far the Contractor to perform this work on the Property. I acknowledge that I have read and understand the following restrictions, limi�atlons and requirements of the sanitary sewer service replacement program. 1. Contractor will remove any obs#acles, including but not limited to sidewalks, trees, landscaping, gardens, private lighting, irrigation systerns, electric dog fences and retaining walls, as necessary to perForm the work described in this document and that certain Master Agreement between the City and Contractor including witMout limitation the doccaments attached thereto and made a part thereo€. 1 also understand #hat the Contractor will restore any excavated areas with sod or seed and that reinstallation of all other items wil! not be performed by Contractor, and that I will be responsible for any restoration of any of said items. 2. I understand that #he sod or seed installed on my private property wil! be my responsibility to maintain, including watering; anc! Contractor wilf not provide any warranty for sod or seed. 3. I understand that the sanitary sewer service repairs inc(uded in this work are intended to address the inflow and infiltration af clear water into tMe sanitary sewer system only. I afso understand that I may choose to make repairs to address other issues such as settlements or sags in the sanitary sewer service line which services my home that if not addressed, may result in blockage of the service line, and potentially result in backup of sewage ir�to my home. I will not hold the City of Golden Valley or its age�ts or contractors liabte for any sewage backup resulting from any of my decisions related to repairs to address non inflow and infiltration defects. B-1 I further acknowledge this Work flrder is subject to a Master Agreement between Contractor and the City of Golden Valiey including without limitation certain Special Provisions as described therein. I understand that i wili be res�nsible for 100 percent of the cost of the au#harized work, plus an administrative fee. Both are payable in full to the City of Golden Valley following completion of the work or through a special assessment certified #o my property taxes at the interest rate established by the City Council over a period ot up to ten years. I also hereby waive my rights to a hearing and appea! of the special assessrnent far a!I work related to sanitary sewer service repairs as ou�ined herein according #o Minnesota Statu#es, Chapter 429. By signing this document I attest that I have read and understand the above information and related information. As the undersigned property owner, I release the City of Golden Valley, its employees, agents and contractors, from any claim or causes of action in cannection with the work authorized herein. Property Owner's Signature: Date: Accepted by: Date: Contractor Accepted by: Date: City B-2 � s s ��t��E�i�Y ��I�IE� ADDRESS ADDRESS OF.SERVICE DAY PHONE NIGHT PHONE CONTRACT4R ADDRESS PHONE i Total Co�t of Work Canstructed: Administration Fee: 7°!0 of Total Cost up to �250: Estrmafe rr+�f to be exeeeded by mc�r� tl�an $500 wfthout authonza�on of the prnperty awner. 1 ackROwledge�is wark order and estimate to be�nal; no add�tionai work orders wilt be submitted for repalr of thts service. Resident Slgnature; B-3 PROPERTY �WNER ADDRESS ADDRESS OF SERVICE DAY PHONE NtGHT PHONE CONTRACTQR ADDRESS PHONE �� a�l Total Cost of Work Constructed: Administration Fee: 7°r6 of Total Cost up to $250: � ., . ,,; �_��:. �. � � Estimate nat to be`exc.�eeded by more fhan $500 without authoriza�ion of the property owner. f acknawledge#his wark ord�r and estimate to be �nal; no additiona(work order�s wili I� submltted for repair o#this servtce. Resldent Signature: Ct��' d� � i Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. H. Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under Internal Revenue Code - Highway 55 West District No. 1 Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary The following resolution will allow the city to be reimbursed for expenditures related to the Tax Increment Financing (Renewal and Renovation) Highway 55 West District No. 1. This reimbursement agreement will allow the City to make expenditures for this project and then be reimbursed by the bond proceeds when issued. Attachments • Resolution Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code for Highway 55 West District No. 1 (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code for Highway 55 West District No. 1. Resolution 13-15 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the following agenda and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE FOR HIGHWAY 55 WEST DISTRICT NO. 1 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) The Internal Revenue Service has issued Section 1.150-2 of ths Income Tax Regulations (the "Regulations") dealing with the issuance of bonds all or a portion of the proceeds of which are to be used to reimburse an issuer for project expenditures made prior to the date of issuance. (b) The Regulations generally require that the issuer make a declaration of its official intent to reimburse itself for such prior expenditures out of the proceeds of a subsequently issued series of bonds within 60 days after payment of the expenditures, that the bonds be issued and the reimbursement allocation be made from the proceeds of such bonds within the reimbursement period (as defined in the Regulations), and that the expenditures reimbursed be capital expenditures or costs of issuance of the bonds. (c) The City desires to comply with requirements of the Regulations with respect to the projects hereinafter identified. 2. Official Intent Declaration. (a) The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City (the "Authority") proposes to undertake a project consisting of$5,915,441 (the "Project"), and to make original expenditures with respect thereto prior to the issuance of reimbursement bonds, and the City reasonably expects to issue reimbursement bonds for the Project, in one or more series, in an amount not to exceed $5,915,441. (b) Other than (i) de minimis amounts permitted to be reimbursed pursuant to Section 1.150-2(fl(1) of the Regulations or (ii) expenditures constituting preliminary expenditures as defined in Section 1.150-2(fl(2) of the Regulations, the City will nat seek reimbursement for any original expenditures with respect to the foregoing Project paid more than 60 days prior to the date of adoption of this resolution. All original expenditures for which reimbursement is sought will be capital expenditures or costs of issuance of the reimbursement bonds. Resolution 13-15 - Continued March 19, 2013 3. Budgetary Matters. As of the date hereof, there are no City or Authority funds reserved, pledged, allocated on a lang term basis or otherwise set aside (or reasonably expected to be reserved, pledged, allocated on a long term basis or otherwise set aside) to provide permanent financing for the original expenditures related to the Project, other than pursuant to the issuance of the reimbursement bonds. Consequently, it is not expected that the issuance of the reimbursement bonds will result in the creation of any replacement proceeds. 4. Reimbursement Allocations. The officers of the City and Authority shall be responsible for making the "reimbursement allocations" described in the Regulations, being generally the transfer of the appropriate amount of proceeds of the reimbursement bonds to reimburse the source of temporary financing used to make payment of the original expenditures relating to the Project. Each reimbursement allocation shall be made within 30 days of the date of issuance of the reimbursement bonds, shall be evidenced by an entry on the official books and records of the City or the Authority maintained for the reimbursement bonds and shall specifically identify the original expenditures being reimbursed. Shepard M. Harris, 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 his signature attested by the City Clerk. �� Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109{fax) ��_�.{:: ;.; �. f�,.:$..� �� _ . i�� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. I. Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under Internal Revenue Code for pouglas Drive Street Reconstruction Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary The following resolution will allow the city to be reimbursed for expenditures related ta the Douglas Drive Street Reconstruction. This reimbursement agreement will allow the City to make expenditures for this project and then be reimbursed by the bond proceeds when issued. Attachments • Resolution Relating to the Financing of a Street Reconstruction Project; Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Relating to the Financing of a Street Reconstruction Project; Establishing Compliance with Reimbursement Bond Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code. Resolution 13-16 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE FINANCING OF A STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT; ESTABLISHING COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) The Internal Revenue Service has issued Section 1.150-2 of the Income Tax Regulations (the "Regulations") dealing with the issuance of bonds all or a portion of the proceeds of which are to be used to reimburse the City for project expenditures made by the City prior to the date of issuance. (b) The Regulations generally require that the City make a declaration of its official intent to reimburse itself for such prior expenditures out of the proceeds of a subsequently issued series of bonds within 60 days after payment of the expenditures, that the bonds be issued and the reimbursement allocation be made from the proceeds of such bonds within the reimbursement period (as defined in the Regulations), and that the expenditures reimbursed be capital expenditures or costs of issuance of the bonds. (c) The City desires to comply with requirements of the Regulations with respect to the projects hereinafter identified. 2. Official Intent Declaration. (a) The City proposes to undertake a street reconstruction project, consisting of the improvement of the City streets identified on Exhibit A hereto (collectively, the "Project"), and to make original expenditures with respect thereto prior to the issuance of reimbursement bonds, and reasonably expects to issue reimbursement bonds for the Project, in one or more series, in an amount not to exceed $10,000,000. (b) Other than (i) de minimis amounts permitted to be reimbursed pursuant to Section 1.150-2(fl(1) of the Regulations or (ii) expenditures constituting preliminary expenditures as defined in Section 1.150-2(fl(2) of the Regulations, the City will not seek reimbursement for any original expenditures with respect to the foregoing Project paid more than 60 days prior to the date of adoption of this resolution. All original expenditures for which reimbursement is sought will be capital expenditures or costs of issuance of the reimbursement bonds. Resolution 13-16 - Continued March 19, 2013 3. Budgetary Matters. As of the date hereof, there are no City funds reserved, pledged, allocated on a long term basis or otherwise set aside (or reasonably expected to be reserved, pledged, allocated on a long term basis or otherwise set aside) to provide permanent financing for the original expenditures related to the Project, other than pursuant to the issuance of the reimbursement bonds. Consequently, it is not expected that the issuance of the reimbursement bonds will result in the creation of any replacement proceeds. 4. Reimbursement Allocations. The City's Finance Director shall be responsible for making the "reimbursement allocations" described in the Regulations, being generally the transfer of the apprapriate amount of proceeds of the reimbursement bonds to reimburse the source of temporary financing used by the City to make payment of the original expenditures relating to the Project. Each reimbursement allocation shall be made within 3Q days of the date of issuance af the reimbursement bonds, shall be evidenced by an entry on the official books and records of the City maintained for the reimbursement bonds and shall specifically identify the original expenditures being reimbursed. Shepard M. Harris, 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 his signature attested by the City Clerk. -2- Resolution 13-16 - Continued March 19, 2013 EXHIBIT A STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT: • CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) from TH 55 to CSAH 70 (Medicine Lake Road) -3- t'1�� C?� @"�, Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) _..� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. J. Approval of Fire Department Relief Association By-Law Amendment Regarding Pension Increase Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary In March, 2013 the membership of the Fire Relief Association approved an amendment to Article XI, of their by-laws increasing the lump-sum pension from $6,700 per year of service to $7,000 per year of service. In order for the City to guarantee the new pension amount and levy, when needed, taxes to finance it,the City Council must also approve the amendment. In July, the City will receive the amount, if needed, for a special levy to cover the shortfall of the pension fund required by Minnesota Statute. ARTICLE XI. RETIREMENT BENEFIT Section 1: Service Pension -An active member of the Association who leaves active duty with the Fire Department is eligible to collect a lump sum service pension subject to the following: a. Eligibility requirements: 1. Have left active service with the Golden Valley Fire Department; 2. Have completed at least 10 years of active service with the Fire Department before leaving; and 3. Have been a member of the Association in good standing at least 10 years prior to leaving the Fire Department. b.Amount of eenefit- Each applicant shall be eligible for a service pension of$�A�-$7,000.00 per full year of active service as a firefighter with the fire department. c. Early Vesting Provision - In the event a member with ten years or more, but less than twenty years of active service on the City of Golden Valley Fire Department resigns, that person shall be entitled to the following benefits that represent the early vested portion of their total pension amount, reduced by four (4) percent per year for each year less than 20. The following table shall be used to determine the pension amount, less any accrued interest: Completed Years of Service Early Vesting Reduction Pension Amount 10 40 percent $42,000 ' 11 36 percent $49,280 12 32 percent $57,120 13 28 percent $65,520 14 24 percent $74,480 15 20 percent $84,000 16 16 percent $94,080 17 12 percent $104,720 18 8 percent $115,920 19 4 percent $127,680 20 none $140,000 More than 20 none $7,000 per year Recommended Action Motion to approve the amendments to Article XI of the by-laws of the Fire Relief Association increasing the lump-sum pension benefit to $7,000 per year of service. �:l�� t�� ' � . ��,. �� Fi.nance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. K. Approval of Amendment to Fire Development Relief Association By-Laws for Approval to Allow the Board to Set Interest Rates up to 5% Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary Each year the Council is required to approve the interest rates on the Deferred Retirement Benefit. Council approval is necessary because of the financial support that may be required through a special levy. The Golden Valley Fire Relief Association presented this request at the February Council/Manager meeting. The Relief Association approved the request at their March 6 Board meeting. ARTICIE XI. RETIREMENT BENEFIT Section l: Service Pension -An active member of the Association who leaves active duty with the Fire Department is eligible to collect a lump sum service pension subject to the following: h. Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit— Interest shall be added to the deferred benefit amount, compounded annually, at a rate equal to the actual time weighted total rate of return of the fund as set by the board of trustees under Minn. Stat. § 356.219, up to 5%, and applied consistently for all deferred service pensioners. Minn. Stat. §424A.02, subd. 10(b), requires municipal ratification of the rate set by the board of trustees in years in which the relief association does not have a surplus over full funding under Minn. Stat. § 69.772, subd 3, paragraph (c), clause (5), or 69.773, subd 4, and if the municipaiity is required to provide financial support to the special fund of the relief association under Minn. Stat. § 69.772 or 69.773. As of the date of this amendment, the following rates have been set by the board: I 2006 = 5%, 2007 = 5%, 2008 = 0%, 2009 =0%, 2010 = 5%�2011=0%, 2012=5%. The deferred I interest rate as set by the board of trustees under Minn. Stat. § 356.219, is S% unless and unfiil otherwise chan�ed bv amendin�these bvlaws, Interest will not accrue for any year in which the member reaches the age of 50 or thereafter. Attachments Resolution Approving Amendment to Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-laws for Interest on Deferred Retirement Benefit (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Approving Amendment to Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By- laws for Interest on Deferred Retirement Benefit. Resolution 13-17 March 19, 2013 Member Scanlon introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO GOLDEN VALLEY FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BY-LAWS FOR INTEREST ON DEFERRED RETIREMENT BENEFIT WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 424A, subd. 10 set procedures and require the City Council to approve changes to bylaws; WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 6, 2013 the Fire Relief Association approved an amendment to their by-laws to include the interest rates that are paid on the Deferred Retirement Benefit in 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley to approve the amendment to the Golden Valley Fire Relief Association by-laws in Article XI, Retirement Benefit, Section I, h, Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit, which reads as follows Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit - Interest shall be added to the deferred benefit amount, compounded annually, at a rate equal to the actual time weighted total rate of return of the fund as set by the board of trustees under Minn. Stat. § 356.219, up to 5%, and applied consistently for all deferred service pensioners. Minn. Stat. § 424A.02, subd. 10(b), requires municipal ratification of the rate set by the board of trustees in years in which the relief association does not have a surplus over full funding under Minn. Stat. § 69.772, subd 3, paragraph (c), clause (5), or 69.773, subd 4, and if the municipality is required to provide financial support to the special fund of the relief association under Minn. Stat. § 69.772 or 69.773. As of the date of this amendment, the following rates have been set by the board: 2006 = 5%, 2007 = 5%, 2008 = 0%, 2009 = 0%, 2010 = 5%, 2011=0%, 2012=5%. Interest will not accrue for any year in which the member reaches the age of 50 or thereafter. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Golden Valley Fire Relief Association by-laws are to be reviewed on an annual basis and requires approval of the City Council for any language amendment that would affect a possible municipal contribution. Shepard M. Harris, 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 his signature attested by the City Clerk. �� ,,. �,' Finance Department �� - - - - 763 593 8013/763 593 8109(fax) . _ . Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. L. Authorizing Issuance and Sale of: $4,635,000 Generat Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2013A and $7,330,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2013B Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary The proceeds of the $4,635,OQ0 General Obligation Improvement Bands, Series 2013A is a bond for a combinatian of projects: -� $1,795,000 wil! finance the non-MSA street and driveway projects included in the 2013 Pavement Management Program. This project has already been approved by the City Council in November, 2012. The special assessment hearing for this project is scheduled for April 3, 2012. � $750,000 will finance the equipment included in the 2013-2017 CIP. The debt service on the certificates will be repaid from annual tax levies. � $2,090,000 will refund the 2004B Bonds which have currently outstanding principal amount of$2,085,000. The proceeds of the $7,33Q,q00 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bands, Series 2013B is refinancing the 2006B bonds that were originally issued far the 2006 PMP. If approved, the sale date of all bond issues will be April 16, 2013 with Cauncil approval scheduled for that evening. Attachments • Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$4,635,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2013A (1 page) • Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$7,330,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2013B (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$4,635,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2013A. Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$7,330,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2013B. Resolution 13-18 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the folfowing resoiution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,635,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2013A BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its General Obligation Bonds, Series 2013A, in the principal amount of$4,635,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapters 429 and 475, to (i) finance improvement projects in the City, (ii) finance various items of capital equipment, and (iii) refinance on July 1, 2013 (the Refunding), the 2014 through 2019 maturities of the City's General Obligation Tax Abatement Bonds, Series 2004B, dated, as originally issued, as of July 1, 2004. SECTION 2. TERMS OF PROPOSAL. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds which is attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), to solicit proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a competitive basis without requirement of published notice. SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet at the time and place shown in the Terms of Proposal, for the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Shepard M. Harris, 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 thereaf: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Resolution 13-19 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $7,330,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2013B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the City), as fallows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2013B, in the principal amount of$7,330,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to provide funds to be used, along with other available funds, to refinance on February 1, 2016 (the Refunding), the 2017 through 2026 maturities of the City's General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2006B, dated, as originally issued, as of July 1, 2006. SECTION 2. TERMS OF PROPOSAL. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds which is attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and canditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby autharized, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), to solicit proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a competitive basis without requirement of published notice. SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet at the time and place shown in the Terms of Proposal, for the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Shepard M. Harris, 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 fo9lowing voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. �l�� t��J � Planning Department 763-593-8095 l 763-593-8109(fax) �. � ..�w �A��a�iuii�.��,��u�w��d� �,�� u : : ��.� . �d�� r�u �� 3 �� . ��.�_... ;��n. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. M. Approval of Extension of Variances- 410 Rhode Island Avenue North Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary On March 27, 2012, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved variances to allow nine single family homes to be constructed along Rhode Island Avenue, north of Harold Avenue. The variances were necessary because the existing lots of record, which the City is legally obligated to allow to be developed, are smaller and narrower than the current minimum lot requirements in Golden Valley. As a result, it was difficult to construct contemporary homes within the setback requirements on the lots. The following variances were granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals: • Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(d)Wall Articulation Requirements-City Code requires any exterior wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance to allow walls to be 50 feet in length without articulating. • Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements- City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area requirements for houses that measure over 15 feet in height on the correspanding side yard facade. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance waiving this requirement. Building permits must be obtained within one year of the granting of a variance. Seven of the nine properties involved in the Rhode Island Avenue development meet the criteria; however, there have been no permits obtained for 410 Rhode Island Avenue North and 7650 Harold Avenue. The developer is seeking a one year extension of the variances for 410 Rhode Island Avenue North to allow more time to develop the lot. The City Council is authorized to approve extensions. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Letter from Curt Fretham dated March 8, 2013 (1 page) • Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals dated March 27, 2012 (7 pages) Recommended Actian Motion to approve an extension of the variances granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 27, 2012 for one year (expiring on March 18, 2014) for the property located at 410 Rhode Island Avenue North. n �� 's= � �o . Z V � � Z �< - � p � p �� `^�. w m a � �� u � Z Q o o � ° � o o � o .. N E E o g w o° `$ ^ W n > > a uc L� g � � O v Q E E c c = c a L`o °' (y� � N�� c c o � c � u � o � p � `^ � N � � O 4' W Q � o o c°� o ° y��' o 0 �o� o�' � � y $ � .,g ` e � � �'r Z � aoz,n c o c o g o.- �j ,.. � Z � M ao ri� Z � � �N 8 S 8 8 8 8� ~�` �` W N �� i W M `� + � � �� • ' � � � � � = Z � � W �� N CJ ,� � ' I- � N Ln a o �'„ � ' � / � � ZN � � � � W� �� ` J 0 d J � I �zaa � ' 1 � � � � � � i __ /_ " � - -- ---i ____ --- �.� ; 000s ea f l ► � � � � , � � m � � , � _ � � f � °° °' � � � '�' z � �A W mN I I � N N � N � � �g'� ,N, vmi I I . � �.��':� I � a: bf �i ' � , 1 i � ,47 l �O A I £l'9S ___ � � , � � � --- -_ _ _ _ M1�90.5£AN —�/---- —``� i CO'05 C1'9S � � � i "; � , � � �JV� , � _ � e ,........,.�.:.:.�.: '� N � � " ' : . I � ' �8Z � I �',�� ( $il m � � FuXv+". 10 � �h:.u, � ^ � ( � � ' � � � 1 � � � � � � � n ��"� .E ' �y`"s�,-� . m � rj' n I N 2 � �j � I m `H H "m �.__�, Z s.n.� � � � 3 W � � w m :� � � O 1 ' � � � d � � � ' � � o � , J �.� � ,; --1� �� ' N' ... �� •� 00'OS .�. 00'OS �L'9S i 00'OOl 3.LZ,tifAS �� - � gSl 3.Ll,f£AS �--"- � � �` ��l\� V Y �� DEVELO�'MENT CO. , LLC March 8, 2013 Golden Valley City Council City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road . Golden Valley, MN 55427 Goiden Valley City Council Members I am writing to request a one-year extension to the variance approval received last year for 410 Rhode Island Ave N (Lot 7, Blocic 4, Cottage Grove Addition) and 7650 Harlod Ave (Lot 10, Blocic 4, Cottage Grove Addition). These two lots are part of a nine-lot redevelopment located at the intersection of Harold Ave and Rhode Island Ave N. Last March,the Board of Zoning Appeals approved the following variances for the redevelopment: Lots 6, 7,8 and 9, Blocic 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4 Cottage Grave Addition: -Any wall longei�than 32 feet in length to be articulated -Increased side yard setback for houses over 15 feet in height .Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, �lock 4, Gottage �rove Addition: -Any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated -Increased side yard setback for houses over 15 feet in height -A front yard setback reduction from 35 feet to 25 feet along Harold Ave. Building permits have been issued for seven of the nine lots.We ask for tlle variances to be extended so that the remaining two honnes will fit in with the other homes in the newly created neighborhood. We anticipate permits to be issued for the last two lots later this spring or summer. Sincerely, ��"°`-------- , ""-�-------____...... �� Curt Fretham . 15400 Highway 7, #400 • Minnetonka, MN 55345 • �'hone: �52-930-3000 • Pax: 952-653-2198 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 A regular meeting of the Golden ailey Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at City Hall, 78 Golden Valley Road, Go Valley, Minnesota. Chair called the meeting to or er at 7 pm. Those present w embers udre andis, Maxwell and Nelson, and Planning Commission Represen � s rty and Waldhauser. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Adminis � e istant Lisa Wittman. I. Appro of Minutes — bruary 2 , 2 Regular Meeting MO by Boudreau-Landis, s conded by McCarty an tion carried unanimously to rave the February 28, 2012 inutes as submitted. Waldha ser abstained from voting II. The Petition(s) are: Rhode Island LLC, Applicant (12-03-03) Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4, Cottage Grove Addition: Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Wall Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements • City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area for houses over 15 feet in height. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Lot 10, Block 3 and Lat 1 D Block 4, Cottage Grove Addition: Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Wall Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 2 • City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area for houses over 15 feet in height. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • City Code requires structures to be located 35 feet away from a front yard property line. The applicant is proposing to build the houses 25 feet from the front yard property line along Harold Avenue. Hogeboom gave a brief history of the land use in this area. He explained that the General Land Use Plan Map adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 2008 designated this area for high density housing. After further study, it was decided by the City Council that this area wasn't appropriate for high density housing so the General Land Use Plan Map was amended back to low density housing which allows for Single Family (R1) or Two-Family (R2) zoning. Hogeboom referred to a site plan and explained that there are currently four homes sitting on nine existing lots of record so a developer has the right to construct homes on these lots even though the City's current requirements would not allow lots of this size today. McCarty asked if the develope�would need Planning Commission and Gity Council approval if they decided to reconfigure the lots. Hogeboom said yes. Nelson asked about the side yard setback requirements if the house is 15 feet in height or less. Hogeboom stated that the north side yard setback would be 10% of the lot width and the south side yard setback would be 20% of the lot width. Nelson asked if there are any requirements regarding the depth of a lot. Hogeboom said there are no requirements regarding the depth of a lot, but the front of a lot has to measure 80 feet in width, or 100 feet in width if it is a corner lot. Nelson noted that the homes are bank-owned, active listings and asked if the applicant owns the properties yet. Curt Fretham, Applicant, stated that they are scheduled to close on the properties this week. Waldhauser asked if conditions can be added to a variance approval. Hogeboom said the Board can make changes to the requested variances but adding conditions is not recommended. Fretham referred to the 2008 amendments to the Zoning Code that required articulation and increased side yard setbacks for houses taller than 15 feet. He said he feels that those amendments didn't take into consideration narrower lots like these. He said he thinks the intent of the amendments was to prevent McMansions, but the variances he's seeking are consistent amongst all of the lots so no one house will stick out. He showed Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 3 the Board illustrations of homes they built in Edina which would be similar to the ones he is proposing for these narrow lots. He referred to the variance regarding articulation requirements and explained the reason he asking for that variance is to allow for 2-stall attached garages rather than detached garages. He said he feels having attached garages would be more in character with the neighborhood and the community. Nelson asked about the size and price range of the proposed homes. Fretham said the homes would be in the $350,000 to $400,000 price range and be approximately 2,200 to 2,500 square feet, with 3 or 4 bedrooms and 2.5 to 3 bathrooms. McCarty asked about the square footage of the existing homes. Fretham said he didn't know the size of the existing homes. Waldhauser asked how lang the back wall of the proposed new homes would be. Fretham said they would be approximately 40 feet in length. He added that he understands the articulation requirements, but in this case articulating the backs of the homes would take away the articulation on the fronts of the homes. Waldhauser asked Fretham if he is determining the design of the homes or if the individual homeowners wifl determine the design. Fretham said the design could change slightly from the pictures he showed and homeowners will be able to choose some of the design features. Nelson asked if a buyer wanted to have more square footage if the depth of the house, not the width would be increased. Frethem said yes, in that case the depth of the house would be increased. Nelson asked if they have to build this many houses to make the project economically feasible. Fretham said he is buying these properties regardless of how many houses can be built and that he will build something on the properties. Waldhauser asked if the properties could be developed with twin homes. Hogeboom said if twin homes were proposed the properties would need to be rezoned to R2. He added that he thinks what the applicant is proposing, with the requested variances, will look better than if he constructed homes that conform to the Zoning Code requirements. Maxwell noted that detached garages may work on these lots. Hogeboom said he wasn't sure if detached garages would work because driveways are required to be three feet away from the side yard property lines. McCarty said he would be inclined to grant variances for the driveways. He noted that there could also be attached garages on the backs of the homes. Fretham said garages on the backs of the homes would take a large portion of the back yards. Nelson said she agrees that detached garages would have a negative impact to the existing homes in the area. Waldhauser stated that if the Board were willing to bend on the side yard setback requirements then the applicant may be able to meet the articulation requirements. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 4 Hogeboom said he thinks the applicant intends to articulate the walls where possible, it would just allow him to have more flexibility if he gets a variance from that requirement. Fretham suggested possibly allowing the articulation to encroach into the setback area, but his preference would be to have straight lines. McCarty asked Fretham what research is indicating that this is a good area for this type of development when there are houses sitting there vacant now. Fretham said his first- hand experience with similar types of infill development has been successful. Hogeboom added that the homes aren't vacant because people don't want to buy homes in this area; they are vacant because they were foreclosed. Waldhauser asked Fretham if it would work for him if a potential buyer wanted to build a smaller home. Fretham said yes. McCarty asked Fretham how many of his other projects have been next to major highways. Fretham said several of his developments have been near busy roads. He gave examples of project he's done in other cities and noted that these kinds of issues are part of the nature of doing infill developments. Waldhauser noted that there would be some buffer from Highway 55 because the lots to the north have a home or a pond between them and the Highway. Waldhauser asked how the grading on the site would be done. Fretham said the homes will probably not be walk-outs and he is proposing to do a grading plan for the entire site. He said that it appears that there are a lot of nice trees on these properties but there really aren't. There are diseased elm trees that need to be removed. He said he doesn't think he'll be interfering with the nicer, mature trees. McCarty asked Fretham how he defines the character of Golden Valley. Fretham stated that many neighborhoods have a lot of different housing stock and that is their character and other neighborhoods are defined by the size of lots rather than the houses. Waldhauser stated that a new character will be created with this new neighborhood. Hogeboom added the neighbors and the City Council have defined the character of this area as single family homes. Nelson asked Fretham to address the unique circumstances of these properties that were not created by the landowner. Fretham stated that they already exist as 50-foat wide lots and the amendments to the Zoning Code in 2008 changed what kinds of houses could be built on these properties. McCarty noted that there are several areas in Golden Valley with narrow lots. They just have more design involved. Fretham agreed and said that many houses designed on narrow lots have flat roofs but he really doesn't want to build that type of house in this area. Waldhauser asked if the homes on the corner lots will be taller. Fretham said they will not be taller but they will have different roof lines. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 5 Nelson opened the public hearing. Larry Kueny, 7303 Ridgeway Road, said he totally supports this proposal because the neighbors fought hard to get rid of a senior housing development that was being considered for this area. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Waldhauser said she thinks for lots that already exist this proposal is a good fit. Maxwell said he is supportive of the proposal as well. Nelson referred to the state statute regarding the granting of variances and said she feels this proposal is in harmony with the intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, it is a reasonable use of the property, it will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and the sizes of the existing tots were not created by the landowner. McCarty stated that the Board typically gets a specific request for a specific variance. This proposal is more like a blanket variance or a carte blanche variance for the area. Fretham said he is trying not to make nine separate variance applications. Maxwell suggested that the language in the approval state that no wall could be longer than 48 feet without articulating. Fretham noted that he is not asking for variances from the side yard setback requirements. He is asking for a variance from the requirement regarding the increased side yard setback area once the house is taller than15 feet. McCarty said he thinks the varied roof lines help break up the facade even if the walls don't articulate. Boudreau-Landis agreed and said he feels articulation can be addressed in other ways such as landscaping. Nelson added that this is also going to be a new neighborhood so the houses won't be built right next to an existing house. Waldhauser questioned if the Board should put a limit on the length of the walls. Maxwell suggested limiting the length of the walls to 50 feet before they need to be articulated. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request to allow walls to be 50 feet in length without articulating for the houses on Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Maxwell and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request waiving the requirement regarding side yard setbacks increasing if the house is taller than 15 feet for the houses on Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4 (The houses shall still meet the side yard setback requirements). Maxwell asked about the length of the back wall of the homes on the two corner lots. Fretham stated that the walls an the north side of the homes are proposed to be 7Q feet Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 6 long with no articulation. He stated that he could move the houses forward slightly in order to have more room to articulate the backs of the homes but he would then have to amend his variance request to allow the front of homes to be 23 feet away from the front yard property line along Harold Ave. rather than 25 feet as requested. He said another idea would be to articulate the walls by 1 foot, rather than the required 2 feet which would require the articulation to go into the side yard setback area. Waldhauser stated that the rear of the homes on the corner lots will hardly be visible. McCarty suggested that the roof lines be broken up or a dormer be added to break up the long facade along the backs of the homes. Hogeboom stated that the notification to the neighboring properties indicated that the front yard variance request was for 25 feet along Harold so he didn't think it would be fair to change the request at this point. McCarty said he is not interested in allowing a larger front yard variance and he would rather that the facade along the backs of the houses be broken up visually. Hogeboom said staff can work with the applicant to help him meet the guidelines regarding what type of structure can or can't be located in a setback area. Nelson asked which lot the model home will be built on. Fretham said Lot 8. Waldhauser asked if the homes on the corner lots are located right at the rear yard setback line or if they could be longer than shown on the plans. Fretham stated that there may be enough room to add a third garage stall but that could be articulated. Maxwell stated that the Board could grant a variance for an unarticulated wall to be 70 feet in length and ask that the applicant work with staff on ways to break up the facade of the back wall by using bay windows or cantilevers, etc. McCarty said he thinks the Board's hands are tied because they don't know the exact design or dimensions of any of the proposed houses. Waldhauser said the Board could restrict the length of the walls to 50 feet before they are required to articulate for the corner houses like they did for the other houses. Maxwell stated that the corner lots are oriented a different way than the other lots. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Boudreau-Landis and motion carried 4 to 1 to approve the variance request to allow no articulation of the walls for the houses on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4. Waldhauser voted no. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to to approve the variance request waiving the requirement regarding side yard setbacks increasing if the house is taller than 15 feet for the homes on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4 (The houses shall still meet the side yard setback requirements). Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 7 MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to the variance request to allow the houses on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4 to be built 25 feet from the front yard property line along Harold Avenue. III. Other Business No er business as discussed. IV. Adj nme The meeting was a rned at 8:50 pm. Nancy J. Nelson, Ch �r Joseph S. Hogeboom, Staff Liaison �t��% C��f Planning Department 763-593-8Q95/763-593-8109(fax} Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. N. Approval of Extension of Variances - 7650 Harold Avenue Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary On March 27, 2012, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved variances to allow nine single family homes to be constructed along Rhode Island Avenue, north of Harold Avenue. The variances were necessary because the existing lots of record, which the City is legally obligated to allow to be developed, are smaller and narrower than the current minimum lot requirements in Golden Valley. As a result, it was difficult to construct contemporary homes within the setback requirements on the lots. The following variances were granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals: • Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(d)Wall Articulation Requirements-City Code requires any ext�rior wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance waiving this requirement. • Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements- City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area requirements for houses that measure over 15 feet in height on the corresponding side yard facade. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance waiving this requirement. � Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements- City Code requires structures to be located a minimum of 35 feet away from a front yard property line. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance to allow the home to be built 25 feet from the south front yard property line along Harold Avenue. Building permits must be obtained within one year of the granting of a variance. Seven of the nine properties involved in the Rhode Island Avenue development meet the criteria; however, there have been no permits obtained for 410 Rhode Island Avenue North and 7650 Harold Avenue. The developer is seeking a one year extension of the variances for 7650 Harold Avenue to allow more time to develop the lot. The City Council is authorized to approve extensions. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Letter from Curt Fretham dated March 8, 2013 (1 page) • Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals dated March 27, 2012 (7 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve an extension of the variances granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 27, 2012 for one year (expiring on March 18, 2014) for the property located at 7650 Harold Avenue. � $c o= � o� � o • °= U � ° Z; � t � � � O 4 r. 'p c oi� � (A c p ° o a c V i1 � � ~ � C �O ` ` p O � tl p v U �^ N a o o �gp op '°t ° 2 c o 1� « �p Q I� C C .:+ a e t�1 C 9 d' p W W � Q E E c c_° � c� �'" °�' W L 0 � O V" � � � •x � � � C � � O � � < `v NNW o o u o � r.�uw p /^ � � O W �� ' o � � �° o g V � � c � v Z � � �O =� [�i � 8 c c"' � �°-�<' � � N C/� Z M = �" � � o� w �c rn co n " I � 0 r. � W W M W � o � � . • l� � � c°oy Q` o ' . ; � II � _ � w � � � �► GV � �W , F- .— N J . _ � Qo �N � � � Wao� � ,� o , � �� °- i oo�> � � f-z a a � � ' �� - -- --- _ " �.� •os ee• l l � � � � �� . � ; _ � � � : � i ;;��,,:! . , � �, .. � � - � �. � � , � _ ,,,_� z I IA 4 :.. � m�:; � I _.. I N y ii N _ � ' � � � 1 h % x 4) � I � ��t I � � I �i �� 9Z I O r�•es —- _ _ --� � � � � � ----- �w.9o.sc.a+ � �. y -`�--- , . �, � --- --- _-- ; T „a,�r � ,,�a.os . I ' ,. ; .�. N � 1 £ , � � N tp tv: ; ,sa � � $ � m � - ,� � � �F � , � ' ^ � � � � � � � N ° ' N � ^ � N � � i N = m n � � 6e z o . m I � - � �-� iv �iD � � � W �r �� .ry* , a..� I �O � a �y r, ' b � , � �� ; ;;� ' oo.os °°•°s �:� °°�°s ►c°5 --� __ _ oo•oot 3.cz.rc.ns -- 9S l 3.Ld,1£.OS -.-.. I # � � � t_._.�Kfi�W��T� DEYEL0I�MENT CO. , LLC March 8, 2013 Golden Valley City Council City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road . Golden Valley, MN 55427 Golden Valley City Council Members I am writing to request a one-year extension to the variance approval received l�st year for 410 Rhode Island Ave N (Lot 7, Block 4, Cottage Grove Addition) and 7b50 Harlod Ave (Lot 10, Blocic 4, Cottage Grove Addition). These two lots are pat•t of a nine-lot redevelopment located at the intersection of Harold Ave and Rhode IsIand Ave N. Last March,the Boa�•d of Zoning Appeals approved the following variances for the redevelopment: Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4 Cottage Grove Addition: -Any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated -Increased side yard setbacl{for houses over 1S feet in height ,Lot 10, Block 3 and Lat 10, Block 4, Cottage Grove Addition: -Any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated -Increased side yard setback for houses over 15 feet in height -A front yard setback i�eduction from 35 feet to 25 feet along HaroId Ave. Building permits have been issued for seven of the nine lots.We ask for the variances to be extended so that the remaining two homes will fit in with the other homes in the newly created neighborhood. We anticipate permits to be issued for the last two lots later this spring or summer. Sincerely, I _ ,�-----,----------�--__..__ � ' �--'"� � � Curt Fretham 15400 Highway 7, �fi400 � Minnetonka, MN 55345 � �'hone: 952-930-3000 • Fax: 952-053�2198 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Baard of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 ular meeting of the Golde Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, March 2012 at City Hall, 78 0 Golden Valley Road, Golden , Minnesota. Chair Nelson cal he meeting to o er at 7 pm. Those present were bers Boudr ndis, Maxwell and Nelson, and Planning Gommission Representa �ty and Waldhauser. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Adminis istant Lisa Wittman. I. Appr of Minutes February 2012 Regular Meeting MO by Boudreau-Landi , seconded by McCa nd motion carried unanimously to ��rove the February 28, 2 12 minutes as submitted. auser abstained from voting II. The Petition(s) are: Rhode Island LLC, Applicant (12-03-031 Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4, Cottage Grove Addition: Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Wall Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements • City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area for houses over 15 feet in height. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10 Block 4, Cottage Grave Addition: Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Wall Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. The applicant is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 2 • City Code requires an increase in side yard setback area for houses over 15 feet in height. The applicanfi is asking for a variance from this requirement. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • City Code requires structures to be located 35 feet away from a front yard property line. The applicant is proposing to build the houses 25 feet from the front yard property line along Harold Avenue. Hogeboom gave a brief history of the land use in this area. He explained that the General Land Use Plan Map adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan in 2008 designated this area for high density housing. After further study, it was decided by the City Council that this area wasn't appropriate for high density housing so the General Land Use Plan Map was amended back to low density housing which allows for Single Family (R1) or Two-Family (R2) zoning. Hogeboom referred to a site plan and explained that there are currently four homes sitting on nine existing lots of record so a developer has the right to construct homes on these lots even though the Gity's current requirements would not allow lots of this size today. McCarty asked if the developer would need Planning Commission and City Council approval if they decided to reconfigure the lots. Hogeboom said yes. Nelson asked about the side yard setback requirements if the house is 15 feet in height or less. Hogeboom stated that the north side yard setback would be 10% of the lot width and the south side yard setback would be 20% of the tot width. Nelson asked if there are any requirements regarding the depth of a lot. Hogeboom said there are no requirements regarding the depth of a lot, but the front of a lot has to measure 80 feet in width, or 100 feet in width if it is a corner lot. Nelson noted that the homes are bank-owned, active listings and asked if the applicant owns the properties yet. Curt Fretham, Applicant, stated that they are scheduled to close on the properties this week. Waldhauser asked if conditions can be added to a variance approval. Hogeboom said the Board can make changes to the requested variances but adding conditions is not recommended. Fretham referred to the 2008 amendments to the Zoning Code that required articutation and increased side yard setbacks for houses taller than 15 feet. He said he feels that those amendments didn't take into consideration narrower lots like these. He said he thinks the intent of the amendments was to prevent McMansions, but the variances he's seeking are consistent amongst all of the lots so no one house will stick out. He showed Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 3 the Board illustrations of homes they built in Edina which would be similar to the ones he is proposing for these narrow lots. He referred to the variance regarding articulation requirements and explained the reason he asking for that variance is to allow for 2-stall attached garages rather than detached garages. He said he feels having attached garages would be more in character with the neighborhood and the community. Nelson asked about the size and price range of the proposed homes. Fretham said the homes would be in the $350,000 to $400,000 price range and be approximately 2,200 to 2,500 square feet, with 3 or 4 bedrooms and 2.5 to 3 bathrooms. McCarty asked about the square footage of the existing homes. Fretham said he didn't know the size af the existing homes. Waldhauser asked how long the back wall of the proposed new homes would be. Fretham said they would be approximately 40 feet in length. He added that he understands the articulation requirements, but in this case articulating the backs of the homes would take away the articulation on the fronts of the homes. Waldhauser asked Fretham if he is determining the design of the homes or if the individual homeowners will determine the design. Fretham said the design could change slightly from the pictures he showed and homeowners will be able to ehoose some of the design features. Nelson asked if a buyer wanted to have more square footage if the depth of the house, not the width would be increased. Frethem said yes, in that case the depth of the house would be increased. Nelson asked if they have to build this many houses to make the project economically feasible. Fretham said he is buying these properties regardless of how many houses can be built and that he will build something on the properties. Waldhauser asked if the properties could be developed with twin homes. Hogeboom said if twin homes were proposed the properties would need to be rezoned to R2. He added that he thinks what the applicant is proposing, with the requested variances, will look better than if he constructed homes that conform to the Zoning Code requirements. Maxwell noted that detached garages may work on these lots. Hogeboom said he wasn't sure if detached garages would work because driveways are required to be three feet away from the side yard property lines. McCarty said he would be inclined to grant variances for the driveways. He noted that there could also be attached garages on the backs of the homes. Fretham said garages on the backs of the homes would take a large portion of the back yards. Nelson said she agrees that detached garages would have a negative impact to the existing homes in the area. Waldhauser stated that if the Board were willing to bend on the side yard setback requirements then the applicant may be able to meet the articulation requirements. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 4 Hogeboom said he thinks the applicant intends to articulate the walls where possible, it would just allow him to have more flexibility if he gets a variance from that requirement. Fretham suggested possibly allowing the articulation to encroach into the setback area, but his preference would be to have straight lines. McCarty asked Fretham what research is indicating that this is a good area for this type of development when there are houses sitting there vacant now. Fretham said his first- hand experience with similar types of infill development has been successful. Hogeboom added that the homes aren't vacant because people don't want to buy homes in this area; they are vacant because they were foreclosed. Waldhauser asked Fretham if it would work for him if a potential buyer wanted to build a smaller home. Fretham said yes. McCarty asked Fretham how many of his other projects have been next to major highways. Fretham said several of his developments have been near busy raads. He gave examples of project he's done in other cities and noted that these kinds of issues are part of the nature of doing infill developments. Waldhauser noted that there would be some buffer from Highway 55 because the lots to the north have a home or a pond between them and the Highway. Waldhauser asked how the grading on the site would be done. Fretham said the homes will probably not be walk-outs and he is proposing to do a grading plan for the entire site. He said that it appears that there are a lot of nice trees on these properties but there really aren't. There are diseased elm trees that need to be removed. He said he doesn't think he'll be interfering with the nicer, mature trees. McCarty asked Fretham how he defines the character of Golden Valley. Fretham stated that many neighborhoods have a lot of different housing stock and that is their character and other neighborhoods are defined by the size of lots rather than the houses. Waldhauser stated that a new character will be created with this new neighborhood. Hogeboom added the neighbors and the City Council have defined the character of this area as single family homes. Nelson asked Fretham to address the unique circumstances of these properties that were not created by the landowner. Fretham stated that they already exist as 50-foot wide lots and the amendments to the Zoning Code in 2008 changed what kinds of houses could be built on these properties. McCarty noted that there are several areas in Golden Valley with narrow lots. They just have more design involved. Fretham agreed and said that many houses designed on narrow lots have flat roofs but he really doesn't want to build that type of house in this area. Waldhauser asked if the homes on the corner lots will be taller. Fretham said they will not be taller but they will have different roof lines. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 5 Nelson opened the public hearing. Larry Kueny, 7303 Ridgeway Road, said he totally supports this proposal because the neighbors fought hard to get rid of a senior housing development that was being considered for this area. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Waldhauser said she thinks for lots that already exist this proposal is a good fit. Maxwell said he is supportive of the proposal as well. Nelson referred to the state statute regarding the granting of variances and said she feels this proposal is in harmony with the intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan, it is a reasonable use of the property, it will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and the sizes of the existing lots were not created by the landowner. McCarty stated that the Board typically gets a specific request for a specific variance. This proposal is more like a blanket variance or a carte blanche variance for the area. Fretham said he is trying not to make nine separate variance applications. Maxwell suggested that the language in the appraval state that no wall could be lon�er than 48 feet without articulating. Fretham noted that he is not asking for variances from the side yard setback requirements. He is asking for a variance from the requirement regarding the increased side yard setback area once the house is taller than15 feet. McCarty said he thinks the varied roof lines help break up the faeade even if the walls don't articulate. Boudreau-Landis agreed and said he feels articulation can be addressed in other ways such as landscaping. Nelson added that this is also going to be a new neighborhood so the houses won't be built right next to an existing house. Waldhauser questioned if the Board should put a limit on the length of the walls. Maxwell suggested limiting the length of the walls to 50 feet before they need to be articulated. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request to allow walls to be 50 feet in length without articulating for the houses on Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Maxwell and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request waiving the requirement regarding side yard setbacks increasing if the house is taller than 15 feet for the houses on Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 4 (The houses shall still meet the side yard setback requirements). Maxwell asked about the length of the back wall of the homes on the two corner tots. Fretham stated that the walls on the north side of the homes are propased to be 70 feet Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 27, 2012 Page 6 long with no articulation. He stated that he could move the houses forward slightly in order to have more room to articulate the backs of the homes but he would then have to amend his variance request to allow the front of homes to be 23 feet away from the front yard property line along Harold Ave. rather than 25 feet as requested. He said another idea would be to articulate the walls by 1 foot, rather than the required 2 feet which would require the articulation to go into the side yard setback area. Waldhauser stated that the rear of the homes on the corner lots will hardly be visible. McCarty suggested that the roof lines be broken up or a dormer be added to break up the long facade along the backs of the homes. Hogeboom stated that the notification to the neighboring properties indicated that the front yard variance request was for 25 feet along Harold so he didn't think it would be fair to change the request at this point. McCarty said he is not interested in allowing a larger front yard variance and he would rather that the facade along the backs of the houses be broken up visually. Hogeboom said staff can work with the applicant to help him meet the guidelines regarding what type of structure can or can't be located in a setback area. Nelson asked which lot the model home will be built on. Fretham said Lot 8. Waldhauser asked if the homes on the corner lots are located right at the rear yard setback line or if they could be longer than shown on the plans. Fretham stated that there may be enough room to add a third garage stall but that could be articulated. Maxwell stated that the Board could grant a variance for an unarticulated wall to be 70 feet in length and ask that the applicant work with staff on ways to break up the facade of the back wall by using bay windows or cantilevers, etc. McCarty said he thinks the Board's hands are tied because they don't knaw the exact design or dimensions of any of the proposed houses. Waldhauser said the Board could restrict the length of the walls to 50 feet before they are required to arkiculate for the corner houses like they did for the other houses. Maxwell stated that the corner lots are oriented a different way than the other lots. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Boudreau-Landis and motion carried 4 to 1 to approve the variance request to allow no articulation of the walls for the houses on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4. Waldhauser voted no. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to to approve the variance request waiving the requirement regarding side yard setbacks increasing if the house is taller than 15 feet for the homes on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4 (The houses shall still meet the side yard setback requirements). Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeais March 27, 2012 Page 7 MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to the variance request to allow the houses on Lot 10, Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 4 to be built 25 feet from the front yard property line along Harold Avenue. Other Bus ness No ot r business was discussed. IV. Ad urnme t The meeting djourned a . 0 pm. ancy J. Nelson, C air Joseph S. Hogeboom, Staff Liaison (",��"�l C)� � ;� �� ,,. ��,� Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. O. Receipt of December 2012 Financial Reports Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary The monthly financial report provides a progress report of the following funds: General Fund Operations Attachments � December 2012 General Fund Financial Reports (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to receive and file the December 2012 Financial Reports. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-General Fund Expenditures December, 2012 (unaudited) Over % 2012 December YTD (Under) Of Budget Division Budget Actual Actual Budget Expend. oo� Council $287,755 26,852 282,435 ($5,320) 98.15% 003 City Manager 697,925 72,305 669,876 (28,049) 95.98% ooa Transfers Out 294,710 0 294,71 Q Q 1 Q0.00% (1) 005 Admin. Services 1,572,160 156,884 1,513,691 (58,469) 9628% oos Legal 120,000 12,404 122,869 2,869 102.39% oo� Risk Management 290,000 (59,483) 237,152 (52,848) 81.78% (2) o�� General Gov't. Bldgs. 570,855 83,887 509,172 (61,683) 89.19% o�s Planning 317,035 32,240 296,889 (20,146) 93.65% 022 Police 4,701,500 556,183 4,802,339 100,839 102.14% (3) 023 Fire and Inspections 1,554,480 140,281 1,527,042 (27,438) 9823% 035 Public Works Admin. 315,365 32,905 312,295 (3,070) 99.03% 036 Engineering 663,425 106,162 634,601 (28,824) 95.66% 03� Streets 1,386,530 171,417 1,246,890 (139,640) 89.93% os5 Community Center 75,355 6,217 61,169 (14,186) 81.17% oss Park& Rec. Admin. 646,275 68,841 633,771 (12,504) 98.07% os� Park Maintenance 996,780 127,282 959,012 (37,768) 96.21% oss Recreation Programs 410,925 20,185 488,636 77,711 118.91% (4) TOTAL Expenditures $14,901,075 $1,554,562 $14,592,549 ($308,526) 97.93% (1)Transfers were made in June. (2) Dividend payment from LMCIT was higher this year. (3) Police revenue would offset overage. (4) Park& Recreation revenue increased to offset. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report-General Fund Revenues December, 2012 (unaudited) Percentage Of Year Completed 92.00% Over % 2012 December YTD (Under) of Budget Type Budget Actual Actual Budget Received Ad Valorem Taxes $11,702,050 5,970,761 11,966,310 $264,260 102.26°/a (1) Licenses 173,800 2,200 224,463 $50,663 129.15% (2) Permits 628,070 40,710 999,384 $371,314 159.12% (3) Federal Grants 0 5,761 23,043 $23,043 (4) State Aid 10,500 0 61,330 $50,830 584.10% (5) Hennepin County Aid 0 0 0 $0 Charges For Services: General Government 43,550 23,728 52,580 $9,030 120.73% (6) Public Safety 181,745 35,473 195,266 $13,521 107.44% (7) Public Works 125,000 30,676 153,098 $28,098 122.48% (8) Park& Rec 395,350 20,260 557,936 $162,586 141.12% (9) Other Funds 1,001,500 6,831 855,789 ($145,711) 85.45% (10) Fines&Forfeitures 260,000 57,563 351,413 $91,413 135.16% (11) Interest On Investments 110,000 45,578 46,253 ($63,747) 42.05% (12) Miscellaneous Revenue 182,700 39,910 255,934 $73,234 140.08% (13) Transfers In 86,810 0 86,810 $Q 100.00°l0 TOTAL Revenue $14,901,p75 $6,279,451 $15,829,609 $928,534 106.23% Notes: (1) Previous delinquencies were made. (2)Apartments, Pawn and Liquor License revenue were higher than budgeted. (3) Building permit revenue increased with new home construction. (4)VOTF officer payment (5) Reimbursement for police salaries were matched. (6) Certification fees came in higher. (7) Police security services came in higher. (8) Planning and Zoning Fee revenue was higher. (9)Youth Tennis Lesson revenue was higher. (10) Project costs were lower than expected. (11) Fines and Forfeitures came in higher. (12) Investment income is low along with high bank fees. (13) Special Assessments collected on previous levies from General Fund. �� Finance Deparfimenfi 763-593-8013/763-593-8109{fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. P. Authorizing 2012 General Fund Transfer and Assignment of Fund Balance Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary At the March Council/Manager meeting, Staff discussed with Council the transfer of 2012 general funds and the assignment of fund balance. The City seeks to have a good balance in its General Fund in order to have sufficient reserves for cash flow purposes, projects, and unexpected shortfalls or emergencies. The City established a formal policy on the level of fund balance that should be maintained in the General Fund. In addition, establishing a General Fund Balance Policy to assure adequate reserves indicates fiscal prudence and maintains a high rating with bond-rating agencies, which prefer to see very strong and healthy balances. When the balance is greater than 60 percent, it should be reduced to 60 percent by using the excess funds for specific one-time projects, acquisitions, or transfers to capital funds. They may also be used to provide limited property tax relief; for example,to lessen the impact of the property tax rate. The amount of those funds in the undesignated balance should be reduced to 60 percent. If kept above 60 percent,the next year's general fund budget should be approved including use of fund balance to balance the budget. The importance on the one-time use is that the City does not incur future expenditures that may create deficits in future budgets. For instance, when one-time building permit revenue is received on a major commercial development,the City should not expect that same revenue will be received as future building permits. Budgets should be set using an average year of revenues and expenditures and not an exceptional year. In 2012, Golden Valley was extremely lucky with the mild climate that reduced heating and electrical costs as well as snowplowing events. Revenues exceeded estimates due to various building permits and payments of delinquent property taxes. For a detailed list of revenue and expenditures review the December financial report that is included in this agenda. The following transfers will be made: Capital Improvement Fund Settlement of Claim $ 600,000 Employee Benefits Fund Employee Retainage $ 250,000 Equipment Replacement Fund Future Stabilization for Equipment Needs $ 100,000 Building Fund Planning/Inspections Department $ 150,000 City Hall Reader Board $ 40,000 TOTAL TRANSFERS $1,140,000 General Fund Police/Fire Increases for PERA $ 30,000 Citywide Survey and Communication $ 30,000 TOTAL ASSIGNED FUND BALANCE FOR 2013 EXPENDITURES $ 60,000 Attachments • Resolution Authorizing the Transfer of$1,140,000 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund ($600,000), Employee Benefits Fund ($280,000), Equipment Replacement Fund ($100,000j and Building Fund ($190,000) and Assigning Fund Balance for 2013 Expenditures ($60,000) and Assigning General Fund Balance for 2013 Expenditures ($60,000) (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing the Transfer of$1,140,000 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund ($600,000), Employee Benefits Fund ($280,OA0), Equipment Replacement Fund ($100,000) and Building Fund ($190,000) and Assigning Fund Balance for 2013 Expenditures ($60,000) and Assigning General Fund Balance for 2013 Expenditures ($60,000). Resolution 13-20 March 19, 2013 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF $1,140,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND ($600,000), EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND ($280,000), EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND ($100,000) AND BUILDING FUND ($190,000); AND ASSIGNING GENERAL FUND BALANCE FOR 2013 EXPENDITURES ($60,000) WHEREAS, the transfer of $600,000 to the Capital Improvement Fund would finance costs for settlement of claim; and WHEREAS, the transfer of $250,000 to the Employee Benefits Fund would fund costs to retain employees, such as additional needs for State pension costs (Public Employees Retirement Fund) and employee insurance; and WHEREAS, the transfer of $100,000 to the Equipment Replacement Fund to help stabilize future equipment certificates; and WHEREAS, the transfer of $150,000 to the Building Improvement Fund for future improvements to the building for combining the Inspections and Planning department to provide customer service and a reader board to post upcoming events and news for the community; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley to authorize the transfer of $1,140,000 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund ($600,000), Employee Benefits Fund ($250,000), Equipment Replacement Fund ($100,000) and Building Fund ($190,000) and assigning General Fund Balance for 2013 expenditures ($60,000). , Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PROCLAMATION FOR ROTARY CLUB DAY WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley was chartered on March 12, 1973; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley has been an active service group in Golden Valley for 40 years, impacting several local organizations and causes; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley built the small picnic shelter at Brookview Park in Golden Valley; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley planted numerous trees in Golden Valley to celebrate the 75th anniversary of Rotary International in 1980 and also in 1983 to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Club; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley was an integral component of the Envision Golden Valley project; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley serves the community through projects such as Highway Clean Up, Cooks for Kids at the Greater Minneapolis Crisis Nursery, PRISM support, etc.; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Golden Valley recognizes local businesses and citizens with their annual Business of the Year and Citizen of the Year presentations; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, acknowledging the great work and impact of the Rotary Club of Golden Valley, and congratulating them on their 40th anniversary, proclaim that March 22, 2013 be Rotary Club of Golden Valley Day in the City of Golden Valley. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the great seal of the City of Golden Valley to be affixed this 19th day of March, 2013. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor V b Y� Y j '��I��$�g. . ��i,�. �/ � City Administration/Council 763-593-80Q3/763-593-81 Q9(fax) _ �� ?t�� --.� ��r�,��i��.��,_,s :� �� Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3. R. Board/Commission Appointments Prepared By Shep Harris, Mayor Summary Each year the City Council conducts interviews with persons who have applied to serve on a board and/or commission. After the interviews are conducted the Council makes their appointments. Recommended Action Motion to make the following appointments: Board of Zoning Appeals Larry Fonnest 1 year term term expires- May 1, 2014 Civil Service Commission Roxanne Sienko 1 year term term expires - May 1, 2014 Environmental Commission Kyle Turner 2 year term term expires- May 1, 2015 Human Services Fund Amy Clements 1 year term term expires- May 1, 2014 Open Space and Recreation Commission Gillian Rosenquist 3 year term term expires - May 1, 2016 Planning Commission Rich Baker 3 year term term expires- May 1, 2016 Jason Boudreau-Landis 1 year term term expires - May 1, 2014 BottineauTransitway � �. DRAFf ETMRONNENfAL IMPACf SfATEMO�(T Bottineau Transitway Update, March 6, 2013 -Theodore Wirth Park (TWP) Forum The Theodore Wirth Park Forum, a multi-day collaborative visioning process organized by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB)and Hennepin County (HC), was completed on March 2, 2013. A multi-discipline consulting design team gathered and utilized stakeholder input to explore possible connections between Theodore Wirth Regional Park and the proposed D1 Alignment of the Bottineau Transitway concept. There were over 50 attendees, and a wide range of input and ideas were generated. Many of the ideas take the form of concept drawings and renderings and involve ' the two Bottineau Transitway Station options in the area of Theodore Wirth Park (Plymouth Avenue and Golden Valley Road) as well as areas along the alignment segments between these stations adjacent to Theodore Wirth Park. The next step will be to document the input received and the range of ideas generated by the forum. This document will be shared with Bottineau Corridor partners through the ARCC and the content may inform a range of future activities including Bottineau Transitway design development activities, station area planning activities and other initiatives in the area. The input and ideas obtained during the forum will also be a valuable resource to inform MPRB comments on the Bottineau Transitway Draft EIS. � � -Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) � An administrative review version of the Draft EIS document is under Federal Transit Administration (FTA) review. We are working closely with FTA staff to ensure compliance with federal cooperating agency requirements, with the intent of advancing the document for technical review. The schedule for release of the Draft EIS for public review is to be determined;we are working toward release of the document by the end of 2013. -Land Use Planning .�, �' As an extension of the ongoing station area pre-planning work, an existing conditions analysis along with areas of change and stability analysis for the stations in the B and D1 Alignments is being facilitated by Hennepin County—in close collaboration with Bottineau Corridor Cities—through a consultant services contract with Stantec. These types of analyses have previously been completed �' for the stations along Segment C and for the Van White Boulevard station. Both the Plymouth Avenue and Golden Valley Road station options will be included in the upcoming work. Hennepin County Board action on this contract is expected on April 9. The station area pre-planning work will provide an important foundation for subsequent station area planning efforts. r As station area pre-planning work is completed, Hennepin County will then pursue procurement of � consultant services for station area planning along the Bottineau Transitway. It is currently www.b ott i n e a ut ra n s i twa y.o rg ��.. .. , BottineauTransi�way DRAFf ENVIRONNENTAL IMPACf STATEMENf t envisioned that the station area planning will be packaged in logical station groups for efficiencies in work effort and to meet process needs. The ARCC can expect updates as the station area planning approach evolves. Each City along the transitway will be engaged in the formulation of station area planning work plans and procurement activities. -Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Adoption into Regional Policy Plan As a reminder,the Metropolitan Council is seeking public comment on a proposed amendment to � the region's long-range transportation plan.The amendment would include light rail transit (LRT)for the Bottineau Transitway in Hennepin County and additional Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors throughout the metro area. Public comment will be accepted through March 21, 2013. � Upcoming meetings include: Thursday,March 7,2013—Public Meeting � 5-7 p.m. Robbinsdale City Hall, Council Chambers 4100 Lakeview Ave. N Robbinsdale � Monday, March 11,2013—Public Hearing � 5:00 p.m. �,-, ;: �� Metro Transit Heywood Office Building, Chambers �a��: �� ' S60 Sixth Ave. N � Minneapolis � � -Next Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting � � Thursday, March 7,2013 1:30 p.m.—3:00 p.m. Brooklyn Park City Hall 5200 85th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN -Upcoming Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Meetings Thursday,April 11,2013 �� 7:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m. �f North Hennepin Community College x� Educational Services Building Room 1 (ES-1) 741185th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN 55445 � Thursday, May 23,2013 � 7:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m. � � Crystal City Hall Community Room � Crystal City Hall, 4141 Douglas Drive N, Crystal, MN 55422 � � � www.bottineautransitway.org � i 4