The URL can be used to link to this page

08-05-15 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber August 5, 2015 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 B. Pledge of Allegiance 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 1. Council/Manager Meeting - July 14, 2015 3-4 2. City Council Meeting - July 21, 2015 5-11 B. Approval of City Check Register 12 C. Licenses: 1. Approve Temporary Liquor License for Golden Valley Festival 13-14 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - PRISM 15-17 3. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Children's 18-20 Health Care Foundation D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission - June 22, 2015 21-33 2. Human Rights Commission - June 23, 2015 34-37 3. Board of Zoning Appeals - June 23, 2015 38-43 4. Joint Water Commission - May 6, 2015 44-45 5. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - June 18, 2015 46-54 E. Bids and Quotes: 1. Award Medley Park Roof Replacement Project 55-56 F. Approve Agreement with SEH for 1-394 Corridor Inflow and Infiltration Engineering 57-64 Report G. Approve Amendment for Agreement with Barr Engineering Co. for Liberty Crossing 65-72 Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design H. Second Consideration - Ordinance #570 - Amending Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages 73-77 Licensing and Regulations 1. Second Consideration - Ordinance #571 - Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for 78-79 New Liquor License Fees J. Second Consideration - Ordinance #572 - Eliminating Section 6.41 Food 80-81 Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations 3. CONSENT - continued K. Email from Payton Perkins Regarding Human Rights Commission Resignation 82 L. Authorize Shared Services Agreement with City of St. Louis Park 83-97 M. Approve Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park 98-99 N. Acceptance of Donation for Memorial Bench 15-65 100-101 O. Approve City Manager Employment Agreement 102-108 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. First Consideration - Ordinance #573 - Amending City Code Section 6.43 Peddlers and Solicitors License 109-119 B. First Consideration - Ordinance #574 - Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for 120-121 Peddler/Solicitor License C. Announcements of Meetings D. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT Council/Manager Meeting Minutes July 14, 2015 Present: Mayor Harris and Council Members Clausen, Fonnest, Schmidgall and Snope, City Manager Tom Burt, Assistant City Manager Chantell Knauss, Physical Development Director Marc Nevinski, Finance Director Sue Virnig, Director of Parks & Recreation Rick Birno, Police Chief Stacy Carlson, Fire Chief John Crelly, Administrative Assistant Judy Nally. The meeting began at 6:42 pm in the Council Conference Room. 2016-2018 Strategic Plan Summary Report City Manager Tom Burt presented the report for review and discussion which includes priorities and action steps for each task. In the coming year this document will be used to evaluate how effective the Council and Staff are in reaching the goals outlined. Staff was requested to update the dates outlined in the report before approval at the July 21, 2015, City Council meeting. The Council consensus was to continue the Council informal quarterly dinners, stating that Council Members are to refrain from discussing any items that will be on future meeting agendas. The City Manager will decide if he wants to participate in the dinners and requested staff to list the dates and times of the dinners on the City's website. The Council supported the document and one member was troubled by some of the criticism directed toward the Council. Proposed City Code Amendment - Chapter 6.43: Peddlers and Solicitors Assistant City Manager Chantell Knauss reviewed the proposed amendments. Some of the changes include: 30 calendar-day permit, permit issued per individual, not per business or organization, applicants will have a criminal history query conducted, exempts nonprofits from requiring a license, solicitation hours will be 9 am to 7 pm, posting and enforcement of "No Soliciting" signs, and the City Manager's designee will be the Police Department. The Council had questions about solicitor's wearing identification badges and City issuance of badges, license costs, City staffing, and "No Soliciting" sign language, The Council consensus was to bring the amendment to the August 5, 2015, City Council meeting for first consideration. Staff will have the City Attorney review the amendment. Staff was also requested to change the language on the signs to be posted from "Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited" to "No Soliciting" and remove the requirement for point type and specific size of the signs. Attendance at Board/Commission Meetings The Council discussed the provision in the current Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils regarding attendance at Board/Commission meetings, orientations, distribution to Commission members of by-laws, and the open meeting law video. Council/Manager Meeting Minutes July 14, 2015 — Page 2 The Council consensus was to change the attendance rule to three "unexcused" absences. Board/Commission members are requested to contact the staff liaison and/or Chair to explain the reason for the absence. Staff was also requested to provide training/orientation for the Board/Commission Chairs on a yearly basis or every other year depending on if there are new Chairs. Biennial 2016-2017 Proposed General Fund Budget The Council asked questions about the proposed 2016-2017 budget for Building Operations, Planning Division, Inspections Division, Police Division, Fire Division, Physical Development Administrative Division, Engineering, Streets Division, Park Maintenance Division, Park & Recreation Administrative Division, Recreation Division, and Community Center Division. The Council by consensus directed staff to include $40,000 for a Harold Avenue Study from Glenwood Avenue to Winnetka Avenue, north of Harold Avenue and south of Highway 55. Council Security City Manager Tom Burt reviewed the security. Staff was directed, on an annual basis, to conduct safety training for the Council. Upcoming Meetings Brookview Community Center Replacement Open House - July 15, 2015 - 6-7:30 pm Brookview Community Center Replacement Open House - July 20, 2015 - 6-7:30 pm City Council Meeting - July 21 , 2015 - 6:30 pm City Manager Finalist Open House - July 22, 2015 - 6:30 pm City Manager Finalist Interviews - July 23, 2015 - 1-7 pm The meeting adjourned at 9:42 pm. Judy Nally Administrative Assistant it raf UNOFFICIAL MINUTES 010 ( �� CITY COUNCIL MEETING r �l GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA July 21, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 1A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Harris, Council Members Clausen, Fonnest, and Schmidgall. Also present were: City Manager Burt, Acting City Attorney Garry and City Clerk Luedke. Absent: Council Member Snope 1 B. Pledge of Allegiance 1C. Recognition of Service - City Manager Tom Burt - Northwest Community Television Board of Directors Mr. Mike Johnson, Executive Director & General Manager of the Northwest Community Television & Northwest Cable Communications Commission, presented a plaque to City Manager Burt for his service on the commission. 1 D. 2015 Photo Contest Awards Mayor Harris announced the 2015 winners for the annual Views of the Valley photo contest. He presented certificates of recognition and cash prizes to those in attendance. 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the agenda of July 21 , 2015, as revised: moving item 3J-Adopt second consideration amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule to follow item 413-Amending Temporary Uses regarding Mobile Food Vendors and the motion carried. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the consent agenda of July 21, 2015, as revised: removal of 3K- Approval of Plat - Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 and the motion carried. 3A1. Approve Minutes of the Special Council/Manager Meeting of July 7, 2015 3A2. Approve Minutes of the City Council Meeting of July 7, 2015 3131. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3132. Approve Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3C1. Receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for Cancer Legal Line. 3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows: 1. Human Services Fund - June 8, 2015 2. Joint Water Commission - April 2, 2015 3. Tri-City Council Meeting - May 26, 2015 4. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - May 21, 2015 Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- July 21, 2015 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA - continued 3E. Approve requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. 3F. Authorize agreement with WSB, Inc. for Professional Services to provide a Storm Water Pond Management Program and Wetland Assessments in the City in the amount not to exceed $56,340. 3G. Adopt Second Consideration, Ordinance #563, amending the City Code regarding the Golden Valley Property Maintenance Code and Approve Summary of Ordinance #563 for publication. 3H. Adopt second consideration, Ordinance #564, amending to Chapter 6 regarding Licensing of Rental Housing and Approve Summary of Ordinance #564 for publication. 31. Adopt second consideration, Ordinance #565, amending the City Code regarding Administrative Citations and Approve Summary of Ordinance #565 for publication. 3J-. Adopt seGORd GORsideration, GFdiinanGe #566, ameRdiRg the 2015 Ma6teF Fee 3 , for AppFeval ef Plat SweeRey Lake Weeds PUD No. 120 AgFeemeRt fOF Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120. 3L. Approve the Professional Services Contract with Environmental Process Inc. 3M. Receive and file the Liberty Crossing Redevelopment update. 3N. Receive and file the Cornerstone Creek Redevelopment update. 30. Adopt Resolution 15-64, withdrawing from the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council. 3P. Receive and file the June 2015 Financial Reports. 3Q. Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Intervention Services Agreement with Sojourner Project, Inc. for Domestic Assault Intervention Services. 3R. Adopt the 2016-2018 Strategic Plan Summary Report dated May 2015. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3.1. Adopt second consideration, Ordinance 566 - Amendment the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Mobile Food Vending, Administrative Citations, and International Property Maintenance Code Finance Director Virnig presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to amend the ordinance by deleting the mobile food vending fees section and the motion carried. MOTION: made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt second consideration, Ordinance #566, amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Mobile Food Vending, Administrative Citations, and International Property Maintenance Code with the deletion of the mobile food vending section upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Clausen, Harris, Schmidgall and Fonnest; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- July 21, 2015 3K. Approval of Plat - Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 and Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the PUD Permit and Development Agreement for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120. MOTION: made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt Resolution 15-63, Approval of Plat for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Fonnest, and Schmidgall; and the following voted against: Clausen, and the motion carried. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the PUD Permit and Development Agreement for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 and the motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4A. Continued Public Hearing - Amending Chapter 11: Land Use Regulation regarding Cocktail Rooms, Distilleries and Micro-Distilleries Associate Planner Goellner presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. The public hearing was opened at the July 7, 2015, City Council meeting. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the Land Use Regulations for Cocktail Rooms, Distilleries and Micro-Distilleries. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt Ordinance #567, amending Chapter 11: Land Use Regulation (Zoning) regarding Cocktails Rooms, Distilleries and Micro-Distilleries upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Fonnest, Schmidgall and Clausen; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 4B. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance #562 - Amending Section 11.04 Temporary Uses regarding Mobile Food Vendors Associate Planner Goellner presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. City Manager Burt and Finance Director Virnig answered questions from Council. The public hearing was opened at the July 7, 2015 City Council meeting. Mr. Phillip Bauch, Owner of a hot dog cart operating in the City of Golden Valley, had a question on the proposed fee schedule. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding amending the City Code to include a Temporary Use for Mobile Food Vendors. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Ordinance #562, amending Section 11.04 Temporary Uses regarding Mobile Food Vendors upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Fonnest, Schmidgall and Clausen; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- July 21, 2015 4C. Public Hearing - Final PUD Plan for Golden Villas PUD No. 118 - 9130 and 9220 Olson Memorial Highway - Golden Villas, LLC, Applicant Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. City Manager Burt answered questions from Council. Mr. Bill Stoddard, Golden Villas LLC, Applicant, updated Council on the tentative timeline and project highlights and answered questions from Council. Mr. Darrell Brinkman, ESG Architects, and Ms. Traci Tomas, Golden Villas LLC, Applicant, answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the Final PUD Plan for the Golden Villas project located at 9130 and 9200 Olson Memorial Highway. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt Ordinance #568, Approval of Final PUD Plan, Golden Villas PUD No. 118, Golden Villas, LLC, Applicant, upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Clausen Schmidgall and Fonnest; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 4D. Public Hearing - Final PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing PUD No. 123 - 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2430 and 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, 2485 Rhode Island Avenue North - Intuitive Investments, Applicant Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Physical Development Director Nevinski answered questions from Council. Mr. Todd Schachtman, Applicant, thanked city staff, his team members and the engineering firm for the final project and answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the Final PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing located at the southeast quadrant of Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue North intersection. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Ordinance #569, Approval of Final PUD Plan, Liberty Crossing PUD No. 123, Intuitive Investments, Applicant, upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Schmidgall, Fonnest and Clausen; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6A. METRO Blue Line Extension Update Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Unofficial City Council Minutes -5- July 21, 2015 6A. METRO Blue Line Extension Update - continued Ms. Alicia Vap, Planning & Agreements Manager, METRO Transit Blue Line Extension Office, gave an update on the Golden Valley Road Station Park and Ride Concept Plan and answered questions from Council. There was Council discussion regarding the Station Area Planning Final Report and the parking requirements needed for the proposed station. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to receive and file METRO Blue Line Extension Update and the motion carried. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Clausen to receive and file METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Phase 1: Station Area Planning Final Report and the motion carried. 6B. First Consideration - Eliminating Section 6.41 Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations City Manager Burt presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt first consideration, Ordinance #572, eliminating Section 6.41 regarding Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Clausen, Schmidgall and Fonnest and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 6C. First Consideration - Amending City Code regarding Alcoholic Beverages Licensing of On-Sale Cocktail Room and Off-Sale Distilled Spirits License City Clerk Luedke presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt first consideration, Ordinance #570, amending Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages Licensing regarding the addition of On-Sale Cocktail Room, Off-Sale Distilled Spirits and amending Sunday Sales upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Schmidgall, Fonnest and Clausen; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 6D. First Consideration - Amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for addition of On-Sale Cocktail Room and Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Liquor License Fees City Clerk Luedke presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt first consideration, Ordinance #571, amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for On-Sale Cocktail Room and Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Liquor License Fees upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Schmidgall, Clausen and Fonnest; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. Unofficial City Council Minutes -6- July 21, 2015 6E. Announcement of Meetings The City Manager Finalist Open House will be held on July 22, 2015, from 6:30 to 8 pm in the Council Conference Room. The Golden Valley Business Council meeting will be held on July 23, 2015, from 8 to 9:30 am at Second Harvest Heartland. The City Manager Finalist Interviews will be held on July 23, 2015, from 1 to 7 pm in the Council Conference Room. The Living in the Valley Event "Taste and Tour" will be held on July 23, 2015, from 5 to 9 pm at various Golden Valley businesses. The Penny Carnival will be held on July 24, 2015, from 10:30 to 12:30 pm at Brookview Park. Some Council Members may attend the Market in the Valley Farmer's Market on July 26 and August 2, 2015, from 9 am to 1 pm in the City Hall Campus Parking Lot. The Concert in the Park: Minnesota State Band will be held on July 27, 2015, at 7 pm in Brookview Park. The Picnic and Music in the Park will be held on July 29, 2015, from 11:15 am to 12:45 pm at Brookview Park. The Movie on the Green will be held on July 31, 2015, at 8:45 pm at the Brookview Lawn Bowling Green. Open for Business will have office hours at the City of Golden Valley on July 31, 2015, from 9 to 11 am in the Council Conference Room. The Concert in the Park: Wendy's Wiggle, Jiggle and Jam will be held on August 3, 2015, at 7 pm at Brookview Park. The Minnesota Night to Unite Celebrations will be held on August 4, 2015, at various times and locations. The next Council Meeting will be Wednesday, August 5, 2015. The METRO Blue Line Extension Public Open House will be held on August 12, 2015, from 5 to 7:30 pm at the Golden Valley City Hall. 6F. Mayor and Council Communication Mayor Harris thanked city staff members for their assistance during the weekend storms. 6F1. Traffic Impact on Highway 55 There was Council discussion regarding the traffic impact on Highway 55 and a letter drafted by staff on behalf of the Mayor to be sent to MnDOT. City Manager Burt gave an update on current traffic issues in the City and answered questions. Unofficial City Council Minutes -7- July 21, 2015 7. ADJOURMENT MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen and the motion carried to adjourn the meeting at 9:33 pm. Shepard Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk cit 0 Ify go I d e nv-.,�, MEMORANDUM so vaney Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 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. cit 0� �v MEMORANDUM ,. goldent valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Golden Valley Community Foundation for the Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary The Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival continues to grow in its success. This year, the Festival will be held on Saturday, September 26, 2015, from 9:30 am (parade start) to 10 pm. The Festival will be held "under the water tower" City Hall campus location. The sale of beer and wine will be from noon until 9:30 pm in a fenced area and monitored by Golden Valley Community Foundation volunteers who will check ID's and tag with a wrist band those who are identified as of legal drinking age. The City Code does provide for temporary sales of liquor with Council approval. Also, required is a certificate of liquor liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured in the amount of $1,000,000. The Foundation is in the process of obtaining the required insurance certificate. Attachment • Festival Site Plan (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve a temporary liquor license for the Golden Valley Community Foundation for the Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival contingent upon receipt of liquor liability insurance certificate for Saturday, September 26, 2015. d n. r +' V' r� A. W y T _o r� tll d � o. dL > ad ° ❑ Handicap pp cores.Gr L o❑ Area C22) not Ent' ° (Portable signs by City) ❑ Slgn/Bo,v�er/Bolloons y °❑ a O oto 0 H� . sand w Bugs ay ❑� ❑� sB a o�o ❑ oo Barr s s Z ° _ a d a d ° Art Fair g z d< �agtns ------ , o a f d 111 d' n Q a n➢1 g a sone a4 L4 B.gs ❑ E S O<� nuov« Drive Thru> 4a c VQJ a Cor Shor,Trnt Sod SB Conn.Org.L _ Muslc Gener. Bops O Art DropoiF ❑ ,V eer Tants(2) tape � O o O �` 'V a Omm. err Husk 0 ° Senting g-B Od,,\ o Ba o' ;I \ o 0 °x9970 131.'1 \ O v r ❑O O91 r 0 Bdl en Aran ❑soend Q " w O°' i�e c %b o Tables vd one SIa � � / ° ° GVCEF Velcona i'ooth'`: VNst.Sec. ® 0. --------- 16 plcnlc tables WY City) 12 trosh cons(Clty) y 70 chutes(GVCEF) Z -----_______®_� MIN Kettle KC MD Donut Q ? FT Trucks Corn ® '_�_� -' ® sA l ; ?e Q r f`11�$�ga1pA��6a Sketch Artist ® ChQdrtn's 10-6 Q FT FT FT GGnm1L j Y o-6 W FT _______ Z Valk BT 3 Trosh Bu a Tramp. l um B Ger❑ ® `e P e cutlets VQO re µ� Bathrooms (4) Q Q^ C us ° (w/ 1 hpndlcap) 60CK3 a a' i� `\ Qo Paty � k^0 Vrhkle ,, `rO e VG�AO� Bolloon Arch Welcome Sign (3'x15') O Saturday 9/26/15 GV ART/MUSIC FESTIVAL vi°o Cc L Barr• 1a=70' Rev. 6/22/15 Go�DEN Prepared byl Peter Knaeble 612-309-9215 city of 1d e-valley �� go 1 City Administration Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) ILA, Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - PRISM 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 PRISM. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 5/15 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Page I of 2 An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit Application Fee (non-(refundable) organization that: Applications are processed in the order received. If the application conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and is postmarked or received 30 days or more before the event, the • awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. application fee is$100; otherwise the fee is $150. If total raffle prize value for the calendar year will be Due to the high volume of exempt applications, payment of $1,500 or less, contact the Licensing Specialist assigned to additional fees prior to 30 days before your event will not expedite your county by calling 651-539-1900. service, nor are telephone requests for expedited service accepted. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization P7 i'reylous Gambling Name: --unit Number: Minnesota Tax ID. Federal Employer ID Norn er, if any: Number(FEIN), if any: `X// Mailingi Address: bc'i c 4,Gt Ave- City: I G1 ,et' y Vk � _State: Zip: 4 Lb County: Name of Chief Executive Officer(CEO): Daytime Phone: `7 (� �o?G� Email NONPROFIT STATUS Type of Nonprofit Organization check one): Fraternal u Religious Veterans Other Nonprofit Organization Attach a copy of one of the following showing proof of nonprofit status: (DO NOT attach a sales tax exempt status or federal employer ID number, as they are not proof of nonprofit status.) 0 A current calendar year Certificate of Good Standing Don't have a copy? Obtain this certificate from: MN Secretary of State, Business Services Division Secretary of State website, phone numbers: 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100 www.sos.state.mn.us St. Paul, MN 55103 651-296-2803, or toll free 1-877-551-6767 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 toll free at 1-877-829-5500. IRS-Affiliate of national,statewide,or International parent nonprofit organization (charter) If your organization falls under a parent organization, attach copies of i2=of the following: 1. IRS letter showing your parent organization Is a nonprofit 501(c) organization with a group ruling, and 2. 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): F)1 r)o K�j '�e LJ Address (do not use P.O. box): 2-��© t r->L V,r �°`C1i►/�t City or Tow ship: I �1�1 VCA t�� Zip: �t c� County: ti��V, �: y R Date(s) of activity (for raffles, be/v ;`� "- Indicate the date of the drawing): �� l r)C/il ;tLA Check each type of gambling activity that your organization will conduct: Bingo* =Paddlewheels* Pull-Tabs* =Tipboards* Raffle (total value of raffle prizes awarded for the calendar year: $ S7✓(�e D C3 1 * 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.mn.gov/gcb and click on D/stNbutors under LIST OF LICENSEES,or call 651-539-1900. LG22O A lication for Exem t Permit skis PP P Page 2 of 2 LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT (required before submitting application to the Minnesota Gambling Control Board) 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 acknowledged 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 (60 days for a 1st class city). 30 days. The application is d nied, V / The application is denied. Print City Name: 6o e/1 �`�� Print County Name: Signatu o ity P97onnel• 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 The city or county must sign before limits. (A township has no statutory authority to approve or submitting application to the deny an application, per Minn. Statutes, section 349.213.) Gambling Control Board. Print Township Name: Signature of Township Officer: Title: Date: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE (required) The information provided in this lication is complete nd accurate to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that the financial report will be completed and retu n to the Board wit in 30 days of the event date. Chief Executive Officer's Signature Date: 4' 1 ` ignature must be CEO ignature; designee may not sign) Print Name: AKS5 REQUIREMENTS MAIL APPLICATION AND ATTACHMENTS Complete a separate application for: Mail application with: • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days, or a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and • all gambling conducted on one day. Only one application is required If one or more raffle drawings are application fee(non-refundable). If the application conducted on the same day. postmarked or received 30 days or more before the event, the application fee is$100; otherwise the fee is $150. Financial report to be completed within 30 days after the Make check payable to State of Minnesota. gambling activity is done: To: Gambling Control Board A financial report form will be mailed with your permit. Complete 1711 West County Road B,Suite 300 South and return the financial report form to the Gambling Control Roseville, MN 55113 Board. Questions? Your organization must keep all exempt records and reports for Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at 3-1/2 years (Minn. Statutes,section 349.166,subd. 2(f)). 651-539-1900. Data privacy notice: The Information requested application. Your organization's name and ment of Public Safety;Attorney General; on this form(and any attachments)will be used address will be public Information when received Commissioners of Administration,Minnesota by the Gambling Control Board(Board)to by the Board. All other information provided will Management&Budget,and Revenue; Legislative determine your organization's qualifications to be private data about your organization until the Auditor,national and international gambling be Involved in lawful gambling activities in Board Issues the permit. When the Board Issues regulatory agencies;anyone pursuant to court Minnesota. Your organization has the right to the permit,all Information provided will become order;other individuals and agencies specifically refuse to supply the Information; however, if public. If the Board does not Issue a permit,all authorized by state or federal law to have access your organization refuses to supply this information provided remains private,with the to the Information; Individuals and agencies for Information,the Board may not be able to exception of your organization's name and which law or legal order authorizes a new use or determine your organization's qualifications and, address which will remain public. Private data sharing of Information after this notice was as a consequence,may refuse to Issue a permit. about your organization are available to Board given;and anyone with your written consent. If your organization supplies the information members, Board staff whose work requires requested,the Board will be able to process the access to the information; Minnesota's Depart- This form will be made available in alternative format(i.e. large print, braille) upon request. city of 90 1 d e' n MEMORANDUM valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3991 /763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. C. 3. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Children's Health Care Foundation 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 Children's Health Care Foundation. MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING 5/15 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Page 1 of 2 An exempt permit may be issued to a nonprofit Application Fee (non-refundable) organization that: Applications are processed in the order received. If the application conducts lawful gambling on five or fewer days, and is postmarked or received 30 days or more before the event,the awards less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar application fee is$100; otherwise the fee is $150. year. If total raffle prize value for the calendar year will be Due to the high volume of exempt applications, payment of $1,500 or less, contact the Licensing Specialist assigned to additional fees prior to 30 days before your event will not expedite your county by calling 651-539-1900. service, nor are telephone requests for expedited service accepted. ORGANIZATION INFORMATION Organization Children's Health Care Foundation Previous Gambling X-05254 Name: Permit Number: Minnesota Tax ID 6069890Federal Employer ID 41-1814223 Number, if any: Number(FEIN), if any: Mailing Address: 2525 Chicago Ave S City: Minneapolis State: MN Zip: 55404 County: Hennepin Name of Chief Executive Officer(CEO): Theresa Pesch Daytime Phone: 612-813-6440 Email: theresa.pesch@childrensmn.org NONPROFIT STATUS Type of Nonprofit Organization (check one): = Fraternal = Religious Veterans = Other Nonprofit Organization Attach a copy of one of the following showing proof of nonprofit status: (DO NOT attach a sales tax exempt status or federal employer ID number, as they are not proof of nonprofit status.) A current calendar year Certificate of Good Standing Don't have a copy? Obtain this certificate from: MN Secretary of State, Business Services Division Secretary of State website, phone numbers: 60 Empire Drive, Suite 100 www.sos.state.mn.us St. Paul, MN 55103 651-296-2803, or toll free 1-877-551-6767 = 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 toll free at 1-877-829-5500. 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 following: 1. IRS letter showing your parent organization is a nonprofit 501(c)organization with a group ruling, and 2. 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 The Metropolitan Ballroom (for raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place): Address (do not use P.O. box): 5418 Wayzata Blvd Cityor Golden Valley County: MN 55416 Township: Zip: Date(s) of activity (for raffles, Saturday, September 12, 2015 indicate the date of the drawing): Check each type of gambling activity that your organization will conduct: Bingo* =Paddlewheels* Pull-Tabs* =Tipboards* =Raffle (total value of raffle prizes awarded for the calendar year: $ 1,000-4,000 ) * 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.mn.gov/gcb and click on Distributors under LIST OF LICENSEES,or call 651-539-1900. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Pne25of2 LOCAL UN 'i tlFOi/ERNMENfi AGICNOWLEbGMENT �requtlre+d before eu(imittlmg applicafion to e MlhneSote Gmbhng Control Boa4rd) 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 acknowledged 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 (60 days for a 1st class city). 30 days. The application is denied. p —The application is denied. Print City Name: I /e *11L,,yl Print County Name: Signature ofy on Signature of County Personnel: A 9A I Liz Title: Date: ,/4 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 The city or county must sign before limits. (A township has no statutory authority to approve or submitting application to the deny an application, per Minn.Statutes,section 349.213.) Gambling Control Board. Print Township Name: Signature of Township Officer: Title: Date: CHZE EXECUTIVE OFER'S'°,SIuiretl) The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the est of my nowledge. I cknowledge that the financial report will be completed and returned to th oa w'thin 30 da of the a ent date. Chief Executive Officer's Signature: Date: �• ' f�� ll (Signa a mus a 0's irignature;d sino sign) Print Name: . REQUIREMENTS ;� ; MA1f1.,AhPLICAT�bN AiVD ATTACHMENTS ": Complete a separate application for: Mail application with: • all gambling conducted on two or more consecutive days,or _a copy of your proof of nonprofit status,and • all gambling conducted on one day. _,application fee(non-refundable). If the application is Only one application is required if one or more raffle drawings are postmarked or received 30 days or more before the event, conducted on the same day. the application fee is$100; otherwise the fee is$150. Financial report to be completed within 30 days after the Make check payable to State of Minnesota. gambling activity is done: To: Gambling Control Board A financial report form will be mailed with your permit.Complete 1711 West County Road B,Suite 300 South and return the financial report form to the Gambling Control Roseville,MN 55113 Board. Questions? Your organization must keep all exempt records and reports for Call the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at 3-1/2 years(Minn. Statutes,section 349.166,subd.2(f)). 651-539-1900. Data privacy notice: The Information requested application. Your organization's name and ment of Public Safety;Attorney General; on this form(and any attachments)will be used address will be public Information when received Commissioners of Administration,Minnesota by the Gambling Control Board(Board)to by the Board. All other Information provided will Management&Budget,and Revenue;Legislative determine your organization's qualifications to be private data about your organization until the Auditor,national and international gambling be Involved In lawful gambling activities in Board issues the permit. When the Board issues regulatory agencies;anyone pursuant to court Minnesota. Your organization has the right to the permit,all information provided will become order;other Individuals and agencies specifically refuse to supply the information;however,if public. If the Board does not Issue a permit,all authorized by state or federal law to have access your organization refuses to supply this information provided remains private,with the to the information;individuals and agencies for information,the Board may not be able to exception of your organization's name and which law or legal order authorizes a new use or determine your organization's qualifications and, address which will remain public. Private data sharing of Information after this notice was as a consequence,may refuse to Issue a permit. about your organization are available to Board given;and anyone with your written consent. If your organization supplies the information members,Board staff whose work requires requested,the Board will be able to process the access to the Information;Minnesota's Depart- This form will be made available In alternative format(i.e. large print, braille)upon request. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 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, June 22, 2015. Vice Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Cera, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present was Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, City Engineer Jeff Oliver, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes June 8, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Johnson referred to the ninth paragraph on page three and clarified that a privacy notice might be required on a mobile food vendor license application if credit card information is requested. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to approve the June 8, 2015, minutes with the above noted clarification. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Final Plan Review— Planned Unit Development (PUD #123) — Liberty Crossing — Southeast Quadrant of Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue North Intersection Applicant: Intuitive Investments Addresses: 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2430 and 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2485 Rhode Island Avenue North Purpose: To allow a 184 unit apartment building and 63 townhome units. Goellner referred to a location map and discussed the applicant's Final PUD proposal to construct a 184 unit apartment building and 63 townhome units on four parcels of land in the southeast quadrant of the Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue intersection. Goellner stated that the properties were re-designated on the Comprehensive Plan General Land Use Plan Map to High Density Residential in December of 2014, and were re-zoned to High Density Residential in May of 2015. Goellner referred to renderings of the proposed buildings and explained that most of the townhome units will be two-stories in height and will be landscaped to create a front yard neighborhood feel. The apartment building will be five stories tall with one level of underground parking and will include a pool, a dog run, and a clubhouse. She discussed the proposed landscaping and screening that will provide privacy for tenants and will help the apartment building fit into the neighborhood. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 2 Goellner referred to the parking requirements and explained that the apartment building requires 276 parking spaces, the applicant is proposing 288 spaces (232 underground, 56 surface). The townhomes require 126 spaces, and the applicant is proposing 138 spaces. The applicant is also proposing an additional 39 parking spaces along the internal drives and will need to provide 14 spaces for bicycles. Goellner referred to a site plan and discussed the existing and proposed access points. She also discussed the proposed trails and sidewalks on the perimeter and interior of the site and said the pedestrian circulation will be strong in both the north-south and east- west connections. Goellner discussed the history of flooding in the area and stated that the applicant has been working with the City regarding stormwater management strategies including: removing a portion of Rhode Island Avenue and installing a dry pond on the northeast corner of the site, installing a large underground stormwater storage system on the current VFW site, and installing an infiltration basin on the north side of the apartment building. She added that creative management on this site can help the overall flood conditions on Medicine Lake Road and throughout the DeCola Ponds system. She stated that staff is recommending approval of this Final PUD proposal. Segelbaum discussed the differences between the Preliminary PUD plan and the Final PUD plan including the different access points and driveways in and out of the development, a quality assessment regarding materials, and the flood mitigation strategies, and the enhanced sidewalk plan. Goellner referred to a drawing of the access points and explained that the number of access point has been reduced since the Preliminary PUD plan review and that the access from Medicine Lake Road will be a right in only turn. She added that the sidewalk plan has been enhanced and a trail along Rhode Island Avenue has been added to the Final Plan. Waldhauser asked if there is a continuous bike trail from Rhode Island Avenue to Medicine Lake Road, or if ends where the swale will be on the north. Kluchka said there is an existing sidewalk to the north of the proposed new trail. Oliver clarified there will be a trail where Rhode Island Avenue is being removed that will connect the existing sidewalk on the east side of Rhode Island to the trail system further to the south into Pennsylvania Woods. Cera asked for clarification on the location of the proposed dry pond. Oliver explained that a portion of Rhode Island Avenue will remain to gain access to Dover Hills. A portion of the right-of-way will be used to provide a dry pond in the short term as investigation of additional flood storage continues. He stated that water will flow from Medicine Lake Road into the underground flood storage and the swale, and will eventually discharge into the expanded storage in the DeCola ponds/Pennsylvania Woods area. Baker asked if there is a difference between the terms "swale" and "dry pond." Oliver said they are essentially the same, however, in the short term it is more accurately serving as a dry pond than a conveyance swale which is what it will be in the long term. Baker referred to the photo shown of an underground storage tank and noted that it had standing water in it. He said it is his understanding that there would not be standing water Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 3 in the proposed underground storage. Oliver said he didn't know the context of the photo shown, but the design for this proposal will have a sloped floor so water will eventually flow out. Blum asked about the security of the underground storage tanks. Oliver said they will be locked and not accessible except for maintenance. Kluchka said his recollection from the Preliminary Plan review was that discussion of the expanded flood storage could not move forward unless the three cities involved agreed on how the financing would work. Oliver said the City knows storage needs to be provided in this area and that there is an opportunity with this development to take the first steps at resolving the overall flooding issue in this watershed. He added that the finalization of the overall financing is many months away, but there is an opportunity with Tax Increment Financing to maximize the public benefit on this site with this development. Segelbaum asked if the developer is responsible for all of the costs or just their part. Oliver said the developer will be responsible for mitigation and that the conversations are ongoing. Baker referred to the access plan and said he thought the access road/alley north of the Walgreen's property wasn't usable but it is now being shown on the plans as a main access point. Kluchka asked for clarification on if that road is for emergency or primary access. Johnson asked which access will be the primary access to the underground parking. Goellner said the parking ramp will be accessed at 23rd and Rhode Island Avenue on the southeast corner of the apartment building. Johnson referred to the main entrance on Winnetka Avenue for the townhomes and asked how that will be prevented from becoming a throughway versus just an access. Goellner agreed that wouldn't be a desirable entrance for the entire development and that the underground parking access will most likely be the preferred access for people living in the apartments. She added that the applicant is also exploring various signage options. Oliver explained that that entrance was placed where it is because it is central to the site and traffic can access the entrance from both directions rather than taking all the traffic all the way through the development. Also, it is evenly spaced between 23rd Avenue and the other entrances and it is located at the top of the hill to maximize visibility for turns in and out of the site. He added that the County is exploring converting Winnetka Avenue from four lanes to three. Cera asked what would prevent people from turning left on to Medicine Lake Road. Oliver said he is confident that the access on Medicine Lake Road can be designed appropriately to help stop cut across traffic. Johnson referred to the applicant's narrative and questioned why it states in one location that they encourage affordable housing but they aren't providing any affordable units. Goellner said that staff always encourages affordable housing, but the City doesn't have the authority to require affordable housing as a part of the proposal. She added that the applicant is providing a lot of variety in the types of units and not just offering luxury units. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 4 Johnson questioned where the City can require affordable housing. Kluchka said that would be a discussion for the City's HRA. Kluchka referred to the proposed sidewalks and asked if they would be the same width as the sidewalks and trails that surround this proposal. Todd Schachtman, Applicant, said he is excited for the options, variety and overall revitalization of this area. He said he is confident this proposal will help redefine this area and help with additional infrastructure improvements. He referred to the comment about the location of the buildings being different in the Preliminary Plan and clarified that the proposed location of the buildings are the same in the Final Plan as they were in the Preliminary Plan. He referred to the access point south of the Dairy Queen property and explained that they will own it, but it is not a defined access point into Liberty Crossing. He added that they have worked diligently with the County, the City and Walgreens's regarding the access points to create a much safer environment. He reiterated that the traffic for the apartment building will use 231d Avenue to access the underground parking and that the overall access plan works best with the stormwater issues. He referred to the stormwater management issues and noted that at the Preliminary design phase they were at a net neutral, but now they are well above that and they are happy to provide as much stormwater storage space as they can. He referred to the proposed landscaping and trail plans and noted that the landscaping really defines and delineates the townhome and apartment entrances and will be a landscape-rich environment. He stated that they've always viewed the trail system and connections as a key feature for them. He added that he is also looking to add solar panels. Waldhauser referred to the comment in the staff report about not allowing fill to be brought in and asked the applicant about using fill in the southeast corner of the property. Schachtman stated that they are planning to bring fill out, but will not be bringing fill in. Segelbaum asked the applicant if they are planning on installing vehicle charging stations. Schachtman said yes and added that they will also be installing extensive bike racks. Johnson referred to the proposed right only turn on Medicine Lake Road and asked about the purpose of a right turn only. Schachtman stated that the County had alignment and safety concerns. Blum asked what other types of sustainability items are proposed. Schachtman stated that in addition to the vehicle charging stations, solar will be implemented, more and larger windows will be used, and they will be recapturing water to use for irrigation. Kluchka referred to the area between Walgreen's and Dairy Queen and asked if there is an opportunity to clean up the trees in that area. Schachtman said yes, it is a part of their development and will be maintained. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 5 Kluchka referred to the sidewalk widths within the proposed development and asked if there was a purpose in making them narrower than the sidewalks or trails leading to the development. Elisa Richardson, Tanek Architecture, explained that the trail along the east side of the development will be 10 feet wide, and the bulk of the development will have 5-foot wide sidewalks. She added that the sidewalk along Winnetka will be widened and will be moved further away from the curb. Kluchka said he wants the pedestrian experience to be consistent coming from a trail or sidewalk and not have people feel like they are coming into a private, not as welcoming development. Richardson said they could make their main sidewalks in the development wider and use different materials to welcome people through the development. Kluchka asked about signage. Richardson said there will be a sign on the southeast entrance on Winnetka Avenue and a sign a Medicine Lake Road. Segelbaum asked if the applicant would be keeping the Liberty Crossing name. Schachtman said yes. He added that the name was chosen out of admiration of the VFW and that the clubhouse will be available for them to use for their monthly meeting. He said he wants the clubhouse to be representative of the VFW and what it has meant to Golden Valley. Waldhauser asked about the rent costs. Schachtman said the rates will be representative of the choice of housing. He said the rents will be typical market rate and will most likely start between $1,000 and $1,400 and go up from there, but they will be less than some other apartments that have been built recently. Waldhauser asked about the rent for the larger units for families. Schachtman said they would be approximately $1,700 to $2,100. He added that the units will be high quality housing that will create choice for different types of people. Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Roger Kinisto, 30th and Kentucky, asked if the townhomes would be privately owned and why the development couldn't be all townhomes and no apartments. He asked if there would be any retail and if the property taxes are sufficient to pay for the number of new students so this development won't be a burden on everyone else. Victoria Hopponen, 2400 Valders Avenue North, said she is the only one left in the area who knows what the area used to look like. She said the land south of Walgreens is unstable ground, the manufacturer bulldozed the hill, and the restaurant used to be standing water. She said there were fox, skunks and deer and they won't come back. She asked how many pilings will have to be put in to stabilize the ground and how long they will have to put up with it, and what time they are allowed to start construction so that people can sleep in. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 6 Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public hearing. Kluchka asked the applicant to address the rental and ownership markets. Schachtman stated that all of the units in the proposed development will be rental. He said they are estimating 14 to 15 months of construction and that they believe this type of housing is needed and wanted. Segelbaum asked if there will be a retail component to the proposal. Schachtman said no, and added that they are pleased to have Walgreens as a neighbor. Kluchka asked about the construction schedule and the communication plans with the community. Schachtman said they hope to start demolition in September or October with 14 to 15 months of construction. He stated that their managing partner will communicate on their website, as well as having on-site communications. Kluchka suggested that a condition of approval be added stating that a communications plan with the neighborhood must be implemented. Segelbaum asked about the hours of construction. Schachtman said they will follow whatever the City requires regarding hours of construction and noise. Kluchka asked the applicant to speak about the soil quality. Schachtman said they have done extensive environmental work on the site and have found nothing atypical. Goellner added that investigation is underway regarding soil contamination. Kluchka asked if pilings will be needed. Schachtman stated that none of their findings have deterred them from being able to use common construction techniques. Tom Dillon, NAI Everest, added that in their geo-technical study the worst part of the development is under the VFW. He stated that they might be able to use geo-piles instead of pounding piles into the ground. Johnson asked the applicant why they are proposing an apartment building instead of having the entire development be townhomes. Schachtman said based on feasibility studies they've done there is a need for choice. Kluchka asked if there will be enough taxes generated to support the needs of the families living here. Goellner said the County's assessing department would determine the amount of property taxes to be paid. Cera added that the school district sets a budget based on parcels in the district so people won't see a big jump in their taxes due to this proposal. Segelbaum asked if there is a time frame in which construction has to be completed. Goellner said she didn't know, but that she would look into it. Kluchka reiterated that he would like there to be a good communication plan with the neighborhood. Segelbaum questioned if the Planning Commission has ever required a Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 7 communication plan as a condition of approval in the past. Waldhauser stated Breck was required to have a communication plan with their neighbors. Waldhauser said she thinks the changes that have been made to this proposal make sense and that this development looks like an asset to the community and she likes the mix of housing and that it is not all high end, luxurious units. She added that the progress on the stormwater mitigation is also nice to see. Blum said he is glad to see a creative water management solution. He said this development will have good access to public transportation, new jobs will be created and the population increase will support jobs in the area. Kluchka said he is enthusiastic about this development. He said he is happy to see the elevation changes because it will look like a neighborhood. He said he wants to recommend a welcoming element around the sidewalks. Segelbaum said he wants to be careful about people cutting through areas where the traffic needs to be so there needs to be a balance between the two. Kluchka asked if striping would be required internally. Oliver said that all pedestrian facilities need to meet accessibility laws. Baker said he is supportive of this the proposal. He said he likes the contributions to the water management issues. He added that he is going to hold the applicant to his commitment to use solar energy. Cera agreed and said this will be a nice addition to that corner of the City. He said he would encourage lower rents and organic recycling. Segelbaum said he thinks this development will be an asset to the community and will help with flood mitigation in the entire area. MOVED by Baker, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing PUD No. 123, subject to the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. 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 applicant worked closely with the City during a lengthy pre-application process—and has continued to refine the proposal—in order to accommodate the unique circumstances surrounding the site. The flexibility allowed under a PUD is necessary to achieve the outcome that will not only benefit the applicant, but the City as a whole. 2. 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. Given the lack of open space or other sensitive environmental features on the site today, there is little available for the applicant to preserve. However, the proposal does take advantage of the natural areas of Pennsylvania Woods and DeCola Pond B to the east and, in partnership with the City, will use a constructed swale to manage stormwater more Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 8 effectively and result in the creation of additional green space within in the Rhode Island Avenue right-of-way. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. The proposal not only provides for an increase in residential density in an underutilized area well served by transit, but the creative inclusion of regional flood storage within the development provides a benefit to the greater area. 4. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. The use of this property for higher density residential use is compatible with the neighboring property to the east and the density being proposed is consistent with the City's revised Comprehensive Plan. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. The potential for reduction in flooding along Medicine Lake Road and within the DeCola Ponds area provides great benefit to the City and its residents. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. The flexibility provided by the PUD allows for a better site layout and coordination between the two uses on the site. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Tanek, submitted May 21 and June 8, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department, dated June 15, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division, dated June 18, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 4. Public bicycle racks or similar facilities for the parking/storage of a minimum of 14 bicycles shall be provided, based on a calculation of 5% of the 276 parking spaces required for the apartment building. 5. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 6. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the Final Plat. 7. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 123" in its title. 8. A park dedication fee of$60,100, or 2% of the land value, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 9. A neighborhood communications plan regarding the construction schedule must be established prior to issuance of a building permit. 10. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 9 3. Informal Public Hearing — Final Plan Review— Planned Unit Development (PUD #118) — Golden Villas — 9130 & 9220 Olson Memorial Highway Applicant: Golden Villas, LLC Address: 9130 & 9220 Olson Memorial Highway Purpose: To allow a six-story, 172-unit apartment building with one level of underground parking. Goellner referred to a location map and discussed the applicant's Final PUD proposal to construct a 172 unit, market rate apartment building with six levels above ground and one level of underground parking at 9130 & 9220 Olson Memorial Highway. The existing bowling alley and office building on the properties will be demolished. She stated that there will be a fitness center, seven units with individual entrances, a dog wash area, a dog run area, bicycle parking, a pool, and a rooftop terrace. Goellner stated that the properties were rezoned and re-designated on the Comprehensive Plan General Land Use Plan Map to High Density Residential in 2012 as part of the Tiburon PUD proposal which was not completed. Goellner discussed the amount of impervious surface coverage on the site and stated that currently the property has approximately 80% impervious coverage and that the applicant is proposing to have approximately 76.5% impervious surface. She added that the proposed landscaping is concentrated at the front of the building and along the perimeter of the site and that a sidewalk is planned along Golden Valley Road. Segelbaum noted the changes between the Preliminary Plan review and this Final Plan review including: improved fire access, new elevations, and the implementation of a TIF District. He referred to the amount of impervious surface and asked if that amount has changed. Waldhauser said she thought it is now slightly higher because of the new fire access road. Goellner stated that another change is that the applicant is now providing an adequate amount parking and they moved the location of the entrance lobby. Kluchka asked about the timing of the future sidewalk. Goellner said she did not know, but she would find out. Kluchka asked if the TIF District is approved. Goellner said yes. Baker referred to the swimming pool facing Highway 55 and said there shouldn't be sight lines from the swimming pool to Highway 55. He also questioned what the green rectangular area shown on the plans is between the swimming pool and Highway 55. Waldhauser said she realizes that the developer was instructed by staff to remove a number of proposed trees placed in the right-of-way along Golden Valley Road, but she would like to see some trees on that side of the building. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 10 Kluchka questioned if the applicant has a snow removal plan. Goellner said that snow storage won't be allowed to take away any required parking spaces and that it would have to be removed from the site. Kluchka suggested that be added as a condition of approval. Bill Stoddard, Applicant, explained the proposal to construct a market rate, 172 unit apartment building with a mix of alcove apartments, penthouses and townhome units. He said they will meet the stormwater requirements and will keep their water on-site. He discussed ways the building will be energy efficient including: being solar ready, water conservation efforts, a car2go hub, and moped parking. He stated that they are in agreement with staff's conditions, however they would like more time to review the Engineering staff's condition regarding shifting the west driveway as far west as feasible to better align with the driveway across the street. Burt Coffin, ESG Architects, discussed the public benefits of this project. He said they are tying this project into the neighborhoods to the east and west. He referred to a site plan and explained that the building will be 6 stories with parking both below grade and at grade. He stated that they want to tie into the proposed future sidewalk and added that the landscaping is a critical part of their proposal because they want to provide a landscape-rich environment with quality architecture on this highly visible site. He stated that the first floor will be brick with windows on all four sides and the main body of the building will be cementitious stucco with some lap siding and red corner highlights. He added that they are trying to activate the street front along Golden Valley Road as much as possible. He referred to the question about the green rectangular area shown on the plans and said that will be a dog walking area. Waldhauser stated that Golden Valley volunteer groups have done some landscaping along the Highway 55 MnDOT property and asked if there is a plan to do any maintenance of that area. Stoddard said yes, they plan to take the chain link fence down and maintain the area. He referred to the question regarding the swimming pool site lines and explained that the elevation of Highway 55 is much lower than their property. Kluchka asked if the name of the project will be changing since Golden Villas gives the impression of senior living. Traci Tomas, Golden Villas LLC, Applicant, explained that Golden Villas LLC is just the ownership and not the name of the building. She stated that they've been working with a marketing team and the name will be Hello. She said the concept is very friendly, welcoming, and unpretentious. Cera noted that the property is a gateway to Golden Valley so the name Hello makes sense. Kluchka asked about the snow removal plan. Tomas stated that they will do snow removal and haul snow off site as needed. Cera asked about the rental prices. Stoddard said they hope to appeal to a wide variety of people with rents ranging from $800 to over $2,000. Waldhauser asked about the rationale behind the location of the driveway that staff is recommending shifting further to the west. Coffin referred to a site plan and explained that Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 11 most of the traffic coming in the west entrance would go straight into the lower level parking. He said he understands it is important that vehicles and fire trucks have enough room to maneuver and that they would like to do a turn study to determine if is it possible keep the driveway in the location they've proposed. Baker referred to the applicant's presentation and asked what "solar ready" means. Stoddard explained that they will have conduit and the necessary items in place during construction and will be ready to install solar when necessary. Segelbaum asked about the elements being added to the project in order to contribute as part of the TIF financing. Stoddard stated that but for TIF they wouldn't be able to do this project. He discussed the changes in the Highway 55 slip ramp, the additional sidewalk being added to the north, the additional street lighting being added, and the other environmentally friendly benefits to the City other than the tax benefit. Waldhauser referred to the condition in the staff report regarding removal of the proposed trees within the right-of-way along Golden Valley and questioned if the City could install additional trees when it constructs the sidewalk to the north. She stated that she doesn't think this a practical recommendation by staff because the developer has no place else to put more trees along that side of the property. Kluchka asked about the construction schedule. Stoddard said they hope to break ground this fall. Johnson asked how the pedestrian connection would work to connect from the building to the public sidewalk. Stoddard said they are considering a painted/striped walkway. Johnson questioned how the sidewalk plan gets implemented. Tomas said it is similar to proof of parking. They will show the proposed sidewalk on their plans for future use and construction. Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public hearing. Cera asked why the proposed trees along Golden Valley Road would have to be relocated. Goellner stated that if the developer plants trees in the public right-of-way then the City would be responsible for maintenance. She suggested that a maintenance agreement might be able to be put in place between the developer and City to allow trees to be planted in the right-of-way. Kluchka suggested that requiring a neighborhood communication plan and a snow removal plan be added as conditions of approval. Segelbaum stated that maybe the developer's website could be used for communication. He asked the Commissioners if they would be willing to recommend softening the condition regarding the driveway alignment. Baker said he would like to leave that up to staff. Waldhauser said the proposal seems to work but if there is a safety issue, it should be addressed. Kluchka Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 12 suggested the Commission say that more investigation should be done before the proposal goes to the City Council for review. Cera said he is curious about the proposed tandem parking spaces. Segelbaum stated that the City is requiring that the tandem spaces belong to the same unit. Cera questioned if the tandem spaces are being proposed to meet the City's parking requirements and if they will really be used. Stoddard said they are fine with the staff's recommendation regarding the tandem parking spaces. Blum stated that this is a gateway location and it is good to see something attractive and interesting on this site. Segelbaum agreed. Kluchka said this is a good example of gateway design and he is happy about the proposed name. Cera said he is enthusiastic about the proposal and thinks it is a very attractive building. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Baker and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Golden Villas PUD No. 118, subject to the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. 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 applicant's use of a PUD has allowed the project to address various aspect of the site including its location along a busy State highway. 2. 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 site is lacking open space or environmental features to preserve and protect. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. As a redevelopment of long vacant underutilized properties, the proposal would make better use of existing infrastructure and help the area transition into a more mixed use and pedestrian friendly environment. 4. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. The redevelopment of these two underutilized properties for multifamily housing is compatible with the medium density residential property to the north and is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. By investing a long vacant property, this proposal helps rid the City of a blighted building, add value to the tax rolls, and provide new housing options for future residents. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by ESG Architects, submitted with the application on May 21, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission June 22, 2015 Page 13 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department, dated June 15, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division, dated June 16, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 4. Both spaces in any tandem parking arrangement shall be assigned to the same unit. 5. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 6. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the Final Plat. 7. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 118" in its title. 8. A park dedication fee of$33,600 (2% of the estimated land value) shall be paid prior to release of the Final Plat. 9. No snow shall be stored on site. 10. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. --Short Recess-- 4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No reports were given. 5. Other Business • METRO Blue Line Extension, Station Area Planning Final Report No discussion was held. • Council Liaison Report No report was given. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm. John Kluchka, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant MINUTES Human Rights Commission (HRC) City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Council Conference Room June 23, 2015 Commissioners present: Carla Johnson, Chair Adam Buttress Simon Gottlieb Susan Phelps Michael Pristash Commissioners absent Jonathan Burris, Vice Chair Teresa Martin Payton Perkins Andrew Ramlet Staff: Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager The meeting was convened at 6:36 pm by Chair Johnson. INTRODUCTIONS No introductions were needed. APPROVAL OF MAY 26 2015 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Buttress, second by Commissioner Pristash to approve the May 26, 2015, minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Two items were added to the agenda under New Business: Four City HRC and Youth for Human Rights. COUNCIL UPDATES Knauss updated the HRC on the City Council's direction from their June 9 Council/Manager Worksession. The Council would like the HRC to work on diversity awareness, education and appreciation for future programming. It was the consensus of the HRC to discuss this as a topic in planning their 2016 programming. OLD BUSINESS October 22, 2015 HRC Conversations Planning It was the consensus of the HRC that the Conversations Event will be held October 22, 2015. There are speakers that have already been confirmed for the October 22 date and HRC wants to move forward with this date. • Dave Nuckles, No Wrong Door at Hennepin County —Vice Chair Burris Commissioner Burris relayed through Knauss that he will be making contact with Mr. Nuckles and be able to report back at the July meeting. Human Rights Commission June 23,2015 Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4 • The Bridge for Runaway Youth — Commissioner Phelps Commissioner Phelps made contact with Joan Contryman and she is happy to come out and talk on this topic. • Breaking Free — Chair Johnson Chair Johnson contacted Breaking Free and Joy Friedman, Training and Outreach Director and survivor of sex trafficking, is available to speak. The requested honorarium is $250. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Phelps to authorize $250 honorarium to Breaking Free for Ms. Joy Friedman's time. Motion carried 5-0. • Family Partnership — Chair Johnson Chair Johnson will make contact with Family Partnership and report back at the July meeting. • First Covenant Church of Bloomington — Commissioner Martin Commissioner Martin was not available to provide an update. • Sergeant Grant Snyder— Commissioner Pristash Commissioner Pristash will continue contact with Sergeant Grant and see if he is available to attend an HRC meeting prior to the event. All speaker contacts are requested to ask their speakers if they have suggestions on a contact that may be a good resource within the school communities. Commissioner Outreach Opportunities Golden Valley Music & Arts Festival — September 26, 2015 It was the consensus of the HRC that it would be beneficial for the Commission to have an information booth at the Golden Valley Music & Arts Festival. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Buttress to participate in the Golden Valley Music & Arts Festival on September 26, 2015. Motion carried 5- 0. Commissioner Buttress volunteered to serve as the NRC's coordinator for this endeavor. Market in the Valley The Commission discussed participating in Golden Valley's farmer's market, "Market in the Valley." It was the consensus of the Commission have an information booth at Market in the Valley on the following dates: July 19, August 16, and September 13, 2015. Knauss will email out a schedule for volunteers to sign up for the July 19 date as that will occur prior to the HRC's next meeting on July 28. The HRC discussed logistics of the set up and what type of equipment may be needed. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Buttress to authorize an expenditure up to $250 for the purchase of a portable canopy and folding table to be used by HRC for community outreach. Motion carried 5-0. Human Rights Commission June 23,2015 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4 Commissioner Pristash volunteered to pick up the canopy and table and to get it to the volunteers for the July 19 Market in the Valley. Chair Johnson will serve as the temporary liaison for Market in the Valley and check with Commissioner Martin to see if she is interested in serving as the Market in the Valley coordinator. Knauss will email to Commissioners a volunteer sign-up for two-hour shifts for the July 19 Market in the Valley. Review of draft Human Rights Commission Brochure Commissioners had very favorable comments on the brochure that was drafted by Communications. They requested the bottom half of the back page be used for upcoming HRC Conversations and events. Knauss will be sure to have brochures available for the July 19 Market in the Valley. NEW BUSINESS Human Rights Magnet Discussion on this item will be delayed to the July 28 meeting when Commissioner Martin will be able to address it. Four City HRC Chair Johnson reported there has been a request for the four cities (Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope and Golden Valley) to meet monthly, having a representative from each of the HRC's in attendance. The meetings will be held the third Sundays of each month at 1 pm for one hour at Mountain Mudd in Crystal. Chair Johnson said she would be able to attend in the short-term, but it would be nice if another Commissioner would take this on. You for Human Rights Chair Johnson explained information requested from Youth for Human Rights arrived. It appears the information is more geared toward educators. Commissioner Buttress volunteered to review the information and report back to the HRC. Adjourn Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commisioner Phelps to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 pm. Motion carried 5-0. Follow-up Items: • Designated Commissioners will make contact with the speakers/organization yet to be contacted and report back at the July meeting: o Dave Nuckles, No Wrong Door at Hennepin County — Vice Chair Burris o Family Partnership — Chair Johnson o First Covenant Church of Bloomington — Commissioner Martin o Sergeant Grant Snyder— Commissioner Pristash • Knauss will email out a schedule for volunteers to sign up for the July 19 Market in the Valley date • Commissioner Pristash to pick up a canopy and table for use at community outreach events Human Rights Commission June 23,2015 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4 • Commissioner Buttress to review the Youth for Human Rights information and report back to the HRC Carla Johnson, Chair ATTEST: Chantell Knauss, Staff Liaison Approved by HRC: July 28, 2015 Human Rights Commission June 23,2015 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals June 23, 2015 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, June 23, 2015, at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Vice Chair Nelson called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members Maxwell (arrived at 7:15) Nelson, Orenstein, and Planning Commission Representative Johnson. Also present were Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman, and Planning Intern Melissa Sonnek. Member Perich was absent. I. Approval of Minutes — May 20, 2015 Regular Meeting Nelson referred to the second sentence in the last paragraph on page seven and noted that the word "and" should be replaced with the word "said." MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried unanimously to approve the May 20, 2015, minutes with the above noted correction. II. The Petition(s) are: 4800 Killarney Drive Peter Mover and Shanna Hanson, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 4 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 11 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Purpose: To allow for the replacement and expansion of an existing deck. Goellner referred to a site plan and explained the applicants' request to replace and expand their existing deck. She noted that the dimensions listed in the staff report were incorrect and that the proposed new deck will be approximately 275 square feet in size. She explained that the existing southwest corner of the home is 13.7 feet from the side yard property line and that the proposed deck would be located 11 feet from the side yard property line. She stated that the applicants have said their unique circumstances are that the home was built in the 1960s on an irregular shaped lot, and was not built parallel to the side yard property line. Pete Denboer, Kuhl Design & Build, referred to the survey of the property and reiterated that the house sits crooked on the lot. He stated that they are trying to build the new deck to stay within the plane of the existing side of the house. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals May 20, 2015 Page 2 Johnson asked if the existing deck is out of compliance. Denboer stated that it was compliant when it was built, however it will need to have new posts installed. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Orenstein said he has no issues with the proposal. Nelson agreed and said the proposed deck is reasonable, it is in harmony with the intent of the City Code, and it won't have any more impact on the neighboring property than the existing home already does. MOVED by Orenstein, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request for 4 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 11 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line to allow for the replacement and expansion of an existing deck. 145 Cutacross Road Christopher & Nicola Dixon, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 10.5 ft. off of the required 18.5 ft. to a distance of 8 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new deck. Goellner referred to a site plan of the property and stated that it was subdivided in August of 2014 and the construction of the home was completed in June of 2015. She explained that the builder had originally planned to build steps from the sliding glass door to a patio, rather than building a deck, however the homeowners want to build a deck. She stated that there has been some confusion regarding the actual distance from the proposed deck to the side yard property line. The application states that the deck would be located 8 feet from the property line, however the plans submitted show that the deck would be located 11.5 feet from the property line. She stated that the applicants have said their unique circumstances are that the lot is triangular in shape which reduces the amount of side yard, a deck is preferred rather than a patio, and the proposed location of the deck avoids trees in the back yard and utilizes the existing sliding glass door. Goellner explained that due to recent Zoning Code text amendments, new side yard setback requirements will be in place on June 26 making the side yard setback requirement for this property 15 feet instead of 18.5 feet. Because of this, staff is recommending that this variance request be denied because the shape of the proposed deck can be changed in order to be located 15 feet from the side yard property line and still be approximately 338 square feet in size without a variance. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals May 20, 2015 Page 3 Orenstein asked if the applicants would still need a variance after the new rules go into effect and if so, what it would be. Goellner said if the applicant wanted to build the deck as proposed, and not make it smaller, the new variance request would be 4 feet off of the required 15 feet to a distance of 11 feet from the side yard property line. Orenstein asked if the applicants would have to go through the application process again and pay additional fees if this request was denied. Maxwell stated that the Board could table the item until their next meeting so they wouldn't have to re-apply. Christopher Dixon, Applicant, stated that he is now asking for a 1 foot variance which would mean the proposed deck would be 14 feet from the side yard property line. He stated that they want the deck they've proposed instead of a patio because two out of the three landscape architects they spoke with have told them not to build a patio because of the change in grade, the difficulty in keeping it clean of debris, and because of the amount of space they would lose to the stairs coming from the door. He stated that he has an issue with being tabled to the next Board of Zoning Appeals meeting because they are hosting a family reunion and need to get the deck built as soon as possible. He reiterated that they are only asking for a variance of 1 foot, not 4 feet because the City Council has already approved the new setback requirements. Nelson noted that if a variance is granted at this this meeting it has to be for the Code requirements currently in place. Maxwell suggested amending the variance request to state that the proposed deck could be built no closer than 14 feet to the side yard property line. Nelson asked the applicant if they built the house. Dixon said yes. Nelson asked if this issue came up during the building process. Dixon said the issue did not come up until they talked to landscape architects who advised against building a patio. Goellner questioned if the 14-foot dimension given by the applicant is correct because when she measured the size of the proposed deck shown on the survey it shows that the deck is 11.5 feet from the property line, not 14 feet. Dixon said if the Board allowed his deck to be 14 feet from the side yard property line, he would be fine with that. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Johnson stated that the builder should know better than to prescribe something that they know is going to need a variance and that this seems to put the City in the middle. Dixon stated that they were also surprised that they needed a variance. He reiterated that part of the issue is the odd shape of the lot. Maxwell asked Dixon if they bought the lot before the house was built. Dixon said yes, they bought the lot and then re-designed the plans that the builder was proposing to use. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals May 20, 2015 Page 4 Johnson said he is in favor of approving this variance request, but he feels like as part of the process something should be said to the builder because if they had planned it correctly, the applicants would not have to ask for a variance at all. Nelson said she was not supportive of the larger variance request but she is supportive of the smaller request allowing the deck to be located 14 feet from the side yard property line, even though the circumstance was created by the landowner. Dixon said from his perspective the unique circumstance is the triangular shape of the lot. He said they want to be good neighbors and compromise but they are only asking for a 1 foot variance. He said they simply did not know they needed a variance to build a deck or they would have done something different. Goellner noted that with past variance requests the City has asked the applicant to exhaust all other options. Dixon said they have considered other options but they are limited by the location of the existing sliding glass door. Nelson asked about the size of the proposed deck. Maxwell said it is 23 feet x 16 feet minus the corner section that was removed. Goellner stated that the proposed deck is 338 square feet in size. Johnson said he is struggling with the fact that the issue has been caused by the landowner. Dixon said they just bought the house yesterday so they weren't the landowners throughout the building process. Goellner noted that LDK Builders should have signed the application as the landowner, however the Dixons signed the application as both the applicant and as the landowner. Maxwell suggested that Mr. Dixon re-sign and date the application. Johnson questioned how they should address the issue of the builder placing the house in a position that now requires a variance in order to build a deck. Maxwell suggested the Board send a letter to the builder. Nelson suggested the Planning Commission discuss the issue. She added that she feels better about this variance request knowing that the applicants were not the landowners throughout the construction process. Johnson questioned why the applicants couldn't build a patio that drains properly. Dixon stated that drainage was one issue. The other issues were aesthetics and maintenance. He stated that the landscape architects he has spoken with have said every times it rains a patio would be covered with dirt and debris. Orenstein added that the steps leading down to a patio would also take away some of the usable space. Dixon reiterated that the existing sliding glass doors are the only doors in the back of the house and are driving the location of the deck. Orenstein said he is satisfied that the variance request meets all of the criteria the Board is supposed to consider when granting variances. Johnson said he doesn't think it has been demonstrated that a patio won't work. Orenstein questioned if the Board should be dictating what a homeowner chooses to build. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals May 20, 2015 Page 5 Nelson said a patio would have more impact on the neighboring property because it would be closer to the property line. Maxwell said it is a question of whether it is reasonable to give the applicant a 1-foot variance or allow them to build something without a variance that will look out of character with the neighborhood. Orenstein questioned if the Board is supposed to consider aesthetics. Maxwell said the proposal is supposed to be in harmony with the rules and surrounding locale. Orenstein said the proposed deck isn't unusual, extraordinary or out of the norm. Nelson asked Goellner if staff would consider giving a positive recommendation if the deck was 14 feet away from the side yard property line instead of the requested 8 feet. Goellner said no because the applicant could reduce the size of the proposed deck, be located 15 feet away from the side yard property line, and still have a reasonably sized deck. She added that if the Board wants to send a message to the builder the variance request should be denied. Johnson questioned if all of the alternatives have been exhausted. He said the builder thought a patio was ok and one landscape architect thought it was ok. The fact that dirt will get on a patio is not a compelling argument. Orenstein said a patio is clearly an option but questioned if it is the Board's job to tell an applicant what they can build. In this case the applicant wants to build a deck. Johnson said a smaller deck can be built without a variance. Dixon said he thinks a deck will fit better with the house. Orenstein asked if the applicant built a patio now and came back a year later and asked to build a deck if the Board would say no, they have to keep the patio. Dixon said they are going to build a deck, it is just a matter of how it will look. He reiterated that they are only asking for a 1-foot variance so they can have furniture on the deck. Nelson agreed that that the applicant could build a deck that meets the requirements, or he could build a deck that functions better. Johnson said he understands, but he doesn't see a reason for a variance. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried 3 to 1 to approve a variance for 4.5 feet off of the required 18.5 feet to a distance of 14 feet at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line to allow for the construction of a new deck. Johnson voted no. Ill. Other Business The Board discussed writing a letter to LDK Builders expressing concern about the process and letting them know that the Board would like them to let homeowners know they might need a variance in the future. The consensus of the Board was to draft a letter and send it to LDK Builders. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals May 20, 2015 Page 6 IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 pm. Nancy Nelson, Vice Chair Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope Meeting of May 6, 2015 The Golden Valley— Crystal — New Hope Joint Water Commission (JWC) meeting was called to order at 1:30 pm in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room. Commissioners Present Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope Staff Present Mark Ray, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Crystal Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager, Golden Valley Randy Kloepper, Water Superintendent, Crystal Bernie Weber, Operations Manager, New Hope Dave Lemke, Utilities Supervisor, New Hope R.J. Kakach, Utility Engineer, Golden Valley Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant, Golden Valley Minutes of March 31, 2015, and April 2, 2015, Meeting MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to approve the minutes of the March 31, 2015, and April 2, 2015, meetings as submitted. Motion carried. Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. Kakach referred to the new agreement prepared by Bolton & Menk which covers design and construction services for the rehabilitation of the 36-inch PCCP line through the City of Robbinsdale. He stated that there will have to be an amendment in the future because the project schedule has changed from a three month construction to a four month construction which will be approximately $80,000 to $90,000. The design work with Robbinsdale's sanitary sewer will be an additional $30,000 to $40,000 which Robbinsdale will be participating in. More information including the increased costs will be available at the next JWC meeting. He stated that staff has been working with the City of Robbinsdale, the railroad and the County regarding the 81 intersection. MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to approve the professional services agreement with Bolton & Menk of $512,975 for the design and construction of repair/replacement of the JWC 36-inch PCCP project. Motion carried. 36-Inch Watermain Emergency Repair Update, Emergency Backup Water Supply Project Update, and County Road 9 Project Update Mark Ray and Randy Kloepper gave an update on the 36-Inch Watermain Emergency Repair, the Emergency Backup Water Supply Project Update, and an update on the County Road 9 Project. Removals have begun at County Road 9 and Xerxes and pipe is being laid at the Minneapolis end. There will be 100 feet in by May 15. On the portion from the original project, pipe is being laid from France to Indiana and will be completed on May 7. MDI will start work inside the well station early next week. a. Resolution 15-02 Supporting Improvements to the 36-inch pipe. Joint Water Commission May 6, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Commissioner Norris introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 15-02 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE 36-INCH PIPE FOR WATER SERVICE FOR THE JOINT WATER COMMISSION CITIES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner McDonald and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Burt, Norris and McDonald; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Chair and his signature attested by the Vice Chair. Review 2015-2020 CIP This item was delayed due to the upcoming bids. Other Business A special meeting will be scheduled on May 18 to open the bids for the 36" pipe rehabilitation project. Burt asked if there is a single point person regarding communication about the improvements to the 36-inch watermain repair project. The hope is that the TAC will have one spokesperson working with the consulting engineer and with each City. Next Meeting The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 2, 2015, at 1:30 pm. Adjournment Chair Burt adjourned the meeting at 2 pm. Thomas D. Burt, Chair ATTEST: Lisa Wittman, Recording Secretary Item 4A BCWMC' 7-16-15 Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting June 18,2015 Golden Valley City Hall,8:30 a.m. Commissioners and Staff Present: Crystal Commissioner Guy Mueller, Vice Chair Robbinsdale Alternate Commissioner Michael Scanlan Golden Valley Commissioner Stacy Hoschka,Treasurer St. Louis Park Commissioner Jim de Lambert, Chair Medicine Lake Commissioner Clint Carlson Administrator Laura Jester Minneapolis Commissioner Michael Welch Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Kennedy& Graven Minnetonka Not represented Engineer Karen Chandler, Barr Engineering New Hope Commissioner John Elder Plymouth Commissioner Ginny Black Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)Members/Other Attendees Present: Erin Anderson Wenz, Barr Engineering Company Jill Kruger, Resident, Parkers Lake Pat Crough, Alternate Commissioner, City of New Chris Long,TAC, City of New Hope Hope Eric Eckman, TAC, City of Golden Valley Bob Paschke, TAC, City of New Hope Erick Francis,TAC, City of St. Louis Park Mark Ray, TAC, City of Crystal Jere Gwin-Lenth, Friends of Northwood Lake Liz Stout,TAC, City of Minnetonka Mary Gwin-Lenth, Friends of Northwood Lake Pete Willenbring, WSB &Associates Gary Holter,Alternate Commissioner, Medicine Lake Rick Johnson, Friends of Northwood Lake Laurie Leonhardt, Friends of Northwood Lake Sandy Bainey, Friends of Northwood Lake 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL On Thursday,June 18, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Conference room at Golden Valley City Hall, Chair de Lambert called to order the meeting of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission(BCWMC)and asked for roll call to be taken [Cities of Minneapolis and Minnetonka absent from roll call]. 2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS [Commissioner Welch, Minneapolis, arrives.] 1 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes Jill Kruger,a Plymouth resident,raised her concerns about the difficulty boating on Parkers Lake due to excessive aquatic plants,particularly over the past six years. She described information she gathered about aquatic plant harvesting and asked if the Commissioners have been to Parkers Lake, have considered budgeting for an aquatic plant harvester, and if there will be a waterski show this summer on Parkers Lake. There was discussion. Derek Asche pointed out that the question about the waterski show would be an item for the City of Plymouth's Park and Recreation Department. Ms. Kruger stated her dissatisfaction with the Commission's lack of action. Commissioner Welch remarked that the Citizen Forum on Non-agenda Items is a great place to raise new items to the Commission for future meeting agendas. There was discussion on what the City of Plymouth currently does regarding aquatic plant management. Mr. Asche described how the City of Plymouth does aquatic plant management at the City's public beaches but not for boat navigation purposes. He described the City's previous work with aquatic plant harvesting and the resident complaints about it. Commissioner Black noted that the Commission will be forming a task force in 2016 to determine the Commission's role in aquatic plant management. Mr. LeFevere explained that a Lake Improvement District can be formed to help fund aquatic plant management, among other activities and the Commission could help facilitate the formation of such a District. Commissioner Black stated that she would like a presentation at a future Commission meeting on Lake Improvement Districts. 3. AGENDA Chair de Lambert appointed Administrator Jester as the Recording Secretary for the meeting. Commissioner Welch moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 88-00 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. 4.CONSENT AGENDA Administrator Jester announced that there is a revised monthly financial report to replace the report in the meeting packet. She noted the changes: the addition of two invoices received after the meeting packet went out and a correction to allocate to the proper line item the reimbursement to the City of Plymouth. Commissioner Mueller moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. [The following items were approved as part of the Consent Agenda: the May 21, 2015,Commission Meeting minutes,the monthly financial report,the payment of the invoices,Approval to set the June 25`h TAC-State Agency Meeting for Bacteria TMDL Implementation Plan, Approval of the Plymouth Ice Center/Lifetime Fitness Parking Lot Project,Approval to Reimburse the City of Plymouth for the Northwood Lake/Four Seasons Water Quality Improvement Project(NL- 2), and Approval to Set the Public Hearing for August 20,2015,to Receive Comments from Cities on 2016 CIP Projects.] The general and construction account balances reported in the Fiscal Year 2015 Financial Report prepared for the June 18,2015,meeting are as follows: Checking Account Balance $718,678.15 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $718,678.15 TOTAL CASH& INVESTMENTS ON-HAND (6/09/15) $3,345,291.65 2 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes CIP Projects Levied—Budget Remaining ($4,078,785.78) Closed Projects Remaining Balance $733,494.13 2012-2014 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $9,634.81 2015 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $1,000,000.00 Anticipated Closed Project Balance $276,140.68 5. BUSINESS A. Consider Adopting Major Watershed Plan Amendment Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that in November 2014 the Commission submitted a Major Plan Amendment request to add 2016 projects to its CIP. She said that BWSR approved the amendment at its May 2015 meeting and now the Commission needs to take action to adopt that Major Plan Amendment. Commissioner Welch asked if the Commission wants to approve adding a project to the Commission's CIP before knowing what the project will be(referring to the discussion further on the agenda regarding the Northwood Lake Improvement Project). Administrator Jester said she had asked the Commission's legal counsel about what would happen in the event the Commission adopts the Major Plan Amendment but then does not move forward with Options A and C for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project.Attorney LeFevere stated that the Commission provides advance notice to Hennepin County about the maximum costs the Commission plans to certify, but the Commission still has time to lower the levy amount before certifying costs to the County later this year. Commissioner Welch moved to approve adopting the Major Plan Amendment. Commissioner Black seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. B. Choose Concept(s) to Implement for Northwood Lake Improvement Project (NL-1) Receive Presentation on Results of Envision Process Administrator Jester introduced Erin Anderson Wenz of Barr Engineering Company. Ms. Anderson Wenz provided an overview of the Envision process and how it was used to look at the two different project options the Commission is considering for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project. Ms. Anderson Wenz explained that Envision is a checklist of design considerations that every infrastructure project can use, is a great resource library, is an encouragement for innovative infrastructure projects, and is a tool that identifies relative value on project aspects that are hard to monetize and tough to value through traditional methods. She said that Envision is a scoring tool, with the highest score being 864 points. Ms. Anderson Wenz explained that Envision evaluates a project through 60 different credits in five categories including quality of life, leadership, resource allocation, natural world,and climate and risk. She defined the five categories and talked about the life cycle analyses 3 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes performed through Envision for both project options for the Northwood Lake Improvement project. She identified the Envision scores and the differences that the Envision process determined between the options, including that it scored the Northwood Lake Improvement Project Stormwater Reuse option as a silver project and the Pond option as a bronze project. Commission Hoschka asked if the approximate 50-Envision-point difference between the two options is significant and worth the cost difference between the two projects. Ms. Anderson Wenz said that she can't answer that for the Commission and that it seems that the answer would stem on the Commission's goals. Commissioner Welch asked if one option is a better water management project over the other project option. Ms. Anderson Wenz said that thinking about water conservation is likely a new endeavor for the Commission and in terms of overall sustainability the reuse option is better. She said that the metric scores are higher for the infiltration option versus the ponding option. Commissioner Black asked how much subjectivity is involved in the Envision process and results. Ms.Anderson Wenz commented that there is less subjectivity with Envision than with other scoring processes. Commissioner Black stated that the Envision tool raises a policy issue in terms of how the Commission might use this tool,which could change the way the Commission has operated to-date. She noted that one aspect for the Commission's consideration is about who benefits from different projects and how the costs and benefits are assigned. She pointed out that the City of New Hope accrues more benefit with Option A. i. Review Additional Information in Consideration of Different Concepts Administrator Jester went through the information included in the meeting packet and discussed the reasoning behind the Administrator's recommendation to implement Options A and C. Mr. Paschke spoke in support of Options A and C. Jere Gwin-Lenth of the Friends of Northwood Lake provided comments. There was discussion. Commissioner Hoschka indicated initial "sticker shock" with the project but indicated support at this time due to results of the Envision process and the fact that this is one of few BCWMC CIP projects slated for the City of New Hope. She asked if educational signage was included in the project. Commissioner Elder noted that educational signage is in the project plan. Commissioner Welch remarked that the Commission needs to be fair in allocating resource requests from its member cities. He raised his concerns about reuse systems(water is not available when you need it)but noted the cost per pound of pollutant removal for options A and C isn't outrageous. He also commented that he wished the City of New Hope would allocate more City funds toward the project. Mr. Paschke responded that there is still a possibility for future grants. Mr. Paschke and Mr. Long talked about water quality projects and best management practices that have been completed and are being implemented in the City of New Hope. Mr. Ray stated that the City of Crystal is excited about the proposed Options A and C as a pilot project for irrigating ballfields and thinks that the cities can learn from the project. Commissioner Black said that the City is currently proposing to contribute 16%of the project cost,but it seems like the City's contribution should be higher. She pointed out that the City of Plymouth has used parkland for water quality projects without asking the Commission for 4 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes funding. Commissioner Elder asked if it would be more palatable if the City of New Hope contributed $300,000 to the project. Commissioner Black responded maybe. Commissioner Welch asked if the City of New Hope is able to put more money into the project. Commissioner Elder said yes, the City can put in $300,000. Commissioner Welch remarked that he doesn't appreciate this process regarding withholding information from the Commission. He wanted to know why the City didn't put all available funding on the table during initial discussions, and he voiced concerns about it setting a precedent. Commissioner Hoschka commented that this is a working body and a conversation and she is not offended by negotiation. Commissioner Mueller agreed with Commissioner Hoschka, and he added that perhaps the Commission can develop a cost sharing policy for future projects. Commissioner Carlson said that he is happy to support the proposed project Options A and C. He asked if the Commission can approve the project with the funding gap. Commissioner Elder said that the City of New Hope is not being disingenuous. He said that he is in current communication with the City Manager. He said that as the conversation has proceeded today, he as a City representative sees that$300,000 is a better contribution,and he has communicated this to the City Manager. The City Manager has just approved this contribution amount, communicating that the funds can be taken from a temporary account. Commissioner Black moved to approve that the Commission participate in the Northwood Lake Improvement Project Options A and C at a Commission cost of up to$751,328 in addition to the $300,000 grant received by the Commission for the project and the City's participation at the$300,000 level. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Commissioner Welch made a friendly amendment to the motion to include that the City with the Administrator's assistance identify and apply for all additional possible grant funding and report back to the Commission at the end of the year on the status of the grants. Commissioner Black and Commissioner Elder approved Commissioner Welch's friendly amendment. Commissioner Hoschka made friendly amendment that any additional grant funding awarded go proportionately to the City and the Commission. Commissioner Black and Commissioner Elder agreed to the friendly amendment. Commissioner Black stated that she doesn't believe her City would be in favor of the motion, but she thinks the motion on the table is fair. She said that the Commission needs to develop policy that gives the Commission more direction on these types of projects. She suggested that the Administrative Services Committee set up a meeting in the near future to start discussing this issue. Commissioner Welch said that he will vote in favor of this motion,even though he does not love it,because he believes the Commission did a thorough job of analyzing the water quality benefits of the project and the options and he is not willing to say no to the Northwood Lake Improvement Project. Commissioner Black raised the point that shoreline restoration really helps protect the lake and residents and the cities should do more with shoreline restoration. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. C. Consider Accepting MPCA Clean Water Partnership Grant for Northwood Lake Improvement Project 5 SCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes Commissioner Black moved to approve accepting the grant. Commissioner Hoschka seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. D. Set Maximum Amount for 2016 Levy Through Hennepin County Commissioner Black moved to notify the County of the Commission's maximum cost certification to the County of$1,250,000.Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 88-00 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. E. Consider Approval of 90% Plans for Main Stem Project(CR2015) 10'h Avenue to Duluth Street Mr. Eckman introduced the project, described how previous Commission comments on the plans have been addressed, and talked about communicating with homeowners about the project. He reported that two construction access points are still needed, but staff feels confident that it will obtain these. Mr. Eckman provided more details on the project. Engineer Chandler remarked that she appreciated having enough time to review and discuss the plans with the City. Mr. Willenbring responded to a question from Administrator Jester about pollutant removal. Commissioner Welch asked about the long-term maintenance of the project. Mr. Eckman described the long-term maintenance of the project and said that it rests with the property owners. He talked about the education the City provides to the homeowners. Commissioner Welch recommended that written materials be provided to the homeowners. Mr. Scanlan moved to approve the 90%plans with the Engineer Recommendations. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Commissioner Welch stated that he will abstain from the vote because of his discomfort of how the Commission has structured the implementation of its C1P projects, as he has stated many times in the past. Commissioner Welch said he thinks there is too little hands-on involvement by the Commission on the project. Commissioner Black expressed her discomfort about turning over maintenance to the residents. Commissioner Hoschka noted that she works at WSB,the contractor working with the City on this project, and she asked if she can vote on this motion. Mr. LeFevere responded that there is no personal benefit to her regarding this vote, so she does not have to abstain. mon a vote, the motion carried 7-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote. City of Minneapolis abstained from vote]. F. Consider Funding Options for XP-SWMM Phase II Project Engineer Chandler reminded the Commission that it directed staff to look for project funding from other sources. She said that she previously described to the Commission possible funding coming from FEMA through the Department of Natural Resources(DNR). Engineer Chandler said that some other possible sources have come to staff's attention. She described the other options including assistance provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(ACOE)through the Floodplain Management Services Program and the Planning Assistance to States Program. Engineer Chandler went into more detail about the two specific programs through the ACOE. There was discussion about the possible loss of Commission control of the project schedule by utilizing the ACOE programs. Engineer Chandler also described possible funding through the DNR Flood Damage Reduction Program. Chair de Lambert noted the Commission directed the Commission Engineer to complete the modeling and expressed concerns about losing control of the project schedule. Commissioner Hoschka 6 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes expressed similar concerns about schedule delays and coordination needed. Commissioner Black said that she doesn't support this project and won't be voting on this item. Commissioner Scanlan stated that he supports going forward with pursuing the FEMA and DNR funding. Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve pursuing the FEMA and DNR funding and not to pursue ACOE assistance. Commissioner Mueller seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 7-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote. City of Plymouth abstained from vote]. [Chair de Lambert, St. Louis Park, departs. Vice Chair Mueller takes over leading the meeting.] G. Consider Additional 2016 Operating Budget Items Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that at its May BCWMC meeting it reviewed the draft 2016 operating budget and assessment and directed her to bring more information about the additional budget items she described at that meeting. She said that the additional items would cost $10,000, including$4,000 for sign installation at creek-road crossings and $6,000 to begin a shoreline habitat monitoring program after it is fully vetted and developed by the TAC and the Commission. Administrator Jester noted that if during the process of developing the shoreline habitat monitoring program the Commission decides not to pursue it,then the$6,000 would not be spent. She recommends the Commission take the proposed $10,000 from the Commission's fund balance, which would leave the Commission's fund balance at the end of fiscal year 2016 at approximately$325,000. She said this amount is still in the range of the amount that the Commission wants to maintain in its fund balance. Alternate Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve the 2016 budget as amended. Commissioner Hoschka seconded the motion. Mr. Asche reported that the City of Plymouth won't be treating the curlyleaf pondweed in Medicine Lake next year—he wanted to make sure the Commission knew that the aquatic vegetation management won't be done by the City next year. Engineer Chandler said that the curlyleaf pondweed treatments 10 years ago were part of the Commission's CIP to improve water quality. She said that until the Commission decides how it wants to handle aquatic invasive species, it could go through the CIP process to include curlyleaf pondweed treatment as a CIP project. Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that there already is included in the 2016 budget $5,000 for forming a task force and determining the Commission's role in aquatic invasive species and aquatic plant management. Commissioner Carlson asked if the Commission could put a placeholder in the 2016 budget in case the Commission decides to do the curlyleaf pondweed treatment in 2016. Administrator Jester said that the Commission could do that but it would change the 2016 City assessments.Commissioner Black said that she will be discussing funding options with the City of Plymouth for curlyleaf pondweed treatment in 2016, and she will communicate to the Council that the Commission may be willing to contribute some funding, and she will report back to the Commission. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka and St. Louis Park absent from vote.] H. Receive NEMO Workshop Registration Information Administrator Jester announced that registration is open for the NEMO workshop-on-the-water being held July 23, and she asked that Commission members consider attending and directed them to the flyer in their meeting packet. 7 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes 6 COMMUNICATIONS A. Administrator: Written Administrator's report was included with meeting materials B. Chair: No Chair Communications C. Commissioners: No Commissioner Communications D. TAC Members: No TAC Communications E. Committees: i. Administrator Jester announced the upcoming Education Committee meeting on 6/30/15 regarding the Website Redesign F. Legal Counsel: i. Mr. LeFevere announced the retirement party being held this evening by Kennedy&Graven in his honor. G. Engineer: i. Engineer Chandler provided an update on Blue Line LRT. She said that there are some wetland and floodplain items that need to be reviewed. Engineer Chandler said that she and the Administrator are looking into whether some of the Commission's review costs could be covered by the Metropolitan Council. ii. Engineer Chandler reported that the 8410 rules have been approved and adopted by BWSR. iii. Engineer Chandler announced that the schedule has changed for the Clean Water Fund grants so that now the application period opens July 6 and ends August 28. She said if the Commission wants to apply for grants then the Commission should discuss it at its next meeting. 7. INFORMATION ONLY (Available at http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/Meetings/2015/2015-June/2015Ju n eMeetingPacket.htm) A. CIP Project Update Chart B. Grant Tracking Summary and Spreadsheet C. Results of Resident Survey by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District D. West Metro Water Alliance(WMWA)June Newsletter"Water Links" http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/MNHENNE/bulletins/i 076bf1 E. Citizen Assisted Monitoring Program(CAMP)2013 Annual Report 8. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Elder moved to adjourn the meeting. Alternate Commissioner Scanlan seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka and St. Louis Park absent from vote.] Vice Chair Mueller adjourned the meeting at 11:25 a.m. 8 BCWMC June 18, 2015, Meeting Minutes Recorder Date Secretary Date 9 city v goldolk1l, MEMORANDUM valley Physical Development Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. E. 1. Award Contract for the 2015 Medley Park Shelter Roof Replacement Project No. 15-21 Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor R.J. Kakach, EIT, Engineer Summary Work to address building maintenance concerns at the shelters within the City's parks has been underway for the last few years. The 2015 program includes exterior repairs to the Medley Park shelter building. This work consists of replacing the flat roof portions of the shelter with a full hip style roof, replacing the metal roof and replacing the plexi-glass roof window with an insulated window, and improving energy efficiency by adding insulation throughout the building. Funding for this project is identified in the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program (B-041, page 71) in the amount of$140,000. The following bids were received for the 2015 Medley Park Shelter Roof Replacement Project: Central Roofing Company $106,519 Flag Builders of Minnesota, Inc. $119,745 John A. Dalsin & Son, Inc. $139,128 Attachments • Award recommendation letter from EPI to R.J. Kakach, dated July 24, 2015 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to award a contract to Central Roofing Company in the amount of$106,519 for the 2015 Medley Park Shelter Roof Replacement Project. �•**-*to wfo. ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS, INC. 715 Florida Ave.S.,Suite 111 18382 FM 302,Suite 103le •�� Golden Valley,MN 55426 Fax: 763-398-0121 Canyon Lake,TX 78133 .N.H•`• 763-398-3040 Phone: 888-733-3050 830-935-4909 epimpls@go-epi.com www.go-epi.com eoitx0go-epi.com July 24,2015 Mr. R.J. Kakach,E.I.T. Utility Engineer City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley,Minnesota 55427 Re: City of Golden Valley Medley Park Shelter-2015 Roof Replacement City Project No.: 15-21 EPI Project No.: 2015-656 Dear Mr. Kakach: Environmental Process, Inc. (EPI) reviewed the City of Golden — Medley Park Shelter 2015 Roof Replacement project work scope with Matt Barlau of Central Roofing Company and there were no questions. Matt Barlau attended the pre-bid meeting on July 14, 2015 and indicated that they fully understand the scope of work and that they will be ready to start work in as in the tentative schedule. The work schedule will be discussed in the preconstruction meeting. Central Roofing Company will be the General Contractor and will use their employees for the majority of the work (i.e. framing, roofing, and siding),but will utilize subcontractors for the limited masonry restoration work and plumbing work. Central Roofing Company is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. EPI has not worked directly with Central Roofing Company in the past. Based on the review of project work scope with Central Roofing Company and the fact that they are the low bidder we recommend awarding the project to them. EPI recommends that the base bid cost of $106,519.00 for the City of Golden Valley — Medley Park Shelter 2015 Roof Replacement project be accepted from Central Roofing Company. Please call(763)398-3040 with any questions,comments. Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS,INC. Denny R.Langer,PE Senior Engineer/Project Manager Copy: Michael Berreau,EPI EPI File No. 15-656 city 0 goldentt'Ar M E M 0 R A N D U M valley Physical Development Department y r r 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. F. Agreement with Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. for 1-394 Inflow and Infiltration Engineering Report Prepared By Jeff Oliver P.E., City Engineer R.J. Kakach, Utility Engineer Summary The City has been aware of flow capacity issues in large diameter sanitary sewer pipes along the 1-394 corridor for a number of years. The flow issues greatly restrict the ability to redevelop property in this area and it stems from inflow and infiltration (I&I). Recent studies have shown how a reduction in I&I will not only mitigate the capacity issue, but removal of the clear water will also increase the capacity of the pipe. Staff has been working with SEH to determine the best approach in reducing Inflow and Infiltration along this corridor and requested a proposal for an engineering report. SEH has provided a proposal to further evaluate the sanitary sewer system along 1-394 and determine the most cost effective solution and steps to take towards achieving increased capacity. The report will provide technical information regarding capacity concerns within the public sanitary sewer system near the 1-394 corridor. This study will assist staff in finding ways to increase capacity within the existing sanitary sewer system to allow continued redevelopment of the corridor. The total cost for SEH to provide an 1-394 Corridor 1/1 Engineering Report is $84,480. Funding for the report is included in the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program (W&SS-074, page 93) in the amount of$400,000. Implementation of the recommendations in this report will be included in future Capital Improvement Plans. Attachments • Letter agreement from Paul Pasko, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc., to Jeff Oliver, dated July 24, 2015 (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize agreement with SEH to provide an Engineering Report for I&I analysis along the 1-394 corridor not to exceed the amount of$84,480. -A SEN Building a Better World for All of Us' July 24, 2015 RE: Golden Valley, MN Laurel Avenue Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation—Preliminary Engineering Report SEH No. 131549 10.00 Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer City of Golden Valley, MN 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Dear Jeff: The City and SEH have worked together since January defining a project addressing the inadequate flow capacity in the 21-inch sanitary sewer pipe (pipe) on Laurel Avenue and Turners Crossroad downstream of Louisiana Avenue. The pipe is shown in Figure 1 as Project Area A. BACKGROUND At our January 16 scoping meeting the City asked us to increase the pipe's capacity by submitting a proposal to prepare bidding documents that modify the pipe geometry inside of manholes 1 and 2 shown in Figure 1.Additionally, if sufficient budget remained after modifying the manholes, our bidding documents should also include rehabilitating pipe near manholes 1 and 2 to remove inflow and infiltration (1/1). While preparing our proposal for those bidding documents, we considered 2 important pieces of information. 1. The contents of our March 11, 2014 memo to the City named 'Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis: Inflow and Infiltration.' That Memo recommended the City continue its efforts to reduce Inflow and Infiltration (1/1)within the entire sewershed containing the pipe shown in Figure 1. Our recommendation was based on pipe flow modelling results of the entire sewershed. The model results were calibrated to include data from 3 flow meters set-out inside of manholes inside, or just downstream, of the sewershed as shown in Figure 1. 2. The ability of the Electro Scan (http://www.electroscan.comtool (ES)to estimate the amount of 1/1 entering the pipe between manholes using electrical current rather than video inspection. Using electrical current to estimate of the amount of 1/1 entering a pipe mitigates viewer error inherent in estimates made from video inspection. An ES estimate of how much 1/1 enters the pipe provides insight into options that can add the most capacity to the pipe. a. Modify the pipe geometry in manholes 1 and 2 b. Rehabilitate the pipes themselves Engineers I Architects I Planners I Scientists Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.,10901 Red Circle Drive,Suite 300,Minnetonka,MN 55343-9302 SEH is 100%employee-owned I sehinc.com 1 952.912.2600 1 800.734.6757 1 888.908.8166 fax Laurel Avenue Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation—Preliminary Engineering Report Proposal July 24, 2015 Page 2 c. A combination of'a' and 'b' We arranged for ES to complete complimentary demonstration of its tool on a 300-foot long segment of the pipe during the week of April 27. The tool's demonstration discovered large defects allowing a large amount of 1/1 to enter the pipe segment at almost every pipe joint along the pipe segment analyzed. After considering this new information during a June 5 meeting, the City withdrew its request for us to prepare a proposal for bidding documents. Instead the City asked us to submit this proposal to prepare a preliminary engineering report. The report will outline an approach applying the best options listed above to add capacity to the pipe. SCOPE OF WORK Below is our approach to completing the report. 1. Adjust our flow model: a. based bullet points 1 and 2 above, b. by separating it into Project Areas A and B (The separation allows us to complete investigative model iterations that will discover a phased approach to rehabilitation and 1/1 reduction. Because effluent in pipes in Project Area B in Figure 1 affect the ability of future effluent from possible building expansions at Brookview Golf Course to make it into Project Area A pipe), c. to include potential additional flow monitoring, and d. to include additional estimates of the amount of 1/1 entering Project Areas A and B pipes from ES estimates and detailed manhole inspections (We will collect this data at random locations; not just in or near manholes 1 and 2). 2. Perform model iterations of enough combinations of manhole and/or pipe rehabilitation to establish whether rehabilitating the smaller diameter Project Area B pipe(and maybe its manholes immediately upstream of manhole 1) is more advantageous than rehabilitating the large diameter Project Area A pipe and its 2 manholes or some combination of each. 3. Calculate schematic level opinions of total project cost, including both construction and indirect costs, for the combinations of manhole and/or pipe rehabilitation investigated in bullet point 2. 4. Recommend a phased approach that completes manhole and/or pipe rehabilitation work adding as much capacity to the pipe as quickly as possible within City budget constraints. The City will have our report to assist in establishing its 2017 budget. PROJECT TEAM Paul Pasko will lead this investigation team. Michael Ostendorf will assist Paul in completion of engineering activities. We will utilize other SEH staff as needed for discipline specific tasks. ES is our subconsultant for completing pipe inspections. SCHEDULE We anticipate the dates for each of the key milestones in the table below are accurate. Key Milestone Date Authorization August 5, 2015 Submit Draft Report September 11 Submit Final Report September 25 Laurel Avenue Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation-Preliminary Engineering Report Proposal July 24, 2015 Page 3 COMPENSATION The enclosed task hour budget describes in detail how we will complete our report for an estimated not- to-exceed fee of$84,480. This cost includes reimbursable expenses. As a reference point, we anticipate rehabilitation construction costs in Project Areas A and/or B could approach $2,000,000 to add capacity to the 21-inch sanitary sewer pipe in Laurel Avenue. If this is the case, our fee for our report is 4.2%of the cost of construction. We will bill the City monthly for our services on an hourly basis including reimbursable expenses. We look forward to completing this report for the City. Please contact me with questions or comments at 952.912.2611 or ppasko@sehinc.com. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. ��a 22r- Paul J. Pasko III, PE Project Manager Approved this day of 2015 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota By pjp3 Enclosures c: Mark Grabowski, Electro Scan Sue Mason, SEH Michael Ostendorf, SEH p:\fj\g\goldv\131549\t-genl\10-setup-cont\03-proposal\preliminary engineering report proposal\07 17 15 laurel ave sla rev 07 27 15.docx 5 E H Task Hour Budget 00,of Golden Valle), Laurel Avenue Sanitaq Sewer Rehabilitation—Prelimintuy Engineering Report Juh' 17,2015 ESTIMATED 1101 RS I�I nIt II ti CI,1r:]T Pk U.11(Ct •estok 'RIXTH l 011 PROJECT TASKS statvue 1lrvct:R PR I' Cr .EVD 1IrrruNrar.INrraa .�• �uun nen \I IN'(:r.k r:NtaNEER 1.11PRI:I.INI I's\RN LNG IM:ERING REPORT PHASE 1.1 Data Collection I I ASbn111S(1) 1 I Closed Circuit Televising(CCTV)Records(2) 1 Flo%v Monnorinu(3) 1 Subtotal Hours 3 I Subtotal Labor Cost $291 596 ',387 1.2 lCondition Assessment and Field Imestigations 1111 Project Area A ElectroScan(5)I I 12 6 3 1221 Review CCIARecords(4) 8 2 122.1 Larger diameter Reinforced Concrete Pipe(R('P) 8 2 12.22 Smaller diameter A itrified Clav Pipe(VCP) 8 2 12.3 Project Area B Electro Scan(5)(19)(20)(23) 4 8 16 3 124 Manhole inspection(6) 2 45 2 8 1 2.5 Tem oran'Flow Monitorine(7) 4 10 2 Subtotal Hours 20 40 55 26 14 Subtotal Labor Cost 53.812 6.116 12.9 53 52,521 1,1;978 $26,379 Adjust Hydraulic Model and Perform Evaluation 1.3 Iterations(22) 1.3.1 Review of peak flow rates(8) 2 1.3 2 Evaluate percent ca acity remaining within pipeline(9) 4 8 Identify Inflow and Infiltration(UI)removal I Irequirements 4 8 8 Evaluate new flow generation from future development 1.3.4 (10) I I J Subtotal Hours 7 15 22 Subtotal Labor Cost S1,334 57,918 52,133 55,386 1.4 Investigate Rehabilitation Methods Ial'get diameter RCP(I I) 5 2 8 2 4 Smaller diameter VCP(I 1) 5 2 6 1 -1= AIanholes(12) 1 8 8 2 Subtotalllours 11 12 22 5 Subtotal Labor Cost 52,097 51,535 $2,133 $707 56,471 Anal N,e the Cost/Benefit of the Rehabilitation 1.5 Methods(13)(14)(15) 15.1 Analyze benefits for rehakhtawm nmih,als 2 2 4 1,5 1 1 Structural rehabilitation(_1) 1 4 L5.1.2 1/I rehabilitation 1 4 1 S2 Prioritize rehabilitation of system 2 2 4 1.5.3 lAnalvze budeenna options for phased rehabilitation 4 4 2 1.5.4 ]Analyze savin gs by scale of rehabilitation 1 1 2 1.5.5 Analvze seasonal impacts on the cost of rehabilitation 1.551 Summer rehabilitation 1 15 5 AA iwet rehabditaGon 1 1.6 Prepare Preliminary Engineering Report(16 1 Data Collection 1 2 1 Condition Assessment and Field Investigations 8 2 1 Adjust Hvdraulic Model and Perforin Evaluation Iterations 8 2 1 1 1,4 Inv estivate Rehabilitation Methods 8 1 Analvze the CosuBenefit of the Rehabilitation Methods 2 4 20 2 2 Recommendations(17) 8 3 2 Subtotal flours 2 4 53 11 8 Subtotal Labor Cost 5424 1 $1,554 $766 $10,285 r2�11�11111G DOCUMENT PREPARATION PHASE(18 Page.of 2 (IIIIAT ITMECI SENIOR LEAD PRUIECI ESTIMATED 1ER1 F 'I,NAGEP110. 'I IECII]9CIA, ENGINEER GIs ADIIII Leat 1LUAGrR t:NGINF];R COST PROJECT COSTS(NIMAR) 1.0 PRELP111NARN ENGINEERING REPORT PHASE Subtotal Hours 2 53 131 55 93 30 9 373 Subtotal Labor Cost 424 10,102 16,754 12,953 9,018 4,239 861 $54,350.04 Subtotal ElectroScan Expenses $29,528.95 Subtotal SEH Expenses $601.01 Subtotal $84,4811.00 2.0 BIDDING DOCUMENT PREPARATION PHASE 18 TOTAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL: 584,480.00 P.\FJ\G\Goldv\131549\1-genl\10�etupcont\03yroposal\Preliminary Engineering Report Propmal\(THB Laurel FINALAulf-I -Cosh NOTES (1)City to provide asbuilts for Project Areas A and B pipes (2)City to provide CCTV data for Project Areas A and B pipes (3)City to provide flow monitoring records in Flowlink file and PDF file for meters within study area sewershed. (4)Review CCTV records for both small and large diameter pipes and estimate I/1 amounts entering each of these 2 categories of pipe size as(GPM of Potential Infiltration)/(100 feet of pipe).Adjust this estimate using Electra Scan results. (5)Estimate infiltration amounts using the ElectroScan tool on up to 25%of the length of the of pipe in Project Areas A and B. (6)Inspect 120 manholes in Project Area A and B using SEH's IBAK digital inspection camera.This task includes preparing MACP reports for approximately 25%of these 120 manholes identified being susceptible to IA.Each manhole report will contain condition ratings(0-5). (7)We anticipate directing City staff to set out additional flow monitoring devices in select manholes along Project Areas A and B pipes.City staff will provide the labor and equipment to install,maintain,and remove these flow monitoring devices. (8)Flow rates for contributing area will be compared against MCES historical records. Records will review rainfall from highest peak(2005)and last year's rain events.Goal of this task is to identify quantity of l/1 that ca be reduced from historical flow rates. (9)Update IrdoSWMM model for peak flow rates. (10)We define future development as development that will occur after our March 11,2014 SEH memorandum named'Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis:Inflow and Infiltration.'We will calculate new flows by comparing flows from future development against flows generated by existing land-use. (11)We will investigate the application of up to 3 pipe rehabilitation options including options L grouting 2.structural CIPP lining. (12)We will investigate the application of manhole rehabilitation options 1.structural CIPP manhole lining 2.cementicious lining 3.grouting.We will provide a schematic level analysis of whether or not adjusting the pipe geometries in manholes 1 and 2 in Project Area A will increase the capacity of pipes in Project Areas A and B. (13)We will use a forces and issues matrix to complete this analysis.The forces will be the rows and are the rehabilitation options applied to pipes and manholes in Project Areas A and B.The issues are the columns and are the impacts the rehabilitation options have on Ill removal,structural rehabilitation,and cost in Project Areas A and B.As part of the analysis we will complete schematic level opinions of probable cost for each investigated option.We will designate each issue for each force as a pro or con for that force.We will compile a tally of the total number of pros and cons to help determine the best rehabilitation options for Project Areas A and/or B.This tally will also help determine a prioritization of rehabilitation work.Pros and cons will have equal weight among themselves. (14)Based on the results of the forces and issues matrix,recommend a prionty of rehabilitation methods to be applied to Project Areas A and B. (15)Cost analysis and phasing will include investigating of scale of rehabilitation savings resulting from increased sewerage bypass system length and general contractor interest.We will analyze the impact of which season rehabilitation might occur on the cost of rehabilitation. (16)We will deliver both paper and digital formats of the repos.Digital format is PDF file.The report will contain the following major sections. (17)Recommend a phased approach that completes manhole and/or pipe rehabilitation work adding as much capacity to its 21-inch sanitary sewer pipe in Laurel Avenueto the pipe as quickly as possible within City budget constraints (18)Prepare bidding documents from report recommnedations at a future date. (19)The City will provide a labor and equipment to support ElectroScan crews with a Jet Truck. (20)The City will provide a labor and equipment to support ElectroScan crews with necessary traffic control. (21)Considers results of analysis of whether or not adjusting the pipe geometries in manholes I and 2 in Project Area A will increase the capacity of pipes in Project Areas A and B. (22)Evaluation includes up to 6 iterations of the adjusted model to test the impacts of various rehabilitation methods applied to pipes and/or manholes. (23)If an ElectroScan probe becomes stuck in a pipe,the City will provide a labor and equipment necessary to assist ElectroScan crews with the recovery of their probe.The City is not responsible for the cost of a damaged probe. Page 2 of 2 city 0 golden. MEMORANDUM val11 l Public Works De artment 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. G. Amendment for the Liberty Crossing Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary At its February 17, 2015, meeting, the Council approved an agreement for professional services with Barr Engineering to provide preliminary design services for flood mitigation storage at the Liberty Crossing Planned Unit Development. The final PUD was recently approved by the Council at its July 21, 2015, meeting. Because of its location in the DeCola Ponds watershed the PUD includes the implementation of flood storage as the first steps in addressing the long term flooding at Medicine Lake Road and DeCola Ponds. Staff and Barr Engineering have met numerous times with the Liberty Crossing development team during the PUD review and approval process to refine the required flood mitigation storage. This process has resulted in a preliminary design that is consistent with the City's goals for the Medicine Lake Road and DeCola Ponds flood damage reduction efforts. However, in order to advance the design, additional work that is beyond the scope of the preliminary design contract is required. Staff requested an amendment proposal from Barr to continue the design of the flood storage. As outlined in the July 17, 2015, letter, the additional work includes coordination and analysis of soil borings in the vicinity of the flood storage, continued preliminary engineering of the project, additional meetings with the Liberty Crossing developer, and assistance in preparing environmental grant applications. The not to exceed cost for the additional work is $64,000, resulting in an amended not to exceed contract amount of$99,300.00. Funding for the project will come from the Storm Utility Fund. Attachments • Location map (1 page) • Proposal letter from Barr Engineering to Jeff Oliver, City Engineer, dated July 17, 2015, for Amendment to the Liberty Crossing Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design contract (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize Amendment to the February 17, 2015, contract with Barr Engineering for Liberty Crossing Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design, for an amended not to exceed $99,300. \1 N r ERRLINDAID Z TA LIN� ua ul CO L D cY ................. ao 100yr Flood Inundation Area 0 d -� Cat 1 `2 z Madison ei6en Ln d Rd Math �a Peds 8,C Pennsylvania Poll a Woods 23 d Ave N Gofden Sandbur, � L�ecc�la 0 M > Pond C? Decola GfalciQrS Ct Pond A � \ Q - C tka �s r Winnetka Heights ®` oa olid z z z _ z t C golden Location Map resourceful. naturally. BARB engineering and environmental consultants July 17, 2015 Mr.Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Amendment to the liberty Crossing Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design Dear Mr. Oliver: Thank you for the opportunity to continue to provide professional engineering services to the City of Golden Valley. This letter outlines an amendment to the agreement between the City of Golden Valley and Barr Engineering Company regarding the project to perform preliminary flood mitigation design work at the Liberty Crossing development site. This site is a critical component of the flood mitigation alternatives identified in the completed DeCola Ponds Area Flood Mitigation Study (DeCola Ponds study, Barr, April 2012) and the ongoing Medicine Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue Area Long Term Flood Mitigation Plan (MLRWA plan, Barr). This letter presents the additional scope of professional consulting services we will provide for your project, including the proposed work tasks, the cost estimate, and the approximate schedule for the completion of the work. This scope includes tasks to be completed as part of the preliminary design of the flood mitigation at the Liberty Crossing site including coordination of geotechnical borings on the VFW and car wash sites, continued work with the developer on the evaluation of flood storage on the VFW site based on the selected site alternative, providing environmental grant application assistance and coordination, and miscellaneous technical review. Introduction The City of Golden Valley is currently working with the developer at the Liberty Crossing site(former VFW site and parcels to the south) located south of Medicine Lake Road and east of Winnetka Avenue to perform preliminary engineering work to incorporate the flood mitigation storage, conveyance, and infrastructure. Past studies of the regional flooding in this area have identified the Liberty Crossing site as a critical location for flood volume storage and flood conveyance. Although the follow-up flood mitigation study(MLRWA plan) is currently underway, the purchase of the parcels and submittal of development plans for the Liberty Crossing development has elevated the need for the City to work in partnership with the developer on incorporating the needed flood mitigation components into the proposed development project. Barr Engineering Co. 4700 West 77th Street, Suite 200, Minneapolis,MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Mr.Jeff Oliver,PE July 17,2015 Page 2 Proposed Work Tasks The following outlines the additional scope of work to be included with the the Liberty Crossing Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design work (original scope of work approved February 20, 2015). Additionally we were verbally authorized by City of Golden Valley staff to provide environmental assistance as part of the original approved scope of work budget. Task 9—Geotechnical Soil Borings Task 9 includes the coordination of geotechnical soil borings on the VFW and car wash sites and laboratory testing of select soil samples. This investigation will include up to 9 soil borings on the VFW site and 3 soil borings on the car wash site. The goal of the geotechnical soil borings is to further define soil conditions and provide subsurface information for the design of the flood mitigation system. Previous soil borings have identified shallow groundwater and areas of fill and peat, which have the potential to influence the design of the flood mitigation system and overall project cost. These soil borings will be used to delineate the presence of unsuitable soils, and also to provide samples for geotechnical laboratory testing. We will obtain estimates from two different drilling contractors to perform the work. We have assumed that one (1) Barr staff will field stake the locations of the soil borings for the contractors and have assumed that the contractors will coordinate the utility locates on the VFW and car wash site prior to drilling. We will have one(1) Barr geotechnical specialist on site during drilling to coordinate the drilling, collect samples, and prepare boring logs. Based on available information from previous investigations, we have assumed that boring depths will range between 35 and 65 feet. Five (5) of the twelve (12) soil borings will extend approximately 20 feet into the native till below the peat.The remaining soil borings will extend approximately 5 feet into the native till. For our costs we have assumed that the driller will use a combination of hollow stem auger and mud rotary drilling methods. Mud rotary may be used if high water pressures are encountered within the peat and underlying soils. Geotechnical laboratory testing of select samples will also be performed.This testing is anticipated to include index and strength testing of select layers,which will provide information to assess the suitability of the subsurface materials to provide foundation support for the flood mitigation system. The estimated cost for laboratory testing is $6,000. We have assumed that we will not be developing a geotechnical report or recommendations. If this would be desired,the estimated additional cost would be $5,000. As previously mentioned, existing soil borings indicate the presence of shallow groundwater at the site. This has the potential to affect the design of subsurface structures, the surface conveyance features, and also reduce the stormwater storage capacity in the proposed stormwater systems. Although borings can provide some insight into the presence of groundwater, an accurate determination of the groundwater elevation may not be possible. For these reasons, we have assumed the installation of two (2) piezometers to provide a more accurate representation of groundwater conditions at the site. The estimated cost for piezometer installation is $4,500. Mr.Jeff Oliver,PE July 17,2015 Page 3 Assumptions: Six days of drilling, ten (10) hours per day, 5 borings extending 20 feet into native till, 7 borings extending 5 feet into native till, soil borings in pavement area can be repaired using cold-patch, installation of two piezometers. Deliverables: Cover letter summarizing geotechnical investigation, including geotechnical boring logs, laboratory testing results, and estimated groundwater elevation Task 10—Preliminary Design&Schematic Development Task 10 includes continued work with the developer on the proposed layout of the VFW site, estimates of the required flood mitigation volume, development of additional flood storage, and estimates of costs for the various alternatives and conceptual designs. We have assumed we will be focusing on the alternative agreed on at the 7/13/2015 meeting which included the removal of 8 townhome units on the east end of the site. We expect there to be several iterations with the developer on finalizing the footprint of the design, considering the results of the geotechnical investigations. We have assumed there will be three (3) meetings with City staff and the developers design team (which includes the 7/13/2015 meeting). We have assumed that we will be developing one plan view schematic and one planning level cost estimate for the selected alternatives once we have finalized the footprint of the design. We also plan to evaluate the selected alternative design using the existing XP-SWMM model for the 100-year design storm event to verify that the proposed project will not change(or will even reduce) flood elevations in the area around Medicine Lake Road and the downstream DeCola Ponds. However, we have assumed that any public meetings in relation to this project will be held during a future phase of the work. Assumptions: One (1) plan view schematic and one (1) cost estimate for the selected alternative for the VFW site. Three (3) meetings with City staff and developers design team. Deliverables: Plan view schematic, planning level cost estimates, and 100-year flood elevation results. Task 11 —Environmental Grant Application Assistance and Coordination A portion of the environmental costs for this project may be eligible for grant funding, particularly from Hennepin County Environmental Services environmental response fund (ERF), which focuses on public redevelopment projects that are facing legacy environmental issues. Barr will be developing the Response Action Plan (RAP) for the City through separate funding from Hennepin County. If the City is interested in pursuing this funding, Task 10 includes time for Barr to assist the City in seeking grant funds for the November 2015 round (grant applications due November 1). If successful,the funds would be available to reimburse costs incurred in the Spring/Summer 2016 related to the excavation,transportation and landfilling of soil deemed unsuitable for reuse. We assumed that the City will be the primary author of the grant application, with Barr providing supporting data, cost estimates, figures, reports and general consultation and review of the overall application. We have assumed that the grant application will be separate from the Liberty Crossing development (if they decide to pursue grant funding for clean-up). Up to two (2) meetings with the City and Hennepin County are also anticipated. Assumptions: City will be primary author of the grant application with assistance from Barr staff, Up to two(2) meetings with City and Hennepin County staff. Mr.Jeff Oliver,PE July 17,2015 Page 4 Deliverables: Final grant application for submittal to Hennepin County ERF funds. Task 12—Miscellaneous Technical Review Task 12 is for time that Barr may be asked to perform technical reviews of documents or information as provided by the Liberty Crossing developer. This could include review of proposed stormwater management features onsite and additional environmental or geotechnical information. Deliverables: Response to technical information, as requested by City staff Estimated Cost and Schedule The table below describes the estimated costs for the approved tasks (Tasks 1-7 & 8 (verbally authorized environmental assistance)) along with the estimated cost for the proposed Tasks 9-12, outlined above. Assumptions associated with these costs are included in the above text. The table below also includes the estimated schedule for the services: Task Description Amount Estimated Completion 1-8 Original Approved Scope of Work $35,300 April 2015 9 Geotechnical Soil Borings and Piezometers(including $43,000* Late August 2015** estimated contractor and laboratory testing costs) 10 Preliminary Design &Schematic Development $13,500 September 2015 11 Environmental Grant Application Assistance and $5,000 October 2015 Coordination 12 Miscellaneous Technical Review $2,500 October 2015 Project Total $99,300 *Includes estimated drilling contractor(including piezometer installation)and laboratory costs **Per calls to three drilling contractors,all are scheduling 3-4 weeks out. This amendment will be effective for the duration of the services, unless earlier terminated by either the City or us. We will commence work upon receipt of a copy of this letter signed by your authorized City representative. We will inform you of our progress through periodic e-mail updates, telephone calls, invoice details, and other communications. For the services provided, you will pay us according to Standard Terms as included in the original agreement. We will bill the city monthly. The total cost of the amended services will not exceed $99,300 without prior approval by the city. Mr.Jeff Oliver,PE July v,2015 Page 5 We understand you or your designees have the authority to direct us. We will direct communications to you at the City of Golden Valley,7800 Golden Valley Road. Direction should be provided to Jennifer Koehler at Barr Engineering Co.4700 West 77th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55435. During the term of this Agreement,we will maintain the following insurance coverages: Worker Compensation Statutory Employer Liability $500k per claim/$500k aggregate Commercial General Liability$1M per claim/$2M aggregate, combined single limit Automobile$1M combined single limit Umbrella/excess policy as to above coverages $10M aggregate Professional Liability(claims-made) $5M per claim/$5M annual aggregate If this Agreement is satisfactory, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided, and return it to us. Sincerely yours, Barr Engineering Co. Ll 4-4ta By Kurt Leuthold Its Vice President Mr.Jeff Oliver,PE July 17,2015 Page 6 Accepted this day of .2015 City of Golden Valley By Thomas D. Burt Its City Manager city 0 r gol en MEMORANDUM valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. H. Second Consideration - Amendments to City Code Regarding Alcoholic Beverages Licensing and Regulations Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary Staff recommends amending the City Code regarding alcoholic beverage licensing to allow for microdistilleries on-sale cocktail room license and off-sale distilled spirits license. Also, staff is proposing to amend the Sunday sales section to allow for off-sale growler sales and on-sale 8 am openings. The recommended changes to Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverage Licensing include: Addition of Sections 5.36: On-Sale Cocktail Room License and 5.37: Off-Sale Distilled Spirits License Amendments to Sections 5:01: Definitions, 5.33: Off-Sale Small Brewer, 5.34: On-Sale Small Brewer Taproom and 5:41 Sunday Sales The first consideration of this ordinance was presented July 21, 2015, Council meeting. If Council adopts the ordinance on second consideration, it will be effective upon publication. Attachments • Ordinance#570, Amending Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages Licensing and Regulation (3 pages) • Summary of Ordinance #570, Amending Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages Licensing and Regulation (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt second consideration, Ordinance #570, Amendment to Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages Licensing and Regulation. Motion to approve Summary of Ordinance#570 for publication. ORDINANCE NO. 570, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Adding New Sections 5.36: On-Sale Cocktail Room License, and 5.37: Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Liquor License and Amending Sections 5.01: Definitions, 5.33: Off-Sale Small Brewer, 5.34: On-Sale Small Brewer Taproom and 5.41 Sunday Sales The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. City Code Section 5.01 entitled "Definitions" is hereby amended by adding the following definitions: number 9: Distilled Spirits, number 11: Growler and number 21: Microdistillery to read as follows with subsequent subsections renumbered as needed. 9. Distilled Spirits: means ethyl alcohol, hydrated oxide of ethyl, spirits of wine, whiskey, rum, brandy, gin or other distilled spirits, including all dilutions and mixtures thereof, for nonindustrial use. 11. Growler: shall have the meaning given such term in Section 5.33 of the City Code. 21. Microdistillery: means a distillery operated within the City producing premium, distilled spirits in total quantity not to exceed forty thousand (40,000) proof gallons in a calendar year. Section 2. City Code Section 5.33, Subdivision 1, paragraph 1 is hereby amended by inserting the following after "subject to": "...all applicable Minnesota Statues, federal laws, rules and regulations, and" Section 3. City Code Section 5.33, Subdivision 1(B) is hereby amended to read as follows: B. The hours of operation shall be limited to the hours set forth in Section 5.42: Hours and Day of Liquor Sales, subd. 2, and Section 5.41 regarding the off-sale Sunday sales of growlers. The malt liquor sold off-sale must be removed from the premises before off-sale closing time at exclusive liquor store. Section 4. City Code Section 5.33, Subdivision 1 is amended by adding subsection (C) to read as follows and renumber subsequent subsections as needed: C. The amount of malt liquor sold at off-sale may not exceed five hundred (500) barrels annually. Section 5. City Code Section 5.34, Subdivision 1 paragraph 1 is hereby amended by inserting the following after "subject to": "...all applicable Minnesota Statues, federal laws, rules and regulations, and" Section 6. City Code Section 5.34 Subdivision 1(A)(B)(C)(D) are hereby amended to read as follows: A. The malt liquor sold on sale for consumption must be produced by the brewer on the licensed premises of or adjacent to one (1) brewery location owned by the brewer. Ordinance No. 570 - continued B. No other beverages containing alcohol may be sold or consumed on the licensed premises. C. The hours of operation shall be limited to the hours set forth in Section 5.42: Hours and Day of Liquor Sales Subd. 1. D. No single entity may hold a taproom license under this Section and a cocktail license under Section 5.36 of the City Code, and a cocktail room and taproom may not be co-located. Section 7. City Code Chapter 5 is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 5.36: Section 5.36: Cocktail Room License - On-Sale Subdivision 1. Cocktail Room License A Microdistillery licensed under Minnesota Statute, Section 340A.22 may be issued an on- sale liquor license for the on-sale of distilled liquor produced by the distiller for consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one (1) distillery location owned by the distiller, subject to the following conditions: A. The distiller may only have one (1) cocktail room licensed under Minnesota Statute 340A.22 and may not have ownership interest in a distillery licensed under Minnesota Statute 340A.301 subd. 6(a). B. No other beverages containing alcohol may be sold or consumed on the licensed premises, other than the distilled spirits produced by the microdistiller upon the microdistillery premises. C. No single entity may hold a cocktail room license under this Section and a taproom license under Section 5.34 of the City Code, and a cocktail room and taproom may not be co-located. D. The hours of operation shall be limited to the hours set forth in Section 5.42: Hours and Day of Liquor Sales, subd. 1. E. Nothing in this Section shall preclude the holder of a cocktail room license from also holding a license to operate a restaurant at the cocktail room location. Section 8. City Code Chapter 5 is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 5.37: Section 5.37: Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Subdivision 1. Off-Sale Distilled Spirits A Microdistillery licensed under Minnesota Statute, Section 340A.22 may be issued an off- sale license for the off sale of distilled spirits produced and packaged on the licensed premises, subject to all applicable Minnesota Statues, federal laws, rules and regulations, and the following conditions: A. Off-sale of distilled spirits shall be limited to the hours set forth in Section 5.42: Hours and Days of Liquor Sales, subd. 2. Ordinance No. 570 - continued B. The license holder may not sell more than one (1) three hundred seventy five (375) milliliter bottle of distilled spirits per day to any one (1) customer at off-sale. Section 9. City Code section 5.41 Subdivision 1 is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end of section: "A brewer holding an off-sale license may sell growlers off-sale on Sunday at the licensed premises." Section 10. City Code section 5.41 Subdivision 2 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subdivision 2. Hours of On-Sale The holder of a Sunday on-sale liquor license may serve alcoholic beverages between 8 am on Sundays to 1 am on Mondays, provided that the licensee is in conformance with the Minnesota Clean Air Act. Section 11. City Code section 5.41 is hereby amended by adding Subdivision 3 to read as follows and renumber subsequent Subdivisions as needed: Subdivision 3. Hours of Off-Sale Growlers A brewer holding an off-sale license may serve growlers from 10 am to 8 pm on Sunday, provided that the licensee is in conformance with the Minnesota Clean Air Act. Section 12. City Code section 5.41 Subdivision 4 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subdivision 4. Unlawful Acts It is unlawful to sell liquor on Sunday unless such sales are 1) licensed in accordance with this Section, 2) in conjunction with the sale of food, except with respect to a brewer licensed to sell growlers off-sale, and 3) during hours of permitted sales. Section 13. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 5.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 14. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 5th of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 570, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Adding New Sections 5.36: On-Sale Cocktail Room License, and 5.37: Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Liquor License and Amending Sections 5.01: Definitions, 5.33: Off-Sale Small Brewer, 5.34: On-Sale Small Brewer Taproom and 5.41 Sunday Sales This is a summary of the provisions of the above Ordinance which has been approved for publication by the City Council. This ordinance amends Chapter 5 to provide for the addition of Section 5.36, On-Sale Cocktail Room License and Section 5.37: Off-Sale Distilled Spirits Liquor License. These two Sections permit certain types of manufacturers of distilled spirits in the City to sell distilled liquor on and off-sale in accordance with state law. This ordinance also amends: • Section 5.33 Off-Sale Small Brewer Liquor License to clarify the hours of operation and the amount of malt liquor to be sold annually. • Section 5.34 On-Sale Small Brewer Taproom License to clarify the hours of operation and of Subdivision (D) stating no single entity may hold a taproom license and a cocktail license. • Section 5.41 Sunday Sales to allow for off-sale of growlers on Sundays and the holder of an on-sale license to serve alcoholic beverages between 8 am to 1 am on Sundays. The ordinance shall take effect upon publication. NOTICE: The foregoing is only a summary of the ordinance A printed copy of the full text of the ordinance is available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST.- /s/Kristine TTEST:/s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk Cit0 goldent�r valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. I. Second Consideration - Amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for New Liquor License Fees Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary If the Council proceeds with adoption of amending Chapter 5: Alcoholic Beverages Licensing to include the addition of an On-Sale Cocktail Room and Off-Sale Distilled liquor license, Council should also adopt the associated fees. Staff is recommending the following fees: On-Sale Cocktail Room license - $600 Off-Sale Distilled Spirits liquor license - $200 The first consideration of this ordinance was presented at the July 21, 2015, City Council meeting. If Council adopts the ordinance on second consideration, it will be effective upon publication. Attachments • Ordinance#571, Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule to include new License Fees (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt second consideration, Ordinance #571, amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule to include new Liquor License Fees. ORDINANCE NO. 571, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for New Liquor License Fees The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. The 2015 Master Fee Schedule in Chapter 25 of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the following new liquor license fees: Liquor License License Renewal Date Annual Fee Off-Sale Distilled Spirits License 1-Jul $200 On-Sale Cocktail Room License 1-Jul $600 Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city 0 golden MEMORANDUM Physical Development valley iDepartment Y P 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. J. Second Consideration - Eliminating Section 6.41 Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations Prepared By Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Summary As staff conducted research on mobile food vending, it was discovered that section 6.41 of the City Code is no longer relevant to City operations. This section of City Code applied when the Golden Valley Health Authority was an operating division of the City of Golden Valley. In 2006, all health and sanitation inspections regarding food and beverage establishments were designated to Hennepin County Environmental Health. Staff confirmed with the City Attorney that Hennepin County health regulations do not need to be adopted in City Code in order to be applicable within the City. The first consideration of this ordinance was presented July 21, 2015, Council meeting. If Council adopts the ordinance on second consideration, it will be effective upon publication. Attachments • Ordinance #572, Eliminating Chapter 6, Section 41: Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt on second consideration, Ordinance#572, Eliminating Section 6.41 regarding Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations. ORDINANCE NO. 572, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Eliminating Chapter 6, Section 41: Food Establishment and Vending Machine Regulations The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Section 6.41 is eliminated in its entirety. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 6.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk From: psperkins Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 12:03 PM To: Knauss, Chantell Subject: Resignation Hello, I would like to inform you that I will no longer be participating as a member of the HRC effective immediately. Peyton Perkins Ci ty (? W 901dal MEMORANDUM v a e y Physical Development Department � r r 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. L. Authorize the City to enter into a Shared Services Agreement between City of Golden Valley and City of St. Louis Park Prepared By Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Summary City staff from the Inspections, Planning, and Fire Departments of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park have outlined an agreement for the City Councils' authorization. This agreement addresses permitting, plan review, inspections, and licensing of the two buildings within the Central Park West PUD that straddle the municipal boundary. The first building is the 199-unit apartment building, which is identified as the Phase 1 Residential building on Lot 1 of the PUD. The second building is the future office parking ramp located on Outlot A of the PUD (see attached site plan). A Shared Services Agreement allows the cities to provide municipal services with less administrative complications and stronger customer service. Terms of Agreement On-going term unless or until one of the cities chooses to terminate the agreement St. Louis Park will conduct inspections on Phase 1 Residential of Lot 1 Golden Valley will conduct inspections on Parking Ramp of Outlot A 1 Building Permit and 1 Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for each building Both cities will enforce Minnesota State Building and Fire Codes Revenue is collected based on building valuation (see attached drawing) All records are kept and shared by both cities Rental Licenses & Property Maintenance Rental licenses could be handled by each city respectively. The rental licensing and property maintenance regulations, fees, and schedules are very similar. Staff will communicate this arrangement with the property management team in charge of overseeing operations in the residential building. Emergency Response & Public Safety Police and Fire Department staff from both cities have met to discuss how emergency services will be addressed within this PUD, which will not differ from how these services are addressed at other municipal boundaries. Staff at both cities agree that customer service and public safety are of upmost importance. This Shared Services Agreement does not include emergency services in the scope, except to note that none of the provisions of the agreement conflict or alter existing mutual aid agreements. Attachments • Shared Services Agreement (12 pages) • Revenue Formula for Building & Fire Permits (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the City to enter into a Shared Services Agreement with the City of St. Louis Park. SHARED SERVICES AGREEMENT This Shared Services Agreement (this "Agreement") is made this day of 12015, by and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("St. Louis Park") and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("Golden Valley"). RECITALS A. Minn. Stat. § 471.59 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into agreements to share services. B. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley each approved a planned unit development (collectively, the "PUDs") with respect the real property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Central Park West Property"). C. The owner of Lot 1, Block 1 of the Central Park West Property (the "Phase 1 Property") intends to construct a residential building and related improvements (collectively, the "Residential Building") on the Phase 1 Property, in accordance with the PUDs. D. A portion of the Residential Building, as approved in the PUDs, will be located within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park (the "SLP Part of the Residential Building") and the remaining portion will be located within the jurisdiction of the Golden Valley (the "GV Part of the Residential Building"). E. The PUDs contemplate that the owner of Outlot A of the Central Park West Property (the "Outlot A") will construct a multi-level parking structure and related improvements (collectively, the "Parking Ramp") on a portion of Outlot A (the "Parking Ramp Property"). F. As contemplated in the PUDs, a portion of the Parking Ramp will be located within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park (the "SLP Part of the Parking Ramp") and the remaining portion will be located within the jurisdiction of Golden Valley (the "GV Part of the Parking Ramp"). G. The final plans for the Parking Ramp remain subject to the review and approval of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, in accordance with their respective city codes. H. The site plan attached as Exhibit B hereto shows the Central Park West Property, the expected location of the Residential Building and the Parking Ramp, and the jurisdictional boundary line between St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. I. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley have the common power to administer and enforce state-wide codes applicable to the construction, demolition, replacement, repair, installation, or maintenance of buildings, structures and related improvements, including without limitation the Minnesota State Building Code and the Minnesota State Fire Code (collectively, the "State Codes"). J. The fee schedules under the parties' respective city codes impose or require substantially similar fee and charge amounts in connection with the administration and enforcement of the State Codes. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to increase the efficiency of the parties' inspection and permitting of construction, maintenance and other certain regulated activities that the owners of the Phase 1 Property and Outlot A will engage in with respect to the Residential Building and the Parking Ramp. 2. Residential Building. A. Administration and Enforcement of State Codes. (i) With respect to the SLP Part of the Residential Building, St. Louis Park shall exercise its powers to administer and enforce the State Codes applicable to the construction and maintenance of the Residential Building. (ii) With respect to the GV Part of the Residential Building, St. Louis Park shall exercise on behalf of Golden Valley their common powers to administer and enforce the State Codes to the same kind and extent St. Louis Park applies such codes to the SLP Part of the Residential Building. (iii) Pursuant to the foregoing, permit(s) and certificate(s) of occupancy for the Residential Building shall be issued by St. Louis Park, and St. Louis Park shall be responsible for all inspections and enforcement activities related to the State Codes applicable to the Residential Building. It being the intent of the parties that the owner of the Phase 1 Property need only coordinate with St. Louis Park for such permits and certificates of occupancy for the Residential Building. (iv) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Golden Valley shall have (a) the right to perform a final walk-through inspection of the Residential Building prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy therefor; and (b) full access to (and copies of, if requested) all records related to St. Louis Park's administration and enforcement of the State Codes with respect to the Residential Building, including, to the extent applicable, electronic access to such records. B. Residential Building Fees. Any fees, charges or surcharges (including without limitation building permit fees, building plan review fees, electrical permit fees, mechanical permit fees, plumbing permit fees, and fire permit fees) imposed or required under the parties' respective city codes with respect to the administration and enforcement of the State Codes for the Residential Building (collectively, "Residential Building Fees") shall be imposed, collected and allocated as follows: (i) To the extent the St. Louis Park City Code imposes or requires Residential Building Fees, St. Louis Park shall impose or require such fees with respect to the entire Residential Building (i.e., both the SLP Part of the 2 Residential Building and the GV Part of the Residential Building) in accordance with the fee schedule of the St. Louis Park City Code, and such fees shall be collected by St. Louis Park. Any Residential Building Fees collected by St. Louis Park shall be allocated among the parties as follows: a. All collected Residential Building Fees collected shall belong to St. Louis Park, except GV's Share which shall belong to Golden Valley. b. As used herein the term "GV's Share" shall mean the product of the following formula to the extent such product exceeds $500.00: The amount of Residential Building Fees received by St. Louis Park, multiplied by 42.4%, multiplied by 25%. c. St. Louis Park shall be responsible for calculating GV's Share and shall do so for each Business Day it receives one or more payments of Residential Building Fees. St. Louis Park's determination of GV's Share shall be subject to Golden Valley review and approval. For purposes of applying the foregoing formula, the "amount of Residential Building Fees received by St. Louis Park" shall be determined separately for each Business Day on which Residential Building Fees are received by St. Louis Park. It being the intent of the parties to avoid the administrative cost of processing the payment of GV's Share with respect to relatively small amounts of Residential Building Fees received by St. Louis Park; provided that whether Golden Valley is entitled to any share of Residential Building Fees shall not impair Golden Valley's rights under Section 2.A(iv) above. As used herein the term, "Business Day" shall mean any day Monday through Friday on which the governmental offices of the parties are open for normal business. d. Pursuant to the foregoing, if GV's Share is less than $500 on any Business Day, no payment of Residential Building Fees collected on that Business Day shall be made to Golden Valley. e. If pursuant to the foregoing Golden Valley is to receive any Residential Building Fees, St. Louis Park shall pay such amount to Golden Valley within thirty (30) days of its receipt of such Residential Building Fees and shall provide to Golden Valley with such payment documentation evidencing the total amount of Residential Building Fees received by St. Louis Park on the applicable Business Day and the calculation of GV's Share with respect to such fees received. f. The foregoing 42.4% figure represents the percentage of the Residential Building Square Footage that will lie within Golden Valley's jurisdiction, according to the plans approved in the PUDs. As used herein, the term "Residential Building Square Footage" refers to the total square footage of the building to be located on the Phase 1 Property, according to the PUDs. 3 (iii) To the extent St. Louis Park's imposition or requirement of any Residential Building Fees is based on a valuation of the Residential Building set forth in a permit application, prior to approving such application, St. Louis Park shall provide Golden Valley a copy of the application and any documentation it obtains or receives in connection with such valuation. Within ten (10) Business Days of its receipt of the application and such documentation, Golden Valley shall indicate to St. Louis Park whether it agrees or disagrees with the valuation, and if it disagrees the basis for such disagreement. In the event Golden Valley disagrees with the valuation, the parties shall cooperate with the property owner to agree upon an acceptable valuation prior to proceeding with the application. (iv) To the extent a party performs an inspection of the Residential Building pursuant to its city code or this Agreement and under that party's city code a separate fee is imposed for such inspection, the foregoing shall not prevent such party from charging, collecting and retaining such inspection fee in its entirety. (v) Except as provided herein, Golden Valley shall not impose or require the payment of any Residential Building Fees. C. Rental Licensing. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, each party shall administer and enforce their respective rental licensing regulations to the extent applicable to the Residential Building, but only with respect to those portions of the Residential Building that lie within each party's jurisdiction. Any fees or charges imposed or required under such regulations shall be collected by and belong to the party administering and enforcing such regulations. 3. Parking Ramp. A. Administration and Enforcement of State Codes. (i) With respect to the GV Part of the Parking Ramp, Golden Valley shall exercise its powers to administer and enforce the State Codes applicable to the construction and maintenance of the Parking Ramp. (ii) With respect to the SLP Part of the Parking Ramp, Golden Valley shall exercise on behalf of St. Louis Park their common powers to administer and enforce the State Codes to the same kind and extent Golden Valley applies such codes to the GV Part of the Parking Ramp. (iii) Pursuant to the foregoing, the permit(s) and certificate(s) of occupancy for the Parking Ramp shall be issued by Golden Valley, and Golden Valley shall be responsible for all inspections and enforcement activities related to the State Codes applicable to the Parking Ramp. It being the intent of the parties that the owner of the Parking Ramp Property need only coordinate with Golden Valley for such permits and certificates of occupancy for the Parking Ramp. (iv) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, St. Louis Park shall have (a) the right to perform a final walk-through inspection of the Parking Ramp prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy therefor; and 4 (b) full access to (and copies of, if requested) all records related to Golden Valley's administration and enforcement of the State Codes with respect to the Parking Ramp, including, to the extent applicable, electronic access to such records. B. Parking Ramp Fees. Any fees, charges or surcharges (including without limitation building permit fees, building plan review fees, electrical permit fees, mechanical permit fees, plumbing permit fees, and fire permit fees) imposed or required under the parties' respective city codes with respect to the administration and enforcement of the State Codes for the Parking Ramp (collectively, "Parking Ramp Fees") shall be imposed, collected and allocated as follows: (i) To the extent the Golden Valley City Code imposes or requires Parking Ramp Fees, Golden Valley shall impose or require such fees with respect to the entire Parking Ramp (i.e., both the SLP Part of the Parking Ramp and the GV Part of the Parking Ramp) in accordance with the fee schedule of the Golden Valley City Code, and such fees shall be collected by Golden Valley. (ii) Any Parking Ramp Fees collected by Golden Valley shall be allocated among the parties as follows: a. All collected Parking Ramp Fees collected shall belong to Golden Valley, except SLP's Share which shall belong to St. Louis Park. b. As used herein the term "SLP's Share" shall mean the product of the following formula to the extent such product exceeds $500.00: The amount of Parking Ramp Fees received by Golden Valley, multiplied by the SLP Ramp Percentage, multiplied by 25%. c. As used herein the term "SLP Ramp Percentage" shall mean the percent of the Total Parking Ramp Square Footage that will lie within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park, according to the final construction plans for the Parking Ramp approved by each party in accordance with their respective city codes (the "Final Construction Plans"). As used herein, the term "Total Parking Ramp Square Footage" shall refer to the total square footage of the parking ramp to be located on Outlot A, according to the PUDs, with such square footage to be calculated based on the Final Construction Plans. As of the date hereof, it is anticipated that approximately 10% of the Total Parking Ramp Square Footage will be located in St. Louis Park (i.e., the SLP Ramp Percentage will be 10%). Upon the parties' receipt of the Final Construction Plans, the SLP Ramp Percentage shall be established by letter agreement among the parties d. Golden Valley shall be responsible for calculating SLP's Share and shall do so for each Business Day it receives one or more payments of Parking Ramp Fees. Golden Valley's determination of SLP's Share shall be subject to St. Louis Park's review and approval. For purposes of applying the foregoing formula, the "amount of 5 Parking Ramp Fees received by Golden Valley" shall be determined separately for each Business Day on which Parking Ramp Fees are received by Golden Valley. It being the intent of the parties to avoid the administrative cost of processing the payment of SLP's Share with respect to relatively small amounts of Parking Ramp Fees received by Golden Valley; provided that whether St. Louis Park is entitled to any share of Parking Ramp Fees shall not impair St Louis Park's rights under Section 3.A(iv) above. e. Pursuant to the foregoing, if SLP's Share is less than $500 on any Business Day, no payment of Parking Ramp Fees collected on that Business Day shall be made to St. Louis Park. f. If pursuant to the foregoing St. Louis Park is to receive any Parking Ramp Fees, Golden Valley shall pay such amount to St. Louis Park within thirty (30) days of its receipt of such Parking Ramp Fees and shall provide to St. Louis Park with such payment documentation evidencing the total amount of Parking Ramp Fees received by Golden Valley on the applicable Business Day and the calculation of SLP's Share with respect to such fees received. (iii) To the extent Golden Valley's imposition or requirement of any Parking Ramp Fees is based on a valuation of the Parking Ramp set forth in a permit application, prior to approving such application, Golden Valley shall provide St. Louis Park a copy of the application and any documentation it obtains or receives in connection with such valuation. Within ten (10) Business Days of its receipt of the application and such documentation, St. Louis Park shall indicate to Golden Valley whether it agrees or disagrees with the valuation, and if it disagrees the basis for such disagreement. In the event St. Louis Park disagrees with the valuation, the parties shall cooperate with the property owner to agree upon an acceptable valuation prior to proceeding with the application. (iv) To the extent a party performs an inspection of the Parking Ramp pursuant to its city code or this Agreement and under that party's city code a separate fee is imposed for such inspection, the foregoing shall not prevent such party from charging, collecting and retaining such inspection fee in its entirety. (v) Except as provided herein, St. Lois Park shall not impose or require the payment of any Parking Ramp Fees. 4. Mutual Aid for Public Safety. This Agreement shall not modify or amend any other agreements between the parties, or to which the parties are a party, regarding fire, police and other emergency services. 5. Workers Compensation Claims. It is agreed that any and all employees of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley and all other persons engaged by each respective party in the performance of any work or services required or provided as contemplated by this Agreement shall not be considered employees of the other party, and that any and all claims that may or might arise under worker's compensation laws or unemployment 6 compensation laws on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided as contemplated by this Agreement shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the other party. 6. Retained Authority. Except to the extent expressly provided herein, this Agreement shall not otherwise alter the municipal powers of the parties. 7. Term. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon six (6) months advance written notice to the other party. 8. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended at any time by agreement of the parties; provided, however, that, unless waived, the owner(s) of the Phase 1 Property and the Parking Ramp Property shall have received three (3) months advance written notice of the proposed amendment prior to the presentation of the proposed amendment to the governing bodies of each of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. For purposes of the address for notice(s) to such owner(s), the parties shall use the addresses available through then-current property tax records. 9. Saving Provision. If any provision of this Agreement shall be found invalid or unenforceable with respect to any entity or in any jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and such provisions found to be unlawful or unenforceable shall not be affected as to their enforcement or lawfulness as to any other entity or in any other jurisdiction, and to such extent the terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended to be severable 10. Notices. Any written notice required hereunder shall be hand delivered or by certified mail at the following addresses unless the other party is given notice of a change of address by certified mail: City of St. Louis Park Attention: City Clerk 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 City of Golden Valley Attention: City Clerk 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of St. Louis Park and the City of Golden Valley have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council of St. Louis Park and the City Council of Golden Valley. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Manager CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Manager 8 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on 2015, by and as and , respectively, of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the City of St. Louis Park. Notary Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on 2015, by and as and , respectively, of the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the City of Golden Valley. Notary Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: 9 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Central Park West Property Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1 and Outlot A, CENTRAL PARK WEST P.U.D. NO. 121, according to the plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. EXHIBIT B Site Plan of the Central Park West Property (Attached) T 2, �JlP 6 p V 8 mgc� // i 0 rd 7,0 0� rtic 116, 0 > V, 91, > I E SHEET 6041 In A CD > -1 L FL n c f 0, C: 0 FiP I N eel, ;�7 ENTRAL PARK WEST OVERALL SITE T LOUIS PARK/GOLDEN VALLEY MN DLC RESIDENTIAL PLAN Je r N L Y N (� m ,tom a d J C N J r L 41Ll- N > N O U J = O cc .Q Ln o v �• __ c'4 0 � oo �;r-ia � 1 .� In '°� C1 nj J C: i ro 'C O N d t 41 0 U lD ) f0 to N lf1 J i • � � err�I v, lid f �i : _Y w it dc • �� I _ !F 0 7 . •� t0 d N a � . > N L C C d1 C G1 O 0 4) t)LO O > C7 C C7 O '+ Oo O 41 dA (U _0 m Ln M O vn O IO ;�.+ o +� 3 0 O N t 0 o � ON O to > 4J o 4-1 > �- c' v4-f City Ut valleygolde- nMEMORANDUM Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. M. Approve Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary As per City Code Section 10.83, Subd. 2 I. "No person shall possess, display, consume or use alcoholic beverages on any City park property, unless permission is granted by the Council." As part of the application process for a Facilities Use Permit to use the large and small picnic shelters at Brookview Park the applicant has the option to pay an additional $25 to be able to serve beer and/or wine. Attached is a list of the individuals and/or organizations who have requested that option. Attachments • Beer and/or wine request list (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. BEER AND/OR WINE REQUEST LIST INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION CC DATE DATE TIME SHELTER APPROVED Kelly Hoover- Questar 08-13 5 pm - 10 pm Small 08-05-15 Naomi Duffy 08-16 11 am - 4 pm Small 08-05-15 Dow Jones 08-20 11 am - 4 pm Small 08-05-15 Michael Melrose 08-21 11 am - 4 pm Small 08-05-15 Loice Oburu 08-23 5 pm - 10 pm Large 08-05-15 Sue Schlafmann 08-27 5 pm - 10 pm Large 08-05-15 Mary Kay Wimer 09-11 5 pm - 10 pm Large 08-05-15 City a b , gold 'vaMEMORANDUMlley Park and Recreation Department 763-512-2345/763-512-2344(fax) . ?....NO R'.'1,10, Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. N. Acceptance of Donation for Memorial Bench Prepared By Ben Disch, Brookview Golf Operations Manager Summary As adopted in the Donation/Gift Policy, a gift of real or personal property must be accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Council. One memorial donation has been made to the City for$700.00. The bench, to be located on the 12th tee box at Brookview Golf Course, is donated from members of Team #5 of the Brookview Men's Golf Association. Attachments • Resolution Accepting Donation from the members of Team #5 of the Brookview Men's Golf Association for Brookview Golf Course Memorial Bench (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Accepting Donation from members of Team #5 of the Brookview Men's Golf Association for Brookview Golf Course Memorial Bench. Resolution 15-65 Aug. 5, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM THE MEMBERS OF TEAM #5 OF THE BROOKVIEW MEN'S GOLF ASSOCIATION FOR BROOKVIEW GOLF COURSE MEMORIAL BENCH WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 04-20 on March 16, 2004 which established a policy for the receipt of gifts; and WHEREAS, the Resolution states that a gift of real or personal property must be accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council accepts the following donations: $700.00 for purchase and placement of bench on Brookview Golf Course from the members of Team #5 of the Brookview Men's Golf Association. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, 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 0� p'wu, valleygotaen 4r"' M E M 0 R A N D U M City Administration Council 763-593-8003/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 3. O. City Manager Employment Agreement with Timothy J. Cruikshank Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Summary After completing City Manager interviews of the candidates on July 23, 2015, the City Council directed Sharon Klumpp, Sr. Vice President of Springsted, Inc., to discuss employment terms with the Council's selected candidate, Timothy J. Cruikshank. On behalf of Ms. Klumpp, the City Manager Employment Agreement is being submitted for consideration. Attachments • City Manager Employment Agreement with Timothy J. Cruikshank (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the City Manager Agreement with Timothy J. Cruikshank. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 5th day of August 2015, by and between the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Timothy J. Cruikshank (hereinafter"Employee"). WHEREAS, the City desires to employ Employee and Employee desires to accept employment, as City Manager of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City; WHEREAS, the City and Employee desire to enter into an agreement establishing the terms and conditions of employment; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Duties. a. The City employs Employee as City Manager of the City to perform the functions and duties specified by the laws of the State of Minnesota, the ordinances of the City and such other duties as are assigned by the City Council from time to time. b. Except where specifically modified by this Agreement, the personnel policies and payroll practices pertinent to management positions as defined in the City's Employee Handbook apply to Employee. There shall be no deviations from such policies unless explicitly provided in this Agreement. 2. Term. a. This Agreement shall commence effective September 9, 2015, and shall continue for an indefinite period thereafter. It is terminable at will by either party subject only to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 412.641. b. During the term of this Agreement, Employee will engage in no outside employment that interferes with or is in conflict with his duties as City Manager or the interests of the City. Prior to engaging in any outside employment or business activity, Employee shall seek City Council approval through the process then set out in the Employee Handbook. 3. Salary, Benefits and Expenses. a. Salary. Compensation is limited under Minn. Stat. § 43A.17, subd. 9, to 110% of the salary paid to the Governor of Minnesota. The current maximum allowable salary and Employee's starting salary is stated in the addendum attached to this Agreement, which is incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Salary shall be paid in installments on the payroll schedule established for regular city employees. Salary will be reviewed and may be adjusted annually. b. Benefits. Benefits including paid time off, insurance (health, dental (if available), term life, and disability) shall be as provided to management employees as outlined in the City's Employee Handbook unless modified by this Agreement. The cash value of any benefit exceeding the maximum established for all City management employees shall be subject to the limitations of Minn. Stat. § 43A.17, subd. 9, to the extent applicable. C. Paid Time Off ("PTO"). Effective upon Employee's first day of employment, Employee shall be credited with eighty (80) hours of PTO. Employee shall accrue PTO in accordance with the City's personnel policies beginning at the over nineteen (19) years level. Employee may use credited PTO effective on Employee's first day of employment. d. Health Insurance. If Employee elects to extend prior health-insurance coverage as provided by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (or "COBRA") or purchase health insurance elsewhere, then the City agrees to reimburse Employee for the cost of the coverage premium for the month of October 2015, upon proof of payment, in an amount not to exceed $1,202. e. Retirement. The City recognizes that Employee will be a member of the Public Employees Retirement Association of the State of Minnesota ("PERA") and, in addition, the City offers voluntary participation in deferred compensation under the provisions of IRS 457k. The Employee may make use of these plans if he so desires. Any direct contribution by the City to the Employee's individual deferred compensation account will be subject to Minn. § Stat. 43A.17, subd. 9, to the extent applicable. f. Professional development, dues, and subscriptions. The City agrees to pay on Employee's behalf or to reimburse Employee, upon proof of payment, the cost of membership dues for the ICMA and the Minnesota City/County Management Association ("MCMA") and the reasonable cost of Employee's attendance at the annual conferences for ICMA, MCMA, and the League of Minnesota Cities. Additional professional development activities may be provided as mutually agreed between the City Council and Employee. Payments provided under this paragraph shall be subject to Minn. § Stat. 43A.17, Subd. 9 to the extent applicable. g. General expenses. The City recognizes that certain expenses of a nonpersonal and general job-affiliated nature may be incurred by Employee, and hereby agrees to consider reimbursement to Employee for 2 such expenses. Such expenses shall be submitted to the City Council for review and approval. i. Salary review. In connection with its evaluation of the City Manager's performance the City Council shall review the City Manager's salary at least annually, for salary amendments effective on the anniversary of Employee's employment. Upon satisfactory evaluation, the Employee shall receive the same general wage increase as all other non-union employees. j. Amendments to Addendum. The initial Addendum is attached to this agreement and bears the same date as this Agreement. Changes in the addendum may only be made by resolution adopting a new Addendum which shall be executed by Employee and the appropriate City officials upon passage. 4. Evaluation. The City agrees that the effective performance of Employee depends in large part on a close, honest working relationship between the City Council and Employee. To that end, the parties hereby agree to meet no less than annually to evaluate Employee, review their working relationship and discuss methods to improve the working relationship. The results of the discussion that occurs in Employee's annual evaluations shall be reduced to writing, become part of Employee's personnel record and serve as the basis upon which Employee plans his work and establishes organizational priorities. The Employee shall summarize his progress in meeting these objectives and such summaries shall be reviewed along with other appropriate material at ensuing meetings. 5. Termination, Severance Pay, Payment for Accrued PTO. a. Termination and severance pay. In the event Employee is terminated by the City Council and during such time Employee is willing and able to perform the duties of City Manager, then the City, exercising its sole discretion, shall give Employee sixty (60) calendar day advance notice of termination, and at the end of the notice pay Employee a lump sum cash payment equal to six (6) months of his salary and the cost of insurance for 6 months at the time of termination; provided, however, that in the event Employee is terminated as a result of any illegal act involving malfeasance or dishonesty for personal gain, then, in that event, the City shall have no obligation to pay the severance sums designated above. The City shall have the option of determining the termination date of Employee and, at its discretion, may relieve the Employee of his duties even prior to the effective termination date. 3 In the event the City, at any time during Employee's employment, reduces the salary or other financial benefits of Employee in a greater percentage than an applicable across-the-board reduction for all City employees; or in the event the City refuses, following written notice, to comply with any other provisions of this Agreement benefiting Employee; or in the event Employee resigns pursuant to a request by the City; then and in that event, Employee may, at his option, be deemed to be "terminated" within the meaning and context of the severance pay provisions above at the time of such resignation, reduction, or refusal. In the event the Employee voluntarily resigns his position with the City, the Employee agrees to give the City a minimum of forty-five (45) calendar day notice in advance of his date of leaving employment. b. Payment for accrued but unused PTO. Notwithstanding the 60-day termination notice provided for earlier in this agreement, the City agrees to pay Employee for accrued and unused PTO in accordance with the City's personnel policies. 6. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The City Council may fix any other terms and conditions of employment of Employee as it may deem appropriate from time to time provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with the provisions of this agreement, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the ordinances of the City, or any other applicable laws. 7. Entire Agreement. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the City and Employee and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, and successors in interest of the parties. 8. Severability. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this Agreement is held to be unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement or portion thereof shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. [Signature Page Follows] 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, has caused this Agreement to be signed and executed in its behalf by its Mayor, and duly attested by its City Clerk, and the Employee has signed and executed this Agreement, both in duplicate, the day and year first above written. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor By: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk Timothy J. Cruikshank, Employee 5 ADDENDUM TO CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT DATED: August 5, 2015 Salary:* $146,000 Auto Allowance: $400 /month This Addendum was approved by the City Council on August 5, 2015, effective September 9, 2015. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA By: Timothy J. Cruikshank, Employee Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk * Maximum 2015 compensation under Minn. Stat. § 43A.17, subd. 9 is $165,003. city ' ( 1 ��ni��Mllla 1„,„,„ 11111111111111 111:0 �� 1imu „ i„„ , , , of umo � � 1111 �.I . �w. � City Administration/Council 763-593-3989/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 6. A. Amendment to City Code Section 6.43 Peddlers and Solicitors Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Summary At the June 9 and July 14 Council/Manager meetings, Council requested staff to bring forth amendments to Section 6.43 Peddlers/Solicitors of the City Code to incorporate the following items: 30 calendar day permit Permit is issued per individual, not per business and/or organization Exempting certain children's organizations from licensing Restricting hours to 9 am - 7 pm Posting and enforcement of"No Soliciting” signs The proposed fee would be $30 per permit per 30 calendar day period. This amendment will be effective upon publication for any new licenses. Those individuals and/or entities with current licenses would be allowed to use them through December 31, 2015. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed code amendments. Attachments • City Code Section 6.43 Peddlers and Solicitors (5 pages) • Ordinance#573, Amendment to City Code Section 6.43 Peddlers and Solicitors (5 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt first consideration, Ordinance#573, Amendment to City Code Section 6.43 Peddlers and Solicitors. § 6.43 Section 6.43: Peddlers and Solicitors Subdivision 1. Definitions For the purpose of this Section, the following terms have the meanings stated: A. Peddler: means any person who goes from place to place, or house to house, in the City selling or taking orders for the immediate delivery upon sale of (i) goods or services, or (ii) the making, manufacturing or repairing of any article or thing whatsoever. The term does not include a person engaged in the activity of selling or taking of orders on behalf of a nonprofit organization when the selling is done to, or the taking of orders is from, members of one specific nonprofit organization, nor does the term include any person who sells or delivers goods or services to established customers in the regular course of business. B. Peddling: means the act of being a peddler. C. Solicitor: means any peddling where the order for services or goods is for future delivery or for the acceptance, demand, or receipt of payment or deposit of money, and/or the solicitation of money or funds. D. Soliciting: means the act of being a solicitor. E. Nonprofit Organization: means a charitable, religious, political or educational organization if such organization is registered with the Secretary of State pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 309.52 as a charitable organization or is exempted therefor pursuant to the provisions of Section 309.515. F. Non-Commercial Advocate: means a person who goes place to place, or house to house, for the primary purpose of disseminating religious, political, social, or other ideological beliefs. Subdivision 2. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage in the business of peddler or solicitor without a license therefor from the City. Each person engaged as a peddler or solicitor must secure an individual license. All applications for licenses shall be issued or denied by the City Manager or his/her designee. Applications for a license shall be on forms provided by the City and shall be accompanied by a fee in the amount as set forth by City Ordinance, provided solicitors dealing with merchandise of any kind to be delivered to customers directly from points outside the State of Minnesota shall be exempt from payment of the license fee. Subdivision 3. Exempt Activities. A. The provisions of Subdivision 2 shall not apply to: 1. Any person selling or attempting to sell at wholesale any goods, wares, products, merchandise, or other personal property to a retail seller of the items being sold by the wholesaler; Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 5 § 6.43 2. Any person selling products of a farm or garden occupied and cultivated by the person selling the same; 3. Any person who makes initial contacts with other people for the purpose of establishing or trying to establish a regular customer delivery route for the delivery of perishable food and dairy products, such as baked goods or milk; 4. Any person making deliveries of newspapers, newsletters, or other similar publications on an established customer delivery route, when attempting to establish a regular delivery route, or when publications are delivered to the community at large; and 5. Any person, age seventeen (17) and under, participating as a peddler or solicitor in fundraising programs for, or sponsored by, a public or private elementary, junior high, high school, or bona fide children's organization including, without limitation, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, or youth sports, arts or similar extracurricular activities. B. All persons exempt from Subdivision 2 by virtue of Subdivision 3.A. shall nevertheless comply with Subdivisions 7 and 9 of this Section. Subdivision 4. License Application. A. Each application for a license required under this Section shall provide the following information: 1. name of the applicant; 2. permanent address of the applicant; 3. local address of the applicant; 4. telephone number of the applicant; 5. date of birth of the applicant; 6. physical description of the applicant; 7. dates for which the right to do business is desired; 8. description of the nature of the business and goods or services to be sold; 9. description of vehicle(s) used in connection with work; 10. statement as to whether or not the applicant has been convicted, within the past five (5) years, of any crime, misdemeanor, or violation of any ordinance other than misdemeanor traffic violations, including nature of the offense and the penalty or punishment assessed; and 11. statement as to whether or not the applicant has had a registration, license and/or identification card for peddler and/or solicitor denied or Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 5 § 6.43 revoked by the City or any other government body within the past three (3) calendar years prior to the application date. B. If the applicant is working for a business, in addition to the above information, each individual applicant shall provide the following information: 1. legal name of the business; 2. address of the business; 3. legal structure of the business; and 4. whether or not the business employing the applicant has, within the past five (5) years, been the subject of an investigation by a consumer protection agency and/or the attorney general's office of any state. C. If the applicant is soliciting funds for a cause, such applicant shall provide information setting forth a description of the cause, its purposes, goals, the location to which and persons to whom the funds will go. D. The application shall be submitted in person by each individual applicant to the City Manager or his/her designee. The identity of the applicant shall be verified by photo identification (valid State driver's license or State identification card). Information on the application may be verified by the City prior to granting a license. E. All applicants will have a criminal history query conducted, to ensure the applicant does not have a disqualifying criminal event on their record. F. Any changes in the information given by an applicant, which occur while the license under which the person is peddling or soliciting is in force and effect, shall be immediately reported in writing to the City Manager or his/her designee. Subdivision S. Issuance. If the application is approved by the City Manager or his/her designee, the applicant shall be issued a license and identification card which must be clearly displayed on the front of the peddler or solicitor's outer garment when conducting business in the City. The license and identification card are non-transferable. The license shall be valid for not more than thirty (30) calendar days, which days must be consecutive and begin within thirty (30) calendar days of the date the license is issued. Subdivision 6. Denial. Any one of the following shall constitute grounds for denial of the license application: A. The failure of an applicant to truthfully provide any information requested by the City as part of the application process. Golden Valley City Code Page 3 of 5 § 6.43 B. Past fraud, misrepresentation or misstatement made in the course of carrying on business as a peddler or solicitor. C. Conviction of any crime directly related to carrying on business as a peddler or solicitor, as provided in Minn. Stats. §364.03, Subd. 2, where the applicant has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties and responsibilities, as provided in Minn. Stats. §364.03, Subd. 3. Crimes that are considered to be directly related to the business of peddling and soliciting include, but are not limited to: crimes involving assault, criminal sexual conduct, burglary, robbery, fraud, theft or moral turpitude. D. Revocation within the past five (5) years of a license issued under this Section. E. Violations of any provision of this Section within the past five (5) years. Subdivision 7. Restrictions. No peddler or solicitor shall do any of the following: A. Engage in peddling or soliciting without clearly displaying on the peddler or solicitor's front outer garment the identification card issued by the City, if a license is required under this Section. B. Engaging in peddling or soliciting before 9 am or later than 7 pm. C. Walk on or about any side or rear yard or attempt to make contact at any point other than the main point of entrance or front door of a residence or place of business. D. Fail to promptly depart from the premises following completion of a transaction or following an unsuccessful attempt to contact the resident of the premises. E. Commit any act or conduct constituting harassment, a nuisance, theft, deceit or menacing or otherwise unlawful activities or violate any other provisions of this Code or state law. F. Claim to have the endorsement of the City solely based on the City having issued a license or certificate of registration to that person. G. Violate Subdivision 9 of this Section. Subdivision S. Revocation of License. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Chapter, if the holder of a license granted under this Section violates any provision of this Section, the City Manager or his/her designee may revoke such license. Revocation shall be effective upon written notice thereof to the licensee. Notice shall be provided by personal delivery to the licensee or by any manner otherwise permitted for the service of process under the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts. Any person that has a license granted under this Section revoked by the City Manager or Golden Valley City Code Page 4 of 5 § 6.43 his/her designee shall have the right to appeal such revocation to a hearing officer in an administrative hearing as provided for in City Code, Section 2.91. Subdivision 9. Non-Commercial Advocate, Peddlers and Solicitors May Be Prohibited by Placard. A. Any property owner or occupant who wishes to exclude non-commercial advocates, peddlers and/or solicitors from his/her/its premises may place upon or near the principal entrance to the premises a printed placard or sign bearing the following notice: "No Soliciting", "No Soliciting or Peddling", or comparable statement. The printing on the placard or sign shall be large enough to be visible from a distance of (5) five feet. B. No non-commercial advocate, peddler or solicitor, including those exempt from license requirements as provided in Subdivision 3, shall ring any doorbell, knock on any door and/or enter upon any premises, where such a placard or sign is posted, unless the non-commercial advocate, peddler or solicitor has been previously invited by the owner or occupant. C. No person other than the owner or occupant of the premises shall remove, injure or deface the placard or sign. Subdivision 10. Non-Commercial Advocate. Subdivisions 2 through 8 of this Section, inclusive, shall not apply to non- commercial advocates and such subdivisions shall not be interpreted to prohibit or restrict non-commercial advocates. Non-commercial advocates shall be subject to Subdivision 9 of this Section. Golden Valley City Code Page 5 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. 573, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Repealing in its Entirety Section 6:43: Peddlers and Solicitors And Adding a New Section 6:43: Peddlers and Solicitors The City Council of the City of Golden Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code, Chapter 6, Section 6:43 entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors" is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 2. City Code, Chapter 6, Section 6:43 is hereby amended by adding a new Section 6:43, entitled "Peddlers and Solicitors", reading as follows: Section 6.43: Peddlers and Solicitors Subdivision 1. Definitions For the purpose of this Section, the following terms have the meanings stated: A. Peddler: means any person who goes from place to place, or house to house, in the City selling or taking orders for the immediate delivery upon sale of (i) goods or services, or (ii) the making, manufacturing or repairing of any article or thing whatsoever. The term does not include a person engaged in the activity of selling or taking of orders on behalf of a nonprofit organization when the selling is done to, or the taking of orders is from, members of one specific nonprofit organization, nor does the term include any person who sells or delivers goods or services to established customers in the regular course of business. B. Peddling: means the act of being a peddler. C. Solicitor: means any peddling where the order for services or goods is for future delivery or for the acceptance, demand, or receipt of payment or deposit of money, and/or the solicitation of money or funds. D. Soliciting: means the act of being a solicitor. E. Nonprofit Organization: means a charitable, religious, political or educational organization if such organization is registered with the Secretary of State pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 309.52 as a charitable organization or is exempted therefor pursuant to the provisions of Section 309.515. F. Non-Commercial Advocate: means a person who goes place to place, or house to house, for the primary purpose of disseminating religious, political, social, or other ideological beliefs. Subdivision 2. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage in the business of peddler or solicitor without a license therefor from the City. Each person engaged as a peddler or solicitor must secure an individual license. All applications for licenses shall be issued or denied by the City Manager or his/her designee. Applications for a license shall be on forms provided by the City and shall be accompanied by a fee in the amount as set forth by City Ordinance, Ordinance No. 573 - continued provided solicitors dealing with merchandise of any kind to be delivered to customers directly from points outside the State of Minnesota shall be exempt from payment of the license fee. Subdivision 3. Exempt Activities. A. The provisions of Subdivision 2 shall not apply to: 1. Any person selling or attempting to sell at wholesale any goods, wares, products, merchandise, or other personal property to a retail seller of the items being sold by the wholesaler; 2. Any person selling products of a farm or garden occupied and cultivated by the person selling the same; 3. Any person who makes initial contacts with other people for the purpose of establishing or trying to establish a regular customer delivery route for the delivery of perishable food and dairy products, such as baked goods or milk, 4. Any person making deliveries of newspapers, newsletters, or other similar publications on an established customer delivery route, when attempting to establish a regular delivery route, or when publications are delivered to the community at large; and 5. Any person, age seventeen (17) and under, participating as a peddler or solicitor in fundraising programs for, or sponsored by, a public or private elementary, junior high, high school, or bona fide children's organization including, without limitation, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, or youth sports, arts or similar extracurricular activities. B. All persons exempt from Subdivision 2 by virtue of Subdivision 3.A. shall nevertheless comply with Subdivisions 7 and 9 of this Section. Subdivision 4. License Application. A. Each application for a license required under this Section shall provide the following information: 1. name of the applicant, 2. permanent address of the applicant; 3. local address of the applicant; 4. telephone number of the applicant; 5. date of birth of the applicant; 6. physical description of the applicant; 7. dates for which the right to do business is desired; 8. description of the nature of the business and goods or services to be sold; 9. description of vehicle(s) used in connection with work; Ordinance No. 573 - continued 10. statement as to whether or not the applicant has been convicted, within the past five (5) years, of any crime, misdemeanor, or violation of any ordinance other than misdemeanor traffic violations, including nature of the offense and the penalty or punishment assessed; and 11. statement as to whether or not the applicant has had a registration, license and/or identification card for peddler and/or solicitor denied or revoked by the City or any other government body within the past three (3) calendar years prior to the application date. B. If the applicant is working for a business, in addition to the above information, each individual applicant shall provide the following information: 1. legal name of the business; 2. address of the business, 3. legal structure of the business; and 4. whether or not the business employing the applicant has, within the past five (5) years, been the subject of an investigation by a consumer protection agency and/or the attorney general's office of any state. C. If the applicant is soliciting funds for a cause, such applicant shall provide information setting forth a description of the cause, its purposes, goals, the location to which and persons to whom the funds will go. D. The application shall be submitted in person by each individual applicant to the City Manager or his/her designee. The identity of the applicant shall be verified by photo identification (valid State driver's license or State identification card). Information on the application may be verified by the City prior to granting a license. E. All applicants will have a criminal history query conducted, to ensure the applicant does not have a disqualifying criminal event on their record. F. Any changes in the information given by an applicant, which occur while the license under which the person is peddling or soliciting is in force and effect, shall be immediately reported in writing to the City Manager or his/her designee. Subdivision 5. Issuance. If the application is approved by the City Manager or his/her designee, the applicant shall be issued a license and identification card which must be clearly displayed on the front of the peddler or solicitor's outer garment when conducting business in the City. The license and identification card are non-transferable. The license shall be valid for not more than thirty (30) calendar days, which days must be consecutive and begin within thirty (30) calendar days of the date the license is issued. Subdivision 6. Denial. Any one of the following shall constitute grounds for denial of the license application: Ordinance No. 573 - continued A. The failure of an applicant to truthfully provide any information requested by the City as part of the application process. B. Past fraud, misrepresentation or misstatement made in the course of carrying on business as a peddler or solicitor. C. Conviction of any crime directly related to carrying on business as a peddler or solicitor, as provided in Minn. Stats. §364.03, Subd. 2, where the applicant has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties and responsibilities, as provided in Minn. Stats. §364.03, Subd. 3. Crimes that are considered to be directly related to the business of peddling and soliciting include, but are not limited to: crimes involving assault, criminal sexual conduct, burglary, robbery, fraud, theft or moral turpitude. D. Revocation within the past five (5) years of a license issued under this Section. E. Violations of any provision of this Section within the past five (5) years. Subdivision 7. Restrictions. No peddler or solicitor shall do any of the following: A. Engage in peddling or soliciting without clearly displaying on the peddler or solicitor's front outer garment the identification card issued by the City, if a license is required under this Section. B. Engaging in peddling or soliciting before 9 am or later than 7 pm. C. Walk on or about any side or rear yard or attempt to make contact at any point other than the main point of entrance or front door of a residence or place of business. D. Fail to promptly depart from the premises following completion of a transaction or following an unsuccessful attempt to contact the resident of the premises. E. Commit any act or conduct constituting harassment, a nuisance, theft, deceit or menacing or otherwise unlawful activities or violate any other provisions of this Code or state law. F. Claim to have the endorsement of the City solely based on the City having issued a license or certificate of registration to that person. G. Violate Subdivision 9 of this Section. Subdivision 8. Revocation of License. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Chapter, if the holder of a license granted under this Section violates any provision of this Section, the City Manager or his/her designee may revoke such license. Revocation shall be effective upon written notice thereof to the licensee. Notice shall be provided by personal delivery to the licensee or by any manner otherwise permitted for the service of process under the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts. Any person that has a license granted under this Section revoked by the City Manager or his/her designee shall have the right to appeal such revocation to a hearing officer in an administrative hearing as provided for in City Code, Section 2.91. Ordinance No. 573 - continued Subdivision 9. Non-Commercial Advocate, Peddlers and Solicitors May Be Prohibited by Placard. A. Any property owner or occupant who wishes to exclude non-commercial advocates, peddlers and/or solicitors from his/her/its premises may place upon or near the principal entrance to the premises a printed placard or sign bearing the following notice: "No Soliciting", "No Soliciting or Peddling", or comparable statement. The printing on the placard or sign shall be large enough to be visible from a distance of five (5) feet. B. No non-commercial advocate, peddler or solicitor, including those exempt from license requirements as provided in Subdivision 3, shall ring any doorbell, knock on any door and/or enter upon any premises, where such a placard or sign is posted, unless the non-commercial advocate, peddler or solicitor has been previously invited by the owner or occupant. C. No person other than the owner or occupant of the premises shall remove, injure or deface the placard or sign. Subdivision 10. Non-Commercial Advocate. Subdivisions 2 through 8 of this Section, inclusive, shall not apply to non-commercial advocates and such subdivisions shall not be interpreted to prohibit or restrict non- commercial advocates. Non-commercial advocates shall be subject to Subdivision 9 of this Section. Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and City Code Chapter 6, Section 6.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. These amendment will be effective upon publication for any new licenses. Those individuals and/or entities with current licenses would be allowed to use them through December 31, 2015. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city ( 1 ��ni��Mllla 11111111111111 „ 1111111111111111111111111110 � �imu of'411 uoio '111 I . �w. �� Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting August 5, 2015 Agenda Item 6. B. First Consideration -Amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Peddlers/Solicitors Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Stacy Carlson, Police Chief Summary First consideration of this Ordinance will provide amendments to the 2015 Master Fee Schedule due to the ordinance change with Peddlers and Solicitors. The current fee is: Peddlers and Solicitors 1-Jan 1st person $30.00 Each additional person (up to a max fee of$50.00 per time) $ 5.00 The new fee that should be considered that will take effect August 28, 2015 is: Peddlers and Solicitors Company Registration $ 5.00 Each employee(background check/Identification card) $30.00 Attachments • Ordinance#574, Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Peddlers/Solicitors License (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt first consideration, Ordinance#574, Amendments to the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Peddlers/Solicitors License. ORDINANCE NO. 574, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Peddlers and Solicitor Fees The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. The 2015 Master Fee Schedule in Chapter 25 of the City Code is hereby amended by changing the following Peddlers and Solicitors fees: Peddlers and Solicitors Fee Company Registration $ 5.00 Each employee (background check/Identification card) $30.00 Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of August, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk