Loading...
10-20-15 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber October 20, 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 C. Introduction of 2015-2016 Teen Committee 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting October 6, 2015 3-6 B. Approval of Check Register 1. City 7 2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority 8 C. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Human Services Fund - September 14, 2015 9 2. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - August 20, 2015 10-20 D. Bids and Quotes: 1. Award Contract for 2015 Bassett Creek Restoration Project 21-23 E. Authorize Submittal of Application for Hennepin Youth Sports Grant 15-82 24-25 F. Approval of Plat and Authorization to Sign PUD Permit and PUD Development 26-40 Agreement for Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 15-83 G. Administrative Hearing Officer Appointments 41-47 H. Authorization to Sign Amended Agreement with Breck School for Community Service 48-51 Officer 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Authorizing Submittal of Grant Application to Hennepin County Environmental 52-57 Response Fund and Continued Coordination of Conceptual Design of Flood Mitigation Project 15-84 B. Second Consideration - Ordinance 561 - Proposed Code Amendment to Section 58-63 7.28: Right-of-Way Management Undergrounding 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Boone Avenue Convenience Center PUD No. 110, Amendment No. 1 - 600 Boone Avenue North - Linn Investment Properties, LLC, Applicant 64-70 B. METRO Blue Line Update 71-79 C. Announcements of Meetings D. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT city o UNOFFICIAL MINUTES golden CITY COUNCIL MEETING valley GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA October 6, 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, Schmidgall and Snope. Also present were: City Manager Cruikshank, City Attorney Garry and City Clerk Luedke. 1B. Pledge of Allegiance 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to amend the agenda of October 6, 2015, as revised: removal of item 31-Authorize Community Service Officer Agreement with Breck School and to bring it back at the next City Council Meeting and the motion carried. MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to approve the amended agenda of October 6, 2015, and the motion carried. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the consent agenda of October 6, 2015, as revised: removal of 3E1-Purchase of Ford Police SUV Interceptor Squad, 3E2-Award Contract for Demolition of 1935 Brunswick Avenue North and 3M-Authorize the City Manager to Establish Temporary No Parking Zones and the motion carried. 3A1. Approve Minutes of the Council/Manager Meeting - September 8, 2015 3A2. Approve Minutes of the City Council Meeting - September 16, 2015 3B1. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3C1. Approve an Off-Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Christianson & Torgerson Partnership LLP d/b/a Holiday Inn Express Golden Valley through June 30, 2016, contingent upon a successful background investigation. 3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows: 1. Planning Commission - August 24, 2015 2. Board of Zoning Appeals - August 25, 2015 3. Human Rights Commission - August 25, 2015 4. Human Services Fund - July 13, 2015 5. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - July 16, 2015 3E1. Approve purchase of one Ford Police SUV Interceptor Squad from Nelson Auto Center for the purchase price of $35,830.95. 3E2. Award contract for the demolition of 1935 Brunswick Avenue to the lowest responsible bidder, Wickenhauser Demolition & Excavating, in the amount of $10,390.00. 3F. Adopt Resolution 15-75, approving appointment of the Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the General Election to be held on November 3, 2015. 3G. Call for Special Meeting to Canvass the 2015 Election Results for November 10, 2015. 3H. Adopt second consideration, Ordinance #580, amending Section 4.01 of the City Code regarding Building Code Regulations. Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- October 6, 2015 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA - continued 31. Authorize the Mayor, City Manager and Police Chief to sign the amended Community Service Officer Agreement with Breck School for 2015 2016. 3J. Adopt Resolution 15-76, amending the 2015 Budget of the General Fund Budget. 3K. Adopt Resolution 15-77, waiving the Public Hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429.031 and ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Private Sanitary Sewer Repairs that involve 2015 Street Improvements. 3L. Adopt Resolution 15-78, waiving the Public Hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statute 429.031 and ordering Certification of Special Assessments on Driveways that involve 2015 City Street Improvements. ' tee e . _ • _ Parking Zones. 3N. Receive and file the August 2015 Financial Reports. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3E1. Approve Purchase of one Ford Police SUV Interceptor Squad Physical Development Director Nevinski and Finance Director Virnig answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve purchase of one Ford Police SUV Interceptor Squad from Nelson Auto Center for the purchase price of$35,830.95 and to approve Vehicle Setup and Markings from Action Fleet for $13,392.39 and the motion carried. 3E2. Award Contract for Demolition of 1935 Brunswick Avenue North Physical Development Director Nevinski answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to award a contract for the demolition of 1935 Brunswick Avenue to the lowest responsible bidder, Wickenhauser Demolition & Excavating, in the amount of$40,390.00 and the motion carried. 3M. Authorizing the City Manager to Establish Temporary No Parking Zones Physical Development Director Nevinski answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Resolution 15-79, authorizing the City Manager to Establish Temporary No Parking Zones upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Clausen, Snope, Fonnest and Schmidgall; and the following voted against: none and the motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 4A. Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2015 Miscellaneous Charges Finance Director Virnig reviewed the staff report and answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- October 6, 2015 4A. Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2015 Misc. Charges - continued MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt Resolution 15-80, adopting and confirming Assessments for Miscellaneous Charges upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Clausen, Fonnest, Harris, Schmidgall and Snope; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 4B. Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2015 Delinquent Utility Bills Finance Director Virnig reviewed the staff report and answered questions from Council. City Manager Cruikshank answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. Mr. Andy Schuller, 1821 York Avenue, asked about a delinquent utility bill that he had received at a home he recently purchased. Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the 2015 Delinquent Utility Bills. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Resolution 15-81, adopting and confirming Assessments for Delinquent Utility Billing upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Clausen, Fonnest, Harris, Schmidgall and Snope; and the following voted against: none, and the motion carried. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6A. METRO Blue Line Extension Update Physical Development Director Nevinski presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. There was much Council discussion regarding the METRO Blue Line update. MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to receive and file the METRO Blue Line Extension Update and the motion carried. 6B. Announcement of Meetings Some Council Members may attend the Golden Valley League of Women Voters Candidate Forum on October 7, 2015, at 7 pm in the Council Chambers. Some Council Members may attend the 3rd Annual Growing Tree Trust Breakfast on October 8, 2015 from 8 to 9 am at 2231 Edgewood Avenue South, St. Louis Park. Some Council Members may attend the Kelly Drive Pumpkin Growers Association Weigh off on October 10, 2015, from 11 am to 2 pm at the Kelly Drive/Duluth Street Intersection. The Neighborhood Watch Annual Meeting will be held on October 10, 2015, at 1 pm in the Golden Valley Police Department Training Room. Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- October 6, 2015 6B. Announcement of Meetings - continued Council Board and Commission Interviews will be held on October 13, 2015, at 5:15 pm in the Council Conference Room. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting will be held on October 13, 2015, at 6:30 pm in the Council Chambers. The Council/Manager meeting will be held on October 13, 2015, immediately following the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting in the Council Conference Room. The next City Council meeting will be held on October 20, 2015, at 6:30 pm. Some Council Members may attend the Golden Valley Business Council meeting on October 22, 2015, from 7:30 to 9 am at Second Harvest Heartland. Some Council Members may attend the New Hope Mayor's Prayer Breakfast on October 23, 2015, at 7 am at the New Hope Community Gyms at Cooper High School. A Special City Council meeting will be held on October 26, 2015, at 6 pm in the Council Chambers. Some Council Members may attend the METRO Blue Line Extension Open House on October 28, 2015, from 5:30 to 7 pm in the Council Conference Room. Election Day is November 3, 2015. 6C. Mayor and Council Communication No action and/or discussion took place. 7. ADJOURMENT MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Fonnest and the motion carried to adjourn the meeting at 7:42 pm. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city of golden11 ME valley Administrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. B. 1. 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. city of golden11MEM A valleyAdministrative Services Department 763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF) Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Present: Denise La Mere-Anderson, Hilmer Erickson, Kathryn Frommer, Elissa Heilicher, Andrea Mac Arthur, Peggy Watkins and Andrew Wold. Also present: Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison. Excused Absence: Alan lngber, Toots Vodovoz. Call to Order: Wold called the meeting to order at 6:47 p.m. Agenda Changes or Additions: No changes or additions to the agenda. July 13 Minutes: Heilicher moved and Erickson seconded the motion to approve the minutes from July 13. The motion passed unanimously. Other Business: Run the Valley Fees/T-shirts: Members decided to keep the fees and t-shirt the same as 2015 and to ask the Communications Department to design the shirt. Participants will be able to register online through the city's RecTrac option. Golden Valley Arts and Music Festival: The annual event will be held on Saturday, September 26. The GVHSF will share the booth with Park and Recreation. Members were encouraged to man the booth, along with city staff, between the hours of 10 am-3 pm. Solicitation Letter: Fackler has talked with Communications about the 2015-2016 letter. GVHSF members discussed a theme for the letter. It was decided that "crisis management" would be the theme and highlight suicide prevention, runaways, families in crisis, etc. Fackler will ask funded agencies to assist with the letter by sending in a quote about the services the GVHSF funds. The goal is to have the letter in the mail by mid-November. Disc Golf Tournament: Wold contacted "Gotta Go Gotta Throw" for information on running the event. It was decided to table the event until 2016. Applications for Funding: Members discussed the applications and felt all agencies are worthy of funding. Three agencies will be invited to meet with the GVHSF members at the October 12 meeting. Fackler will send invitations to Tree House, Crisis Nursery and PRISM. Discussion followed on how do residents know about the agencies we fund and how can they contact the agencies for services? It was suggested to add the contact phone numbers for the agencies to the website and all publicity. Fackler will meet with Communications. Wold announced the next meeting will be held on Monday, October 12 and will start at 6 pm with dinner. A short meeting will be held and agencies will present at 6:30 pm, 6:50 pm and 7:10 pm. Adjournment: Erickson moved to adjourn the meeting, La Mere-Anderson seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 pm. Respectfully submitted, Andrew Wold, GVHSF Chair Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison cr so* Item 4B BCWMC 9-17-15 Watershed ManagComms sssant Commiion Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting August 20,2015 Golden Valley City Hall,8:30 a.m. Commissioners and Staff Present: Crystal Commissioner Guy Mueller, Vice Chair Robbinsdale Commissioner Wayne Sicora Golden Valley Commissioner Stacy Hoschka,Treasurer St. Louis Park Commissioner Jim de Lambert, Chair Alternate Commissioner Jane McDonald Black Medicine Lake Commissioner Clint Carlson Administrator Laura Jester Minneapolis Commissioner Michael Welch Attorney Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy& Alternate Commissioner Lisa Goddard Graven Minnetonka Commissioner Jacob Millner,Secretary Troy Gilchrist,Kennedy&Graven New Hope Alternate Commissioner Pat Crough Engineer Karen Chandler,Barr Engineering Plymouth Commissioner Ginny Black Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)Members/Other Attendees Present: Derek Asche, TAC,City of Plymouth Dave Stack, Friends of Bassett Creek Erick Francis,TAC,City of St. Louis Park Mark Ray, TAC,City of Crystal Richard McCoy,TAC, City of Robbinsdale Charles Schmidt,New Hope Resident Jeff Oliver,TAC, City of Golden Valley Liz Stout,TAC, City of Minnetonka Bob Paschke,TAC,City of New Hope David Tobelmann,Alternate Commissioner, City of Plymouth Michael Scanlan, Alternate Commissioner, City of Robbinsdale 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL On Thursday,August 20,2015,at 8:34 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 [City of Minnetonka absent from roll call]. 1 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes 2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Dave Stack of the Friends of Bassett Creek requested that the Commission revisit the issue of creek restoration along the stretch of Bassett Creek along the Fruen Mill area.Commissioner Welch responded that the Commission will be talking about this area at the Commission's September meeting. Administrator Jester said that at the BCWMC's September meeting,the Commission anticipates reviewing a proposal by Barr Engineering Company for the City of Minneapolis for the streambank restoration project feasibility study. She said that now is the time to bring up discussion of inclusion of the Fruen Mill stretch in the project. She noted that at the September meeting the Commission will be getting an update from the City of Minneapolis or the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board regarding the current restoration project through Wirth Park. She encouraged Mr. Stack to attend the Commission's September meeting to provide input. Commissioner Welch encouraged the Commission to check out the Friends of Bassett Creek listserv. [Commissioner Millner, City of Minnetonka, arrived]. Charles Schmidt raised an issue regarding a steep ravine behind Winnetka Village in Crystal that drains into a pond and carries debris into the pond. He noted that he brought up this issue to this group one year ago, and he is wondering if there is anything planned to address the erosion in the ravine and any plans to dredge the pond. Mr. Ray of the City of Crystal said that there are not any plans to dredge that pond at this time and the City is looking at creating a method for evaluating pond dredging needs.Administrator Jester stated that she will follow up with Crystal City staff to see if there is any role for the Commission in stabilizing that ravine and sediment. 3.AGENDA Commissioner Welch moved to approve the agenda as presented. Commissioner Millner seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Alternate Commissioner Goddard requested the removal of item 4A—July 16,2015, Commission Meeting Minutes—and item 4F—Approval of Golden Villas Apartments Project— from the Consent Agenda. Chair de Lambert said the items would become agenda item 6Ai and 6Aii. Commissioner Black moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Commissioner Millner seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Plymouth abstained from vote]. [The following items were approved as part of the Consent Agenda:the August 2015 financial report,the payment of invoices, Approval of BCWMC 2016 Operating Budget, and Approval to Set Technical Advisory Meeting for September 8,2015.] The general and construction account balances reported in the Fiscal Year 2015 Financial Report prepared for the August 20,2015,meeting are as follows: Checking Account Balance $663,513.06 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $663,513.06 TOTAL CASH& INVESTMENTS ON-HAND (8/12/15) $3,867,624.00 2 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes CIP Projects Levied—Budget Remaining ($4,015,111.53) Closed Projects Remaining Balance $147,487.53 2012-2014 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $5,585.36 2015 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $495,084.26 Anticipated Closed Project Balance $353,182.09 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Receive Comments from Member Cities and Public on Proposed 2016 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects: Northwood Lake Improvement Project(NL-1) and Honeywell Pond Expansion Project(BC-4) Chair de Lambert opened the public hearing. Administrator Jester provided background on the Commission's process to add these projects to the BCWMC's CIP. She reminded the Commission that in order to approve the projects,the BCWMC needs to hold a public hearing on the projects. She briefly described the projects and their feasibility studies. Commissioner Mueller asked about the items included in the proposed maintenance of the Honeywell Pond Expansion Project and the estimated maintenance cost of$3,000. Mr. Oliver described the proposed maintenance that includes vegetation maintenance, pumping,and general maintenance but does not include dredging of the pond.Commissioner Tobelmann asked about the process for funding the projects and what happens in the event of a project being under budget. Administrator Jester described that the BCWMC would receive the$75,000 grant from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for the Northwood Lake Project and how the cities would invoice the Commission and the Commission would reimburse the cities for actual project costs after an approved reimbursement request. She noted that the agreements(to be considered later in the meeting)do not address the procedure to be followed in the case that the project is completed under budget. Mr. Stack asked how the dredged materials from the Honeywell Pond will be disposed. Mr. Oliver said that the City will test the materials and will dispose of them properly. Commissioner Sicora said that the MPCA recently revised its guidelines associated with cleaning out ponds so the process is prescribed and the guidelines are available publically. Chair de Lambert called for additional comments. Upon hearing none,he closed the public hearing. 6. BUSINESS A. i. July 16,2015,Meeting Minutes (Removed from Consent Agenda) Alternate Commissioner Goddard requested more detail in the minutes under item 5Ai. regarding Commissioner Black's question about the financial report's line item"Other General Fund 3 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes Revenues."Chair de Lambert directed staff to revise the July 16th meeting minutes and present them as part of the Consent Agenda at next month's meeting. ii. Approval of Golden Villas Apartments Project, Golden Valley (Removed from Consent Agenda) Alternate Commissioner Goddard pointed out that the NPDES permit requires that exposed soil areas must be stabilized as soon as possible and by seven days after construction has temporarily or permanently ceased in certain cases. She said that the Engineer's memo states that the areas must be stabilized no later than 14 days after construction. Alternate Commission Goddard stated that she does not want the Commission to advocate that others put something into their plans that contradicts the NPDES permit. Commissioner Black moved to approve the project with the conditions in the Engineer's memo revised as requested by Commissioner Goddard. Commissioner Welch seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0. Commissioner Welch he asked if the Commission revised its Requirements such that projects that fall below the NPDES still will be analyzed by the Commission. Engineer Chandler said that she would check. iii. Resolution of Appreciation for Charlie LeFevere and Introduction of New Legal Counsel for BCWMC Chair de Lambert read aloud the Resolution of Appreciation for Services of Charlie LeFevere to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission. Commissioners and Mr. LeFevere offered comments. Mr. LeFevere introduced Troy Gilchrist of Kennedy&Graven, who will be serving as the primary legal counsel for the Commission. Commissioner Black moved to adopt the resolution. Commissioner Welch seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0. B. Consider Approval of Resolution Ordering 2016 Improvements Administrator Jester described resolution and stated that the levy request contained therein is for$1,222,000, which is less than the maximum levy request of$1,250,000 that the Commission approved last month due to refined project cost estimates. Administrator Jester summarized the resolution and explained that it orders the improvements,certifies the costs to Hennepin County, and approves the three agreements for the projects: • Cooperative Agreement with the City of New Hope for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project; • Sub-Grant Agreement with the City of New Hope for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project;and, • Cooperative Agreement with the City of Golden Valley for the Honeywell Pond Expansion Project. Administrator Jester pointed out that next year the Commission will request for collection in 2017$411,000 to complete the Northwood Lake project. There was discussion about adding clarifying language to the agreements about how funds would be handled in the case of projects being completed under budget.Attorney LeFevere and Attorney Gilchrist said that they could work on drafting language to present to the Commission later in the meeting. Commissioner Welch stated that he would like language included in the Cooperative Agreements to reflect that a final report on the project is required by the Commission at the conclusion of each project. The Commission indicated consent to the addition of the provision in the agreements. Commissioner Welch remarked that he thinks it is good practice to vote on resolutions by roll call vote and to record the vote on the resolutions. The Commission indicated consent with this suggestion. Chair de Lambert tabled discussion of this item until later in the meeting. 4 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes C. Consider Approval of Proposal for Preparation of Feasibility Study for Plymouth Creek Restoration Project(2017CR-P) Engineer Chandler pointed out that there is a memo on this item in the meeting packet and that a revised cost estimate has been handed out today. She said that the cost estimate revisions are due to the new information that there is a high likelihood that there are wetlands along this reach of the creek. She explained that the revised cost estimate includes the cost of the wetland delineation. Engineer Chandler pointed out that the proposal includes an optional Phase I soil contamination investigation. She explained that it is not required, but that the engineer recommends it and recommends doing it either now during the feasibility stage or early in the design process. Engineer Chandler talked about the reach of the creek included in the project,noting that it is upstream of the previous Plymouth Creek restoration project and lies on both sides of the Fernbrook Lane culvert collapse area. She announced that the cultural resource study needs to be done for the part of the reach that was not included in the BCWMC's Resource Management Plan. She summarized the proposal and what the feasibility study would include. Engineer Chandler added that the proposal does include budget for public involvement as well as Commission involvement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,and the MDNR, and presentation of the draft report to the Commission. Engineer Chandler stated that the cost estimate for the feasibility study is$56,000 without including the Phase I soil contamination investigation or$63,000 including the Phase I investigation. Engineer Chandler fielded questions. Mr. Asche asked for specifics on the public involvement process and budgeted number of public meetings,the number of meetings with the agencies included in the budget, and when the meetings should be held. Engineer Chandler said that the budget should cover two public meetings and two meetings with the agencies.There was discussion about timing of the meetings. Engineer Chandler recommended holding the first public meeting after the first meeting with the agencies but during the feasibility study stage and before design. Commissioner Welch recommended that the further public input should be gathered through a second public meeting before the Commission approves the feasibility study. There was further discussion about the location of this project in relation to other Commission projects completed in Plymouth. Commissioner Welch commented that he thinks now is a great time to do the Phase I investigation,but he commented that the proposed $7,000 cost is pretty expensive for a Phase I investigation. He asked what Barr is proposing to include with the Phase I study and if it would be a more extensive investigation than a basic Phase I. Engineer Chandler said that she can find out more information about it. She asked if the presentation of the feasibility study to the Commission would be done by the Commission Engineer or other Barr staff. Engineer Chandler said that she likely would have the Barr staff member that worked on the report come in and present the report. Commissioners Black and Tobelmann asked to be invited to the meetings with the agencies. Mr. Asche asked for more information on how this project fits in with the BCWMC's Resource Management Plan(RMP). Engineer Chandler gave background on the RMP and described how it acts like a preliminary permit approval tool. Mr. Asche asked how much investigation into alternatives should be included in the feasibility studies since it feels like for the stream projects alternatives are limited. Engineer Chandler agreed that for stream projects there are fewer options to consider but the goal is to make sure nothing is missed. Mr. 5 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes Asche asked if the ENVISION tool is a tool that can be used to evaluate future projects,although he noted that he isn't interested in using it for the Plymouth Creek stream restoration project. Administrator Jester responded that the ENVISION tool is a great tool but expensive and not necessarily the right tool for every case.There was discussion about for what projects ENVISION could be useful. Commissioner Black moved to order the preparation of the feasibility study with the inclusion of the Phase I investigation.Commissioner Welch seconded the motion with the friendly amendment that the Engineer brings back to the Commission more information about the Phase I investigation. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote.] B. Consider Approval of Resolution Ordering 2016 Improvements-Continued Attorney Gilchrist stated that he and Attorney LeFevere propose two additions to the Cooperative Agreements in front of the Commission today. He read aloud the first proposed addition to include at the bottom of section 6 of the Cooperative Agreement with the City of New Hope for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project: "If the total actual cost of the project is less than the total estimated cost,the City shall remain responsible for its entire contribution toward the project,and the amount of the Commission's reimbursement to the City shall be reduced by the amount of savings on the project." Attorney Gilchrist read aloud the second proposed addition to include in both the Cooperative Agreement with the City of New Hope and the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Golden Valley to add at the bottom of the second paragraph in section 5: "The City shall complete and submit with its final reimbursement request to the Commission a final report on the project using the Commission's final reporting form and providing such other information as may be requested by the Commission." Attorney Gilchrist pointed out that language authorizing the Chair and Secretary to execute the agreement on behalf of the agreement is already included in the Cooperative Agreement.Attorney Gilchrist and Attorney LeFevere clarified that both proposed new language insertions should be included on the Cooperative Agreement with the City of New Hope for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project(NL-1)and just the language insertion about the final report submission be added to the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Golden Valley for the Honeywell Pond expansion. Commissioner Black moved to approve the proposed amendments to the Cooperative Agreements as specified by Attorney Gilchrist and Attorney LeFevere.Commissioner Millner seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Alternate Commissioner McDonald Black voted for City of Golden Valley]. Commissioner Black moved to approve the Resolution Ordering 2016 Improvements,Designating Members Responsible for Construction, Making Findings Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 103B.251,Certifying Costs to Hennepin County,and Approving Agreements for Construction of Improvements. Commissioner Welch seconded the motion. By call of roll,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote.] Commissioner City Ay Nay Mueller Crystal X McDonald Black Golden Valley X 6 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes Carlson Medicine Lake X Welch Minneapolis X Millner Minnetonka X Black Plymouth X Sicora Robbinsdale X de Lambert St. Louis Park X D. Items Related to 2015-2025 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan i. Receive Update on Presentation of Watershed Plan to BWSR Metro Region Committee Chair de Lambert updated the Commission on the recent presentation of the Watershed Plan to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources(BWSR)Metro Region Committee. He reported that Commissioner Mueller presented a summary of the plan to the Committee and it was well received. Chair de Lambert asked if the PowerPoint presentation that summarizes the plan is posted on the Commission's website. Administrator Jester said that staff can get it posted. ii. Consider Approval of Response to Comments from 90-Day Review of Draft Watershed Management Plan Administrator Jester reported that the BCWMC received comments from the MN Department of Agriculture, MnDOT,and the City of Minneapolis during the draft Plan's 90-day review period. She said that the comments from those entities and the draft response to comments are in the meeting packet. Administrator Jester explained that the Commission does not need to respond in writing to these comments like the Commission needed to for the 60-day comments;however,the Commission needs to address the 90-day comments. Administrator Jester reviewed the comments received and how staff proposes to address them. She summarized the comments received from the City of Minneapolis. She explained that staff spoke with Lois Eberhart about staffs proposed response to comments and reported that Ms. Eberhart is fine with the proposed response to comments. Administrator Jester said that any of these comments and responses can be discussed today, and she went through the highlighted comments and responses included in the table in the meeting packet. Regarding comment No. 6,Commissioner Welch recommended that the draft response be modified to include the phrase"Commission-approved"so that the response reads,"... or Commission-approved alternative." Engineer Chandler said that during a preliminary discussion with the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT)staff the topic came up regarding potential changes to the connection to the New Tunnel. She said that she realized that the Joint and Cooperative Agreement between the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization(WMO), Bassett Creek, and the City of Minneapolis isn't in the BCWMC's Watershed Management Plan appendices. She said that it will be added to the plan's appendices as Appendix I. Engineer Chandler also presented the additional recommended revisions to the draft plan in order to thoroughly address the Joint and Cooperative Agreement. She went through the revisions to 7 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes Section 2.8.1, Section 5.1.1.3,and Appendix H. Commissioner Tobelmann asked if the word"generally" needs to be included in the proposed additional language for Section 2.8.1. Engineer Chandler said the word can be removed. Commissioner Welch asked if all the language is reflective of the original agreement. Engineer Chandler responded yes. Commissioner Welch moved to approve the addition of the proposed language about the Joint and Cooperative Agreement to the plan with the revision to remove the word"generally"as mentioned by Commissioner Tobelmann. Commissioner Black seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8- 0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Commissioner Hoschka voted for City of Golden Valley]. Commissioner Black moved to approve the responses to comments and to authorize staff to amend the plan to reflect the responses. Commissioner Mueller seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Commissioner Hoschka voted for City of Golden Valley]. [Commissioner Welch departed the meeting. Alternate Commissioner Goddard assumed representation for the City of Minneapolis.] E. Consider Approval of Clean Water Fund Grant Application for Northwood Lake Improvement Project Administrator Jester announced that at the Commission's previous meeting it directed staff to prepare this grant application for funds up to$500,000. She presented the application and recommended that the BCWMC request$400,000,which would still cover 50%of construction costs. Commissioner Black moved to approve the grant application with the$400,000 funding request and authorizing staff to edit the application as needed prior to submission. Commissioner Mueller seconded the motion. Commissioner Tobelmann said he would provide some comments to Administrator Jester regarding some of the wording. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Alternate Commissioner McDonald Black voted for City of Golden Valley]. F. Consider Approval of Grant Application for MDNR Flood Reduction Program Funds Engineer Chandler reminded the Commission that due to the special legislation passed in June, $500,000 in general funds became available for the flood reduction program. She reported that DNR staff is still trying to figure out if any of those funds are still available. Engineer Chandler explained that if funds remain, DNR staff would like the opportunity to help fund the BCMWC's XP-SWMM work. She said that the DNR recommended that the BCWMC submit a grant application for those funds. She said the grant application is in front of the Commission today for discussion. Engineer Chandler went through the information in the grant application, explaining that the BCWMC proposed that funds cover XP-SWMM work in the BCMWC's next fiscal year. She said that she needs to make one correction to the table so that it correctly reflects the estimated project cost of$261,000. Engineer Chandler explained that in the application she named Administrator Jester as the Authorized Agent,who is the one who can sign the grant on behalf of the Commission through the State's SWIFT program, and she named herself as the contact person. The Commission indicated consent to naming Administrator Jester the Authorized Agent and Engineer Chandler as the contact. Commissioner Mueller moved to approve submitting the application. Alternate Commissioner Goddard seconded the motion. Commissioner Black remarked that she is not in favor of the XP-SWMM project but is in favor of finding funding for it,so she will support this grant application. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8- 0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Commissioner Hoschka voted for City of Golden Valley]. 8 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes G. Consider Submitting Comments on Metro Chloride TMDL Engineer Chandler reported that comments on the draft Metro Chloride TMDL are due September 2. She stated that Greg Wilson of Barr Engineering reviewed the draft TMDL. She provided an overview of the TMDL and presented staff comments. Administrator Jester remarked that member cities should provide comments on the TMDL,too. Commissioner Black moved to approve staff's letter and comments. Commissioner Mueller seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [Commissioner Crough absent from vote. Commissioner Hoschka voted for City of Golden Valley]. H. Receive Information on Tasks Related to XP-SWMM Phase II Project Engineer Chandler updated the Commission on XP-SWMM work including the additions and upcoming additions to the model such as soil data, information from important connecting storm sewers, ponding storage information,and ensuring that the same vertical data is being used throughout the watershed in the model. She mentioned adding Atlas 14 precipitation data and the new storm distribution information. Mr. Asche asked about the mention in the Engineer's memo of the phrase,"...absolute water surface elevations and flow rates."Engineer Chandler said that the use of the word absolute is in contrast with the word "relative,"but the certainty of the model won't be known until model calibration. Commissioner Hoschka asked detailed questions about collecting and running storm data. She recommended that the TAC members highlight on a map the areas that were flooded during and after the June 2014 storm. She recommended that Engineer Chandler collect such information from the TAC. Mr. Asche pointed out that this XP-SWMM work was approved in April,but the Commission is receiving today the detailed memo about how the XP-SWMM is going to come together. He remarked that he thinks there is a need for the proposals to come in front of the Commission before the Commission authorizes projects. He said that it is important for non-CIP work to follow a process in the same fashion that the CIP projects follow a process. I. Receive Work Plan for Clean Water Partnership Grant for Northwood Lake Improvement Project Administrator Jester stated that this is an information-only item. She reminded the Commission that it was awarded a$300,000 grant for the Northwood Lake Improvement Project and as part of this grant,the BCWMC needed to submit a detailed project work plan,budget, and Gantt chart. Administrator Jester reported that she,the City of New Hope staff,and the MPCA project manager developed this work plan with some assistance from Barr Engineering staff regarding water quality monitoring. J. Review Information on BCWMC Facebook Page Amy Herbert reported that Administrator Jester authorized her to set up a public Facebook page for the BCWMC in order for the Commission to consider using Facebook as a public communication tool. She noted that eight of the nine BCWMC member cities have a Facebook page for communicating with residents. She noted that Facebook is a popular social media tool with adults and would be a way for the BCWMC to amplify its outreach. Ms. Herbert reminded the Commission that it will be launching its redesigned website this year,which will contain more news and updates than the current website,and that a Facebook page goes hand-in-hand with the new site and content. Ms. Herbert recommended posting content on Facebook daily, and she responded to questions. The Commission raised concerns about staff time involved in maintaining the page,the cost of staff time, site security especially regarding comments that others might post to the site,and the frequency of posts to the page. Alternate Commissioner Crough stated that he thought posting two times a week would be enough. Attorney LeFevere commented that if the Commission posted daily, he would "unfriend"the Commission. Administrator Jester recommended that this issue go to the Education Committee 9 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes to discuss and bring an update to the Commission at its next meeting. She said that staff will record its time spent specifically on the Facebook tasks and will check with other water organizations regarding the staff time spent,the frequency of their posts,and other issues about maintaining a Facebook page. [Alternate Commissioner Goddard departed the meeting.] 7. COMMUNICATIONS A. Administrator: i. Administrator Jester announced that the West Metro Water Alliance(WMWA),which the BCWMC supports financially and through the Administrator's time spent working with WMWA, will be at the Minnesota State Fair through Blue Thumb at the Eco Experience. She reminded the Commission that WMWA is the education arm of several different watershed organizations. She reported that WMWA is paying Blue Thumb to develop a new campaign and the campaign being developed is"10,000 Plantings for our 10,000 Lakes"to try and get people involved in planting native plants for clean water and pollinators. ii. Administrator Jester stated that the BCWMC will need volunteers for its booth at the Golden Valley Art and Music Festival on September 26. The Commission discussed participating in the festival's parade and decided not to participate in the parade due to lack of volunteers. B. Chair: i. Chair de Lambert reported on the Hennepin County Budget and Capital Investment Committee regarding the BCMWC's CIP request for next year. He said that the Committee immediately approved the request by vote 6-1 with no questions about the proposed 2016 projects. C. Commissioners: i. Commissioner Black reminded the Commission that previously she reported that the City of Plymouth budgeted no funds for curlyleaf pondweed treatment for Medicine Lake for 2016 and that she would ask the Plymouth City Council to consider adding to its 2016 budget$40,000 for curlyleaf pondweed treatment. She reported that the City Council preliminarily voted to approve including$30,000 for curlyleaf pondweed treatment in 2016 but the Council does not finalize its budget until December. Commissioner Black stated that the City Council made no guarantee for any curlyleaf pondweed funding in 2017. ii. Commissioner Tobelmann provided an update on the NEMO Workshop on the Water. D. TAC Members: No TAC Communications E. Committees: No Committee Communications F. Legal Counsel: No Legal Communications G. Engineer: i. Engineer Chandler reminded the Commission that the Westwood Lake plant viewing is Monday, August 24 at 10:30 a.m. and that Commission members interested in attending should let her or Administrator Jester know. ii. Engineer Chandler announced that Barr Engineering Company is hosting the second of BWSR's presentation of the 8410 Rules on Thursday,August 27 from 1:30 p.m. -3:00 p.m. and that people 10 BCWMC August 20, 2015, Meeting Minutes interested in attending need to RSVP by tomorrow. iii. Engineer Chandler reported that the SWLRT is proposing a significant change to the New Tunnel so the Commission Engineer will review the proposal. She said it is unclear as to the level of work that will be required for the review because it depends on whether the Commission will need to do modeling or will be using existing modeling. iv. Engineer Chandler stated that the City of Minneapolis issued a Request for Proposals for performing hydrologic and hydraulic modeling on a large section of north Minneapolis. She said that 1,700 acres of the project includes the Bassett Creek watershed. Engineer Chandler noted that she is not involved in the Barr Engineering proposal for this work and Barr Engineering has not been selected for the project at this point but she is mentioning this in case the Commission has any concerns. She said that she has also informed the BCWMC's Minneapolis TAC representative about this proposal. Chair de Lambert asked if this modeling work could result in cost savings to the Commission with its XP-SWMM model. Engineer Chandler said that this would need to be talked about should Barr Engineering be selected for the work. 8. INFORMATION ONLY (Available at http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/Meetings/2015/2015- August/2015AugustMeetingPacket.htm) A. CIP Project Update Chart B. Grant Tracking Summary and Spreadsheet C. Channel 12 Interview on Schaper Pond Diversion Project D. Hennepin County Green Partners Environmental Education Grant Program E. Mississippi WMO Stormwater Park&Learning Center Grand Opening 9/19/15 9.ADJOURNMENT Chair de Lambert adjourned the meeting at 11:31 a.m. Recorder Date Secretary Date 11 city of golden11 MEMORANDUM Physical Development valley Department P 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. D. 1. Award Contract for 2015 Bassett Creek Restoration Project, City Project No. 13-25 Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Summary The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission's (BCWMC) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) lists a number of water quality improvement projects that provide a benefit to the Bassett Creek watershed and its residents. The project listed as Restore Main Stem Channel (10th Ave to Duluth St)2015CR in the BCWMC CIP is identified for construction in 2015. The project area covers 9,500 feet of stream from 10th Avenue to Duluth Street and matches into the 2012 Creek Restoration project at the upstream and downstream ends (see attached location map). The restoration project will stabilize eroding stream banks and repair deteriorating storm sewer pipe outlets, resulting in property protection and improved water quality in Bassett Creek and downstream waters. According to the feasibility report, an estimated 60 to 100 pounds of phosphorus and 140,000 to 200,000 pounds of sediment will be removed annually as a result of this project. On October 16, 2014, the BCWMC adopted a resolution ordering the project. In addition, it provided funding in the amount of$1,503,000 for the project, and directed the City of Golden Valley to construct the improvements through a cooperative agreement. Citizen engagement and participation has included the following: • BCWMC public hearings on June 19, 2014 and October 16, 2014 • Project open houses at city hall on April 24, 2014 and January 8, 2015 • Project updates and informational letters to residents • On-site meetings with property owners The 2015 creek restoration project is being constructed in two phases, each under separate contract. Phase one includes stream bank shaping, placement of field stone rock and 12-inch bio- logs, and repair of storm sewer outlets. Phase two includes the establishment of native vegetation along the stream which will commence immediately after phase one is completed and continue over two additional growing seasons to ensure proper establishment. Bids for the first phase of the 2015 Bassett Creek Restoration Project, City Project No. 13-25 were opened on September 16, 2015. The following bids were received: Rachel Contracting $ 765,736.20 New Look Contracting, Inc. $ 782,580.00 Sunram Construction $ 844,936.00 Landwehr Construction, Inc. $ 987,913.00 Solutions 101 LLC $1,042,322.48 Staff has reviewed the bids and found them to be in order and within the project budget. The BCWMC has $1,503,000 in its 2015 CIP for construction of this project. As with all BCWMC projects the City of Golden Valley will be reimbursed for all project expenditures. It is anticipated that phase one construction will begin in November 2015, contingent upon the award of contract and receipt of all permits required for the project. Phase two of the restoration project (native vegetation establishment) will go out for bids in early spring 2016. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to award a contract for the 2015 Bassett Creek Restoration Project, City Project No. 13- 25, to the lowest responsible bidder, Rachel Contracting, Inc., in the amount of$765,736.20. "."."--.......„_.........4 , • „ , i . : ,„‘„,,,.,, ..„ toe ,s__. ; _ I J '� :i S -.C7- j ________ --1 •en Q ✓ 1w `. IA tii I. .J N env eueZ o o L co V L i ,. 0 tNI vie, I IF IN Jp 28161100 i O d 0 ii 2 o. v jr, 0 mi- ce \I ___ - _ J Q V� f+ 0 Jo E a r L 1` ' c o N ---- ; In - m m / ! M 1 .o m q. I 44 . ---- A------T- ,73 i 1 I ____:_..____L, i. Rhode Island `v N O Iliti I i 01 N env apeuuIM __.1_____T—T ...__ ___..... .....r_____ _ ______---"1-..„).igo oc csiul- 4.08° 11- iiT1J _ --________L____ s -�-.-- O r 0 F �a c .:',. � o N ny u!=uOoslM ''' ; ti. ce ---1 .7.1) 97.5 ( i '----"------r--snHii _ y.4 r" 0 City of golden MEMORANDUM valley Park and Recreation Department 763-512-2345/763-512-2344(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. E. Authorization for Submittal of Application for Hennepin Youth Sports Program Grants Prepared By Rick Birno, Director of Parks and Recreation Summary Applications for the Hennepin Youth Sports Program Grant are currently being accepted for the 2016 grant cycle. Staff has discussed possible projects and recommends proceeding with applying for funds to construct a new Challenge Course with water station, shaded picnic area and replacement play structure at Schaper Park. Schaper Park is located at 631 Ottawa Avenue North. City staff is in support of the collaborative effort to create an innovative option for families to be active together. The attached resolution, approving a grant submission, outlines the proposed improvements at Schaper Park. The grant request will be for$225,000 from Hennepin County, with additional funds and staff management/labor in the amount of$225,000. Maintenance, repairs and long term capital replacement will be shared with Three Rivers Park District. Attachments • Resolution Authorizing Submittal of Application for Hennepin Youth Sports Program Grant (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Submittal of Application for Hennepin Youth Sports Program Grant. Resolution 15-82 October 20, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION FOR HENNEPIN YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM GRANT WHEREAS, Hennepin County, via its Youth Sports Grant Program, provides for capital funds to assist local government units of Hennepin County for the deveopment of sports or recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley desires to make improvements at Schaper Park to create a destination Challenge Course and other park improvements for children, adults and families of every fitness level to be active and make fitness fun. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley: 1. The estimate of the total cost of the proposed improvements at Schaper Park is $450,000 and the City of Golden Valley is requesting $225,000 from the Hennepin County Youth Sports Grant Program. The City of Golden Valley will assume responsibility in a partnership with Three Rivers Park District, Minnesota/Wisconsin Playground and the Loppet Foundation for a match requirement fiscal and in-kind labor support of$225,000. 2. The City of Golden Valley agrees to be the fiscal agent and manage project, and will operate and maintain the Challenge Course for the intended purpose and functional life in a partnership with Three Rivers Park District. 3. The City of Golden Valley agrees to enter into necessary and required agreements with Hennepin County for the specific purpose of constructing a new recreational facility. 4. That the City Manager and/or Director of Parks and Recreation is authorized and directed to execute said application and serve as official liaison with Hennepin County or its authorized representative. 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 of golden11 MEMORANDUM Physical p valley Y DevelopmentDepartment 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. F. Approval of Plat and Authorization to Sign PUD Permit and PUD Development Agreement for Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary At the August 18, 2015, City Council meeting, the Council held a public hearing on the Final PUD Plan for Cornerstone Creek. After the hearing the Council approved the Final Plan. The Final Plat, PUD Permit and PUD Development Agreement have been prepared for consideration. City staff has reviewed the documents and finds them to be consistent with the approved Final PUD Plan and the requirements of City Code. Attachments • PUD Permit - Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 (3 pages) • PUD Development Agreement- Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 (8 pages) • Resolution for Approval of Plat- Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 (2 pages) • Final Plat- Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat - Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the PUD Permit and Development Agreement for Cornerstone Creek PUD No. 124. Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 City Council Approval: August 18, 2015 City of Golden Valley, Minnesota Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Project Name: Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 Location: 9300 and 9310 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota Legal Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 Applicant: CHDC Cornerstone Creek, LLC Address: 614 North First Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401 Owner: CHDC Cornerstone Creek, LLC Address: 614 North First Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401 Zoning District: High Density Residential (R-4) Permitted Uses: To allow for the construction of a 45 unit facility for adults with developmental disabilities, administrative offices for Jewish Housing and Programming, and a public multi-purpose space. Components: A. Land Use 1. The plans prepared by UrbanWorks Architecture, submitted July 15, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. A Park Dedication Fee of$9,740 (2% of the land value) shall be paid by the developer prior to release of the Final Plat and the issuance of any building permits. 3. An adequate plan for snow storage and removal shall be in place. B. Construction 1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to the Planning Manager dated July 20, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memos from the Engineering Division to the Planning Manager dated July 17, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. All signs on the property must meet the requirements of the City's sign code. Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 Page 2 C. Grading, Utilities, Access and Other Engineering Issues 1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to the Planning Manager dated June 16, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The property owner shall provide to the City all easements and agreements necessary to ensure cross-access and shared parking between the two lots. D. Subdivision 1. Proof of filing of the plat shall take the form of a certified copy of the fully recorded plat, or a receipt from the County specifically noting that the applicant has paid for such a copy to be sent to the City when it becomes available. 2. The name of the final plat shall include "P.U.D. 124" in its title in accordance with City Code. 3. The applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City in conformance with City Code and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. It is hereby understood and agreed that this P.U.D. Permit is a part of the City Council approval granted on August 18, 2015. Any changes to the PUD Permit for Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 shall require an amendment. Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 Page 3 CHDC CORNERSTONE CREEK, LLC Witness: By: Title: Date: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Witness: By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Date: Witness: By: Timothy J. Cruikshank, City Manager Date: Warning: This permit is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. #124 AGREEMENT dated this day of , 2015, by and between the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and CHDC Cornerstone Creek LLC (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Development Approval.The Developer has asked the City to approve a Planned Unit Development (PUD 124) known as Cornerstone Creek, which land is legally described on Attachment One, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"). 2. Conditions of Development Approval. The City has approved the Planned Unit Development on the following conditions: a. The plans prepared by UrbanWorks Architecture, submitted July 15, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. b. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division, dated July 17, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. c. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department, dated July 20, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. d. The property owner shall provide to the City all easements and agreements necessary to ensure cross-access and shared parking between the two lots. e. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). f. The City Attorney will determine if a title review is necessary prior to approval of the Final Plat. g. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 124" in its title. h. A park dedication fee of$9,740, or 2%of the land value, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. i. The applicant must validate that there is adequate space for snow storage on site, or have a plan in place for snow removal. j. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 3. Additional Obligations of Developer. a. The Developer shall pay all required fees and costs incurred by the City related to the review and processing of the PUD application, including legal and professional consulting costs. b. The Developer must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City setting forth the responsibilities of the Developer or future owner for the following: i. Maintenance of the water and sanitary sewer facilities within the property. ii. Maintenance of the storm sewer and storm water quality treatment facilities. iii. Maintenance of any trees or landscaping that is approved by the City for placement in the public right-of-way. d. The new driveway aprons into the site must be constructed according to City standards for commercial driveway aprons. The driveway entrances must include curb tapers, in locations approved by the City, that allow for ADA pedestrian ramps to be constructed at a later date. The curb tapers will need to be inspected and approved by the City at the time of construction. e. A City Right-of-Way Management Permit is required for all obstructions and excavations within City streets and rights-of-way. As part of this permit,the City will evaluate and determine the extent of pavement restoration required by the Developer for excavations within Golden Valley Road. f. The Developer, or its agent, shall obtain a Certificate of Compliance for the new building prior to occupancy of the building. g. Developer must submit Final Construction Plans addressing all recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division, dated July 17, 2015 and any conditions set forth by the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission upon its review, prior to issuance of permits for new construction. h. The Developer shall obtain any other required permits from the City and other governmental authorities as required for the construction of the development. 4. Development Plans.The Subject Property shall be developed in accordance with the approved plans, original copies of which are on file with the City's Physical Development Department. 5. Installation by Developer. The Developer shall install or cause to be installed and pay for the following, hereinafter referred to as the "Site Improvements." The securities required for Site Improvements are discussed later in this Agreement. a. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments. b. Surveying and staking of work required to be performed by the Developer. c. Installation of gas, electric, communications, and cable lines prior to building occupancy. d. Installation of all sanitary sewer services and water services to the building as shown on the Final Plans or as amended in final construction plans approved by the City. e. Installation of all storm sewer and storm water quality treatment facilities as shown on the Final Plans, and as may be amended upon review of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission or in final construction plans approved by the City. f. Installation of driveway aprons that meet City standards. g. The grading, erosion control and landscaping, all of which shall all be made in accordance with City approved plans. 6. License. The Developer, and its successors and assigns, hereby grant the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Subject Property during the site development, including construction, and all time thereafter,to perform all work and inspections applicable thereto and contemplated under this Agreement. 7. Property Fees and Charges. The Developer shall pay all applicable fees, charges, and assessments for PUD 124 and the Subject Property in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The fees shall include the following fees: a. Park Dedication Fee The Developer is assessed a Park Dedication Fee of$9,740 per City Code. Payment in full is required prior to the City's signing and release of the Final Plat and the issuance of any building permits. 8. Financial Securities for Site Improvements. The Developer shall submit a Cash Deposit or Stand-by Irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable and issued by a local banking institution acceptable to the City Attorney for the following: a. 125%of the estimated cost to furnish and install all materials identified in the Landscape Plan for PUD 124 (calculated at $61,013 x 125% = $76,266.25) on file in the Physical Development Department. The landscape security required herein may be reduced by 66%following installation of landscape materials per the approved plan and upon acceptance by the City. The remaining balance of the landscape costs will be retained by the City for a warranty period of two years following installation and acceptance by the City to ensure survival of the plant materials. The remaining balance of the landscape costs will be released following the City's acceptance of the two-year warranty inspection. Within thirty days after the notice by Developer of conclusion of the warranty period, City agrees to perform the warranty inspection. Within ten additional days City will provide Developer with either a list of corrections or final release documentation (provided by Developer) suitable for releasing the deposit. If corrections are required and upon notice by Developer that the corrections have been made, the ten day inspection and ten day notification or release will be followed. 9. Assessments for Public Improvements. The subject property is located within the Highway 55 West Redevelopment Area.The City of Golden Valley is considering public improvements within the Highway 55 West Redevelopment Area, which includes Golden Valley Road, Mendelssohn Avenue, Decatur Avenue, 7th Avenue, and Boone Avenue, that are necessitated by the development of this PUD and other developments within the area. These improvements include installation of pedestrian facilities, including, but not limited to, accessibility improvements and modifications; installation of street lighting; overhead power line burial; sanitary sewer lining; street realignment; and mill and overlay of the existing street pavements. It is anticipated that these improvements will be completed by the City by November 1, 2018, and that the not to exceed special assessment to the Subject Property is estimated to be $124,000.00. The Developer, its successors and assigns, waive any right to appeal under Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081 any special assessments to the Subject Property for the improvements described herein. 10. Assessments. The Developer understands that the Developer or the Builders will be required to pay for the Subject Property fees, charges and assessments in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The rates for each of these items will be set according to the current rate structure at the time the building permit is received. 11. Developer's Default. Upon an Event of Default (defined below), the City shall be entitled to all the remedies permitted by law or equity. Without limiting the foregoing, with respect to an Event of Default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder,the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. The Developer grants the City full authority and a license to act as set forth in the previous sentence following an Event of Default, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy the cost in whole or in part as a special assessment against the Subject Property. The Developer waives its right to notice of hearing and hearing on such assessments and waives the right to appeal such assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. The following shall be an "Event of Default" under this Agreement: (i)the failure by the Developer to pay when due and invoiced the amounts required to be paid by Developer under any provision of this Agreement; or(ii) failure by the Developer to observe and perform any covenant, condition or obligation on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement. 12. Responsibility for Costs. a. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all documented costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the approval of the PUD and ensuring compliance with the Final Plans, including but not limited to reasonable legal, planning, engineering and inspection fees and expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the PUD,the preparation of this Agreement and other legal documents, and all reasonable costs, expenses, legal, engineering and planning fees incurred by the City in reviewing the application and related documents, and in monitoring and inspecting the progress of the Project. b. The Developer shall indemnify and hold the City and its officers, employees and agents harmless from claims made by Developer for damages sustained or costs directly incurred resulting from development of the Project, construction and operation, except for such damages or costs resulting from the gross negligence, intentional misconduct or intentional violation of this Agreement or applicable laws and ordinance by the City, or its officers or employees. c. The Developer shall reimburse the City for reasonable costs incurred in the enforcement of Developer's obligations under this Agreement, including engineering, building official, planning and attorney's fees, and for the City's performance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement in the event that the Developer fails to commence or complete such obligations on a timely basis. d. The Developer shall pay in full all documented bills submitted to it by the City for obligations properly incurred under this Agreement within sixty (60) days after receipt; if the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all development work and construction on the Property until the bills are paid in full, and may draw on any of the security deposited hereunder to discharge such obligations. Bills not paid within sixty(60) days shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per year. 13. In addition to any other remedies permitted by law, in the event the Developer fails to pay any amount payable to the City hereunder when due,the City may charge such amount, in whole or in part, as a special assessment against the Subject Property. 14. Miscellaneous. a. The Developer represents to the City that, to the best of Developer's knowledge, the development of the Subject Property as contemplated herein complies with all City, county, metropolitan, state and federal laws and regulations including, but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. b. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. c. In addition to any other remedies available to the City, Breach of any term of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. d. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. e. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release. f. This Agreement, any amendments hereto, and conditions of the Ordinance are binding on all successors and assigns of the Developer, shall run with the land and shall be recorded against the title to the property. This Agreement must be recorded in the appropriate Hennepin County land records at the expense of the Developer and a copy of the recorded executed Agreement provided by the Developer to the City. g. Developer, its successors and assigns, agree to provide the execution of amendments to this Agreement, as are necessary to effect the recording hereof. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request, the City will execute and deliver a release to the Developer as for the obligations related to such work. h. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to the City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. i. Developer may not assign this Agreement without the written permission of the City. j. The Developer represents to the City that, with respect to itself(and with respect to thirds parties, to its actual knowledge,) no material misrepresentations have been or will be made, nor has any materially inaccurate information was or will be provided to the City by the Developer during the City's review process. k. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by State laws, any further development or construction of new improvements and any additions or alterations to existing improvements not expressly approved under this Agreement will require additional approvals from the City, as required by City ordinances, and in full compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement. 15. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following addresses: CHDC Cornerstone Creek LLC 614 North First Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: City Manager City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: Shepard M. Harris, Mayor By: Timothy J. Cruikshank, City Manager DEVELOPER By: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2015, by Shepard M. Harris, Mayor, and , City Manager, of the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2015, by , on behalf of the said Developer. Notary Public ATTACHMENT 1 Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124, Hennepin County, Minnesota Resolution 15-83 October 20, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT - CORNERSTONE CREEK P.U.D. NO. 124 WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, pursuant to due notice, has heretofore conducted a public hearing on the proposed plat to be known as Cornerstone Creek P.U.D. No. 124 covering the following described tracts of land: The Registered portion is described as follows: That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 31, Township 118, Range 21, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 31 distant 484 feet East from the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter; thence East along said North line a distance of 101 feet; thence South parallel with the West line of said Southwest Quarter to the center line of 6th Avenue North (old County Road No. 6) as described in County Commissioners Proceedings dated April 27, 1925; thence Westerly along said center line to a line drawn South, parallel with the West line of said Southwest Quarter, from the point of beginning; thence North along the last described parallel line to the point of beginning. The West line of the above described tract of land is marked by Judicial Landmarks set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 12495. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, Section 31, Township 118, Range 21 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter distant 585 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence North, parallel with the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, to the North line of the South 16.50 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West along said North line to a point 836 feet West, measured along said North line, from the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence South, parallel with said East line to said South line; thence East along said South line 110.75 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. The Abstract portion is described as follows: That part of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31, Township 118, North Range 21 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows: Commencing on the North line of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 31, 585 feet East of the Northwest corner of said Southwest IA; thence East along said North line of said Southwest '/4 a distance of 150.05 feet; thence South and parallel with the West line of said Southwest '/4 a distance of 394.49 feet, more or less to the center line of Watertown Road, so called; thence Westerly along center line of said road a distance of 150.43 feet, more or less, to a point therein distant 585 feet East of the West line of said Southwest 1/4 of said Section 31, Township 118, Range 21; thence North and parallel with the West line said Southwest 1/4 to point of beginning. And Resolution 15-83 - continued October 20, 2015 That part of the South 16.50 feet of the West 735 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 31, Township 118, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying east of a line drawn north, parallel with the west line of said Southwest Quarter, from a point on the south line of said Southwest Quarter, distant 585.00 feet east of the Southwest corner thereof. WHEREAS, all persons present were given the opportunity to be heard; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, and the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized and instructed to sign the original of said plat and to do all other things necessary and proper in the premises. 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. N U n y s cO W 9 ma EJ., iL� i - g;o 3 0 (_/) F. V3°„ Nv $v n- 6 N N r fit._ �g3m ° E oo Z p € 3` g _ .r,,1-' x€ "€ a I to o r U L J1 1"' -y . _ - p� .c «Tm v u V.1 - y ° y a> S V(- r 3 ° J ea Li I C NI N a _1 a9 =° m SYS iLv3u- -a r„ I o II rn v W ost l z U =o -°, I O O -z" _ >'2'' - - Y»o Ec 1 0 Q - 3w I ;e a9 1 I /r y m�_E V - �E° Fo _ aEo 15- N of I Li U sz A' iota no ' oa ' I o -It ":01,14,E, Pit- ° �s V - - �1! I a - 2-W:n o s _ 1 i ii a- n ;3 S a. _ F t I 2,12 ;= l 8 n U a P El ti o ° '''g; no ::iZ I5-8 v s9= oE e ao 30. ' .1,:i' » . m° `' I tg a ° ai • ° ° -.E.-got = < o ill i o„ a °a wa z ,& N n �,F3t °�N °;; Nu ~ z. € °an53 iE°- eE° ogiel _ o . N :8=I-75-0z h°L 87-E-0 NE-0 ,f,', dm ° u 3 ^ UE ca °E j4.1561' 'ggo ° «Y o a $ E= $ i" bm m• mx mo.0 -.-,1,..t1 y ew n o9z °a rcv I o= 'o I c ognE Ag-P, ° 6:� i c ° cE� L'6, _ S _ • Uhlg; t V o O O x _ ig� ; -« Al J _8 V 'E^' - I ')" ceryl ii o co`. ..co _ -. - E ET. I - =o E I i°'� ° o Q O 3 °1u W g B -174 >I n y o€ m ci ms's ig _ Z - „ e�iL ° ',At '�3 c , 1 r�,� yN Yon ni 3 ° I - Z.- F aw o"� ° °« � I 1 It Imo I oge _ .°r 0 ° I. 3 1 I " '„E”, - T It X , :a_°° _ _°,° g: - U I ' . I 1 ,..° 1 I I^ N '3 6Ga I I go - • f:- __ ,?,7-_W51 .'oar a "°' U la` I I 1 - �I I I Io 3 Iu V I H� al Z ° 91 �fE .. S'.2°,, g I: I = Isi �i ; 1 11w ' g Io : I iT 1 i 0 F� p lr - Y O �'os - I c 1P I s �xi �' Eo 03 a3i E�z� �` o I� 2> aE of I3J i-- E Ia.E i '61a 6 I ' 1 cc %U mU 5 • if-_ gem u 1 ,g 1z gz I I>g 6 a - 1 I Wv m n „o s �, ° I So~�S �_ °� a X 8°32 ° So ° , o <1-_ :o I�° °:a Im= F<F_ " I I �q5 " z pyo _ . 5) gi xui 5 5 2 - U Iw NO I-`" I i33 _..°.. I9f N 1 1.2 t3 In O I Ki m0 �ii a V ¢i _ f I _ 3 • c V OI O --lZ'301'Bll 141 'I£ J3S 0 22 JO M3NM00 M31M0n0 1503 IN 'o p 2 p,- ,, O N $ I- ."cW 2j 21nW '1Zh 0 U '4 Y �,O, zo -ct v�N O 2 ~ y - Wz \JW 2,)- W J WO w Uy m 2$ 0 I ro � c3 °� mo a$2,'W ZoYW Off^¢7£ C 2 Y U lC 10 Z O Vlk 10 JtY MW io- QOQd, Op, O O O O ' U 0 $J 2mo 22� $ 2 $ 2 2 ,� o 00 OOU 01YN O�� O O O O O 0.5 v uQ 2 m D z--z U rn ory x JWJ = O oc;� 3 1 r�> v,---)2 I r� OJN?� f I I W O 1 zoo, < Q O N i O WI-J I mxa 1.111 Z aZet= b/I M 31/1 30 b/1 ICI I 33 I W —1— J O a U H Z M5 301 30 1331 00 5£1 w 33 I T---- Z -1 1530 38I 30 3NIl 1503 (/I La N Q m O 3,99,94005 ; — > } ,Mi (NOM d1M0530 Mad 64'46£) W —}—Z———— 0 OS'91 _� ,i/__--- **Mr 3 M*t.00S 3d/d NOW N0N!57 - o\ 6F'09F 50'FF \ o 48:',,, 1 rL _1-lZ'301!BfI 'dML[F'035 X71 MS 3111 m� II CI �a0-r p o O LP< En ' O! 30 31117 153N 3111 HllM 13P0MVd 3:VIl /-_ I LI (.3 I o 3 jm 5 f oN +- ~O p I ,,,..7,1-. OI OW ��� s33 O -i�I^y ,c2N¢ S'9fw Th2\ I ^� ' ?� < L� NS N Js .ho3 s<,-,,-, v. !i' 3 VW We Z I ZZ~ Ci 02in2 WOW In • p O<�� 7 mp h� iW i✓ 2Ary 0 �N Q �� uvui R" p 7 1-g-a! c I°p Q : ix c) mm F_ h� a ti aaa s^ IZtri W 'q O n 12 W 3,-'17..:, bz� bE I o �m 4;3%Q�W v =2 0 N P n,blN u ;3% O I w Z i.-- � I R 3 .i --10 308'B11 dN1 'lc 035 '6/! Al 5 3111 !Fa U Ili w \o q,' C� �; N W 2 \W o JO 3,m 1 S.3M 3111 Hi in 73710 V 3Nn J -J M2p J= �� i hWR I I ` \-'03q1 m Q ,�' _� 1(] �',/ __I_ \ \\1 U O Q O _ _ o l i t 91'15/ HL/)OS II W h I i1 M C� �,) 1 p 10 V �� 3.1'2 O 3 V ..:;09;',-; -,- N S10 ' I cr, C7 �,j l�o1 m v �vv,1 =�> '-I I 33 4-LU (J0 .s It NOM03S 30 1/! 'M'S 311!30 307'N I ZI C� I F_ 9'9! -3/0 JO 1/1005 13 6i'0 53/7 N7/'ON110J I I J (/) O!L I` — a bl'FF 1 C� I j--o 71!'99/ O 0*1OZ o `i 3d/d NOMI \`-- \ 69'61* 41,65;9400N �, I - f \ SZ6! 'LZ 7IMdV 03100 33 H0N/Z/! ^\ 500033008d SM3N0155101100 A1N000 NI \ 33 I 0(0"91" \\\\ , 030!80530 5V 3N17 AVM-40-160d A7,N I I t \I t,,-, ' -S66Z1 Oh'3500 5N3MM01 O/ 31/1 JO/1005 1J Z9'0 5317 WN ONOOJ----1 I v)M• 46. OON U W w'� 1NVOSMOd 135 530 10//1 7VIO;p/;,'53 ly ' ti Lg w 03N8101 58 O.NV7 30 10001 30 307 1534 `6',\ 0 .. "J O'Z u 06 '4i'3 3' '''�j, n 0 0\\ Lgo W J ,) WW03 I2 2,n"'s C?a I I I .-°2 Wvi 33 3 LOO, LV`:-.1 " _ro vi W w �n°12 LOO, F•, ti�_� �'u oow J� sal'', 6P of z2� W o g:" lig) W\ .h �0 Jj"'' aN L.� ;`9W3' %2 �3 ZZ bI �O J3cim /0 W~ 03 \C\'' w"' ,�N 083 \ \ Oi W,t sLg I,�I �W h , 4 I -- 1 ,-IZ 300'B l! 'dMl 'IC 035 '6/l 31 S 31/1 JO 6131000 153401705 city1 . ( L „qpi„ 1.„„ , , 1 U11,,,„,0 „ „III100 ' e,' i, 11111111111111 „„„ „ ,,,11 �o1111111111111111111111111110i "° . 101,1„„, 4% vooi 01 ill., , 1„, 11„ 11101 . w 1�1..1 Fire Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. G. Administrative Hearing Officer Appointments Prepared By Rick Hammerschmidt, Deputy Fire Chief Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary On July 21, 2015, the City Council passed City Code Section 2.91 establishing the administrative hearing procedures program. The administrative hearing process offers an alternate to the regular court system to review alleged violations of city ordinances. The process is intended to be more informal and less intimidating to alleged violators. Section 2.91 provides that the hearing officers who conduct the administrative hearings may not be City employees and must be approved by the City Council. Following the posting of the positions and the interview process, staff recommends appointing the following individuals to serve as hearing officers for the administrative citation program: Paul Bohnsack-Apple Valley, MN — Ellen Longfellow- St. Paul, MN Michael Budka -Apple Valley, MN — Robert Reutiman - Wayzata, MN Robert Fine - Minneapolis, MN — David Schmitz - New Brighton, MN Jody Kieser Kisting -Savage, MN Each of these individuals is admitted to practice law in Minnesota, is not a resident of Golden Valley and otherwise meets the minimum requirements of the position. Each has direct experience either as a hearing officer for another city's similar program or significant experience in an administrative hearing setting. They will be called on a rotating basis as needed, and will serve in this capacity until they either withdraw or are removed from the list by the City Council. Under the terms of the code, the City will establish a procedure to evaluate the performance of each hearing officer, including comments from citizens and City staff. Attachment • Professional Services Agreement for Administrative Hearing Officer(5 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt appoint attorneys Paul Bohnsack, Micheal Budke, Robert Fine, Jody Kieser Kisting, Ellen Longfellow, Robert Reutiman and David Schmidt as administrative hearing officers for the City of Golden Valley and the agreement terms as attached. 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER AGREEMENT made this ________ day of _______________, 20____, by and between the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and _____________________ ______________________________________ (hereinafter referred to as “Consultant”). IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. The City retains Consultant to be a hearing officer to conduct hearings and render decisions in conjunction with the City’s administrative code enforcement program. The administrative hearing process and the duties of the hearing officer are set forth in City Code Section 2.91, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. Consultant shall act on a non-exclusive basis as a hearing officer on matters referred to Consultant by the City in accordance with City Code Section 2.91. Hearings shall take place in the council chambers at City Hall. 2. COMPENSATION. Consultant shall be paid by the City for the services described in the Scope of Services the amount of One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($150.00) for each hearing calendar of four hours or less (i.e., each set of hearing(s) on the same day which set lasts four hours or less). Consultant shall not be paid for travel time. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any out-of-pocket expenses. Payment shall be made by the City within thirty-five (35) days of receipt of an invoice. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS; CONFLICT. In providing services hereunder, Consultant shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provisions of services to be provided. Consultant shall recuse him or her self if Consultant has a conflict of interest in any matter before him or her. 4. STANDARD OF CARE. Consultant shall exercise the same degree of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of the services as is ordinarily possessed and exercised by a licensed attorney under similar circumstances. 5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The City hereby retains Consultant as an independent contractor upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant is not an employee of the City and is free to contract with other entities as provided herein. Consultant shall be responsible for selecting the means and methods of performing the work. The City shall not be responsible for withholding taxes with respect to the Consultant’s compensation hereunder. The Consultant shall have no claim against the City hereunder or otherwise for vacation pay, sick leave, retirement benefits, social security, worker’s compensation, health or disability benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, or employment benefits of any kind. 6. SUBCONTRACTORS. Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided under this Agreement, and no interest under this Agreement is assignable. 2 7. MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT. Consultant must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity. In the event Consultant receives a request to release data, Consultant must immediately notify City. City will give Consultant instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold City, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from Consultant’s officers’, agents’, city’s, partners’, employees’, volunteers’, assignees’ or subcontractors’ unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. 8. RECORDS. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records of expenses involved in the performance of services. 9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 10. TERMINATION. This Agreement shall continue for an indefinite term but may be terminated by either party upon written notice to the other. Dated: __________________, 20__. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BY: ________________________________ Tim Cruikshank, City Manager CONSULTANT Dated: __________________, 20___. ______________________________ 3 EXHIBIT “A” TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Sec. 2.91: Administrative Hearing Procedures. Subdivision 1. Administrative Hearings. A. Where the City Code entitles a person to an administrative hearing this Section shall apply and Section 2.14 of the City Code shall not apply. B. A person wishing to exercise their right to an administrative hearing shall file a notice of appeal with the City Clerk. The notice of appeal must be filed with the City Clerk on the form prescribed by the City Manager or his/her designee within twenty (20) days after issuance of the administrative citation, notice or order that is to be the subject of the hearing. If required by the Section of the City Code granting the right to the administrative hearing or the City’s master fee schedule, the notice shall be accompanied by the applicable filing fee. C. The City Council shall periodically approve a list of persons, from which the City Manager or his/her designee will randomly select a hearing officer to hear and determine a matter for which a hearing is requested. D. The appellant has the right to request, no later than ten (10) days before the date of the hearing, that the assigned hearing officer be removed from the case. One (1) such request for each case will be granted automatically by the City Manager or his/her designee. A subsequent request must be directed to the assigned hearing officer who will decide whether the hearing officer can fairly and objectively review the case. If such a finding is made, the City Manager or his/her designee must assign another hearing officer. The hearing officer is not a judicial officer but is a public officer as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 609.415. The hearing officer must not be an employee of the City. The City Manager or his/her designee must establish a procedure for evaluating the competency of hearing officers, including comments from citizens and City staff. E. Upon the hearing officer’s own initiative or upon written request of an interested party demonstrating the need, the officer may issue a subpoena for the attendance of a witness or the production of books, papers, records or other documents that are material to the matter being heard. The party requesting the subpoena is responsible for serving the subpoena in the manner provided for civil actions and for paying the fees and expenses of any witness. A person served with a subpoena may file an objection with the hearing officer promptly but no later than the time specified in the subpoena for compliance. The officer may cancel or modify the subpoena if it is unreasonable or oppressive. A person who, without just cause, fails or refuses to attend and testify or to produce the required documents in obedience to a subpoena is guilty of a misdemeanor. Alternatively, the party requesting the s ubpoena may seek an order from district court directing compliance. 4 F. The City shall schedule the hearing to occur within thirty (30) days of the City receiving a request for a hearing in the form prescribed by the City Manager or his/her designee. Notice of the hearing must be served on the person responsible for the violation at least fourteen (14) days in advance of the hearing, unless a shorter time is accepted by all parties. Service of the notice will be by first class mail and will be complete upon mailing. At the hearing, the parties will have the opportunity to present testimony and question any witnesses, but strict rules of evidence will not apply. The hearing officer must record the hearing and receive testimony and exhibits, and keep a record of documentary evidence submitted. The officer must receive and give weight to evidence, including hearsay evidence that possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonable and prudent people in the conduct of their affairs. G. The hearing officer must: 1. determine whether the City has established by a preponderance of the evidence that, as applicable, a violation of the City Code, or a violation of the terms and conditions of a City approval, including permits and licenses, required and granted under the City Code, has occurred; 2. determine whether the corrective action and/or administrative decision resulting from the alleged violation is reasonable; and 3. affirm, vacate or modify the City's administrative decision regarding the alleged violation and/or corrective action. H. The hearing officer has the authority to reduce, stay, or waive a scheduled penalty either unconditionally or upon compliance with appropriate conditions. The hearing officer may increase the scheduled fine when the actual costs of enforcement are shown by a preponderance of the evidence to be greater than the amount of the scheduled fine. I. When imposing a penalty for a violation, the hearing officer may consider any or all of the following factors: 1. The duration of the violation; 2. The frequency or recurrence of the violation; 3. The seriousness of the violation; 4. The history of the violation; 5. The violator’s conduct after issuance of the notice of hearing; 6. The good faith effort by the violator to comply; 7. The economic impact of the penalty on the violator; 8. The impact of the violation upon the community; and 9. Any other factors appropriate to a just result. J. The hearing officer may exercise discretion to impose a fine for more than one (1) day of a continuing violation, but only upon a finding that the violation caused a serious threat of harm to the public health, 5 safety, or welfare or that the accused intentionally and the unreasonably refused to comply with the City Code requirement. K. The hearing officer’s decision and supporting reasons must be in writing, and shall include: the hearing officer’s decision, the factual and legal basis for the determination; the corrective action required, if any; the date and time by which corrective action must be taken; and the penalty assessed, if any. The hearing officer shall mail a copy of the decision to the appellant. Subdivision 2. Appeal from an Administrative Hearing The decision of the hearing officer is final without any further right of administrative appeal. An aggrieved party may obtain judicial review of the decision of the hearing officer in accordance with state law. city of golden11MEMORANDUM lPolice Department 763-593-8079/763-593-8098(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 3. H. Authorization to Sign Amended Agreement with Breck School for Community Service Officer Prepared By Stacy Carlson, Chief of Police Summary In 2009, the Police Department entered into an agreement with Breck School to provide traffic control during school days in exchange for reimbursement for the salary and benefits of a full- time Community Service Officer. In prior agreements, the Police Department sent two Community Service Officers to assist with traffic control. The agreement has been revised to state the Police Department will now send one Community Service Officer and Breck School will provide one civilian employee to work under the authority of the Breck School Community Service Officer for the purpose of traffic control. School officials have requested the agreement be extended through the 2015-2016 school year. Although paid for by Breck School, the Breck School Community Service Officer is an employee of the City, subject to the terms and conditions of employment with the City, and under the chain of command of the Police Department. Attachments • Amended Community Services Officer Agreement (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Mayor, City Manager and Police Chief to sign the amended Community Service Officer Agreement with Breck School for 2015-2016. COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER AGREEMENT This Community Service Officer Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the City of Golden Valley and Breck School ("Breck School"),pursuant to P.U.D. No. 88, Paragraph C(2). NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the parties to this Agreement agree as follows: 1. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agreement is to define the duties and responsibilities of the City of Golden Valley, its Police Department, and Breck School in the operation of the Community Service Officer Program. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT: The term of this Agreement shall be for the 2015-2016 Breck School Year, beginning upon execution of this Agreement. The Agreement may be continued, canceled or modified at the end of the 2015-2016 Breck School Year. Breck School is obligated to notify the City of Golden Valley of its intention to continue, cancel or modify this Agreement at least (90) days prior to its termination. The City of Golden Valley and Breck School will continue discussions about the terms of this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement may be revised, subject to the mutual written Agreement of both parties, prior to the end of this contract term. 3. PERSONNEL: The Chief of Police shall staff a community service officer to fill the position of Breck School Community Service Officer (the "Breck School CSO") during the term of this Agreement. Breck School shall staff a civilian employee to work under the authority of the Breck School CSO for the purpose of traffic control. 4. CHAIN OF COMMAND: Any individual serving as the Breck School CSO shall be a full-time employee of the City of Golden Valley and shall report to the Chief of Police or his/her designee regarding all law enforcement and employment related matters; and shall receive assignments to particular duties from the Chief of Police or his/her designee. The City of Golden Valley shall provide training to any individual serving as the Breck School CSO for his/her assigned duties including traffic control skills training and shall provide traffic control skills training to any other CSO providing traffic control services to Breck School on a regular basis. 5. WORK DAYS: The Breck School CSO shall work at Breck School providing traffic control services from a time period starting forty-five minutes prior to the school start time until fifteen minutes after the start of school time both as determined by the Breck School and fifteen minutes prior to the school end time until thirty minutes after the school end time both as determined Breck Schools, everyday school is in session, which times shall be adjusted as necessary in the event inclement weather or other events delay the school start time or cause early release. Any officer serving as a Breck School CSO shall make the appropriate arrangements for time off, vacations and holidays, etc. in accordance with the police collective bargaining agreement. 6. ABSENCE FROM WORK: In the event that the Breck School CSO is sick or has other unplanned absences, he/she shall notify BOTH the Breck School in accordance with their policy, and the police department in accordance with their policy. The police department shall attempt to 1 provide officer coverage when the Breck School CSO is not available for duty. Requests for floating holidays shall be made to the police department for approval, and notification shall be made by the Breck School CSO to the appropriate personnel of Breck School. 7. TRAFFIC CONTROL: The Breck School CSO shall, twice per day at the times described in Section 5 herein, on all days when school is in session during the term of this Agreement provide traffic control services to Breck School. In addition, Breck School will provide one civilian employee to work with the Breck School CSO in carrying out the twice-daily traffic control duties on all school days to maintain the orderly flow of traffic. In the event of an unscheduled employee absence of the Breck School CSO, the City of Golden Valley shall attempt to provide alternate coverage. In the event of an unscheduled employee absence of the Breck civilian employee, Breck School shall attempt to provide alternate coverage. 8. DRESS CODE: This position is a uniformed position and the police department shall supply appropriate uniforms and equipment for CSOs providing traffic control services at the Breck School. 9. HANDLING OF POLICE RELATED INCIDENTS: Criminal activity and incidents normally handled by the police shall be dealt with by the Breck School CSO in accordance with police department policy, state and federal law, and generally accepted police practices. The City of Golden Valley shall be liable for the acts of its officers, employees or agents and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the Breck School, its officers, employees or agents. 10. SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: The Breck School CSO is not part of the disciplinary team of Breck School, and shall normally not become involved in discipline issues or the enforcement of school rules except as they relate to maintaining a peaceful and safe environment at Breck School. 11. LIMITATIONS. The provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 471.59, the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minn. State Chap. 466 and other applicable laws govern liability of the City of Golden Valley and the Breck School. 12. COMPENSATION AND COST SHARING: It is agreed that Breck School shall reimburse the City of Golden Valley for the Breck School CSO's salary and benefits for the full- term of this Agreement. This shall include any overtime incurred by the Breck School CSO for attendance at extracurricular activities at Breck School when his/her attendance is requested by Breck School and such work is outside of the Breck School CSO's working hours as described at Paragraph 5. In a manner that is mutually acceptable to the parties to this Agreement, the City of Golden Valley shall bill Breck School periodically for the services provided by the Breck School CSO, but no less frequently than on a monthly basis, and Breck School shall promptly reimburse the City of Golden Valley in a manner mutually agreed upon by the parties to this Agreement. 2 13. GOVERNING LAW. The Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the substantive and procedural laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to the principles of conflicts of laws. All proceedings related to this Agreement shall be venued in Hennepin County. This Agreement may only be modified by the mutual written Agreement of the parties. Dated this 20th day of October, 2015. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BRECK SCHOOL Mayor, Shepard M. Harris l'/OS Z*VX?. Ae4if City Manager, Timothy Cruikshank Police Chief, Stacy Carlson 3 city of golden ,' MEMORANDUM valley Physical Development Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 5. A. Authorizing Submittal of Grant Application to Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund and Continued Coordination of Conceptual Design of Flood Mitigation Project Prepared By Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Resolution The attached resolution grants City staff the authority to apply for grant funding from Hennepin County for soil correction work near the intersection of Winnetka Avenue and Medicine Lake Road (see attached map). The site is expected to serve as flood mitigation for flooding issues affecting homes and businesses in Golden Valley, New Hope, and Crystal. The resolution also grants City staff the authority to continue coordinating the conceptual design process for a flood mitigation project at this site. This flood mitigation project is planned to be constructed in conjunction with the Liberty Crossing housing development, but the housing development is not a component of this resolution. Soil Investigation & Results The City previously received funding from Hennepin County to complete an investigation of soil conditions in this area. Results showed a combination of debris-impacted soil and clean soil with low levels of non-hazardous chemical contamination. These results are very common in suburban cities around the United States, including the Twin Cities metro area. To assist in the cleanup of such sites, Hennepin County provides financial resources to facilitate projects. A cost estimate for the soil cleanup work is attached. The developer of the Liberty Crossing PUD also conducted a soil investigation in 2015 and similar results were found on the properties owned by the developer. The investigation and cleanup of the sites being redeveloped by the developer will be covered with private funding sources. Since Hennepin County is focused on funding soil correction work for public facilities, affordable housing, and development providing significant job growth, this market rate housing development would not be a likely candidate for this funding. Grant Staff plans to apply for$152,000 in funding from the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund (ERF), which is a fund eligible to municipalities for the cleanup of contaminated soil on sites that will be used for public facilities. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis twice a year. The next deadline is November 2. To date, Hennepin County has awarded 328 ERF grants totaling $46.3 million. Work Plan Soil corrections are planned for completion in spring and summer 2016 after the demolition of existing buildings occurs. The design of the flood mitigation project by Barr Engineering is underway and construction is expected to begin in summer 2016. Attachments • Resolution Authorizing Continued Design and Coordination of Flood Storage and Rate Control Strategies in Decola Ponds Sub-Watershed and Authorizing Submittal of Grant Application for Pennsylvania Woods/Decola Ponds/Liberty Crossing Area to Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services (2 pages) • Cost Estimate, Barr Engineering (1 page) • Site Map, Barr Engineering (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Submittal of Grant Application to Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund and Authorizing Continued Coordination of Conceptual Design of Flood Mitigation Project. Resolution 15-84 October 20, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTINUED DESIGN AND COORDINATION OF FLOOD STORAGE AND RATE CONTROL STRATEGIES IN DECOLA PONDS SUB- WATERSHED AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF GRANT APPLICATION FOR PENNSYLVANIA WOODS/DECOLA PONDS/LIBERTY CROSSING AREA TO HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley, as well as the City of New Hope, has experienced periodic flooding in the area known as the DeCola Ponds sub-watershed; and WHEREAS, the flooding impacts both private residential and commercial properties, as well as major public roads resulting in public safety concerns; and WHEREAS, addressing the flooding in the DeCola Ponds sub-watershed is a high priority for the City; and WHEREAS, the City, in collaboration with the cities of New Hope and Crystal, has initiated a series of studies to understand the cause, scope, and impact of the flooding; and WHEREAS, the studies have recommended a number of solutions to minimize flooding and property damage, including infrastructure improvements to improve flood storage and rate control, implementation strategies, and cost estimates; and WHEREAS, the City is currently working to implement part of the overall solution, through collaboration with a private developer, to create underground flood storage on the Liberty Crossing redevelopment site, and expand open flood storage in the sub-watershed on land in and around an area of the City known as Pennsylvania Woods; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley has approved the Final Plan of Development for Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) 123 thereby allowing the applicant to construct a 184 unit apartment building and 63 townhomes at 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2485 Rhode Island Avenue North, 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2430 Winnetka Avenue North; and WHEREAS, the Golden Valley Housing and Redevelopment Authority has adopted the redevelopment plan for Winnetka and Medicine Lake Road Redevelopment Project Area and established a Tax Increment Financing District (Redevelopment), Liberty Crossing, within Winnetka & Medicine Lake Road Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is hereby authorized to submit an application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund in the amount of$152,000 in order to clean contaminated soil on the land in and around an area of the City known as Pennsylvania Woods; and Resolution 15-84 - continued October 20, 2015 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden Valley approves the continued design and coordination of flood storage and rate control strategies in the DeCola Ponds sub-watershed, for which the Environmental Response Fund grant application is being submitted to the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services on November 2, 2015, by City of Golden Valley. 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. Q W oo ?? o0o E 0 — a v _ ro hu I 0)w v Q Vi O y4 C il Ui°' N 8 I 3 a 3 o 6�. o E 3 7.0 o x ., E v o to v P, t� Q 1 g i o0 o E S v p e t > V S.N E L E b z OV 8 O '3 — D ce .E w 4 Gr ° pop ° v r § F 3 W m 'O °: 7 G W 2 V c N a v g o V w° o a E w v o' V j g T c , ^ ti . is ."V' �" 4 '� W V h 4w C O y a 2 C G V E T O' O C •G In 7 N G Occ O1H4 Opy p2t0 .L 8 Cg. V o E N ° E E `er E E g ° 3 E r 4) > o H e V N ti .V. h H 7 2 7 o > axi Q Q �° Q Q y a w° Q b Oa $ 25 ! ! ! O T M L 7 V)h YOVi 69 69 C W O O, O O O O 0 0 0 O F a U L W � O O O O 00 0 0 0 O Q O y .) N O ' ^ M O O N O �y W C o ,o M N N n 00 V a C c0 O, M OC .4. ' c A O O E a O C 1 V = 69 69 69E9 fA 9 69 69 69 69 69 '7 0 y W � Do U O 0' o C n C 00 'n 61 O . N ‘0 O 00 VI N 0 w T .° C.) YO ON . — 0aa L 'C U C 'O F= cc, 0 a d d Vi 69 69 Vi 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 Q J 0, 0 ❑ 9 .+ '''' 6 Z V) V V U V) V) V) VI W., a U FO a u u L a a a -0. e) v u E .0 s V 00 O 'C N ^ .-, p TVI I g e • 3 W — 8 7 a y o 6 a a. 0 V 0 c] N c cco. 00 V E C E. 7 " c . C. C vi N C v) O L w 7 o W E T. N > r/] �' p C 0 q d d G C ."J E C .N y '� O O 7 E o a U g a 0q € � = o W ,c f E 'o S c w R u c ... 5 o u -0 E c oU L E V o f a c E a V - C] ',8- E c 0 e a S w 0 c w A w a s2 4, 0, x � Q E � >, il 8. -8 IP 0v a U w e Ca H 1 w O L1 m O � 'w x a a WW V V 0 N N M M M M V V U ry .-i N ,9 7 h .. u = f'.. .L.sr j- W- p , : ,.. • 1 i ; TZ ; g-.NM r, . Fx • r. 111 ppcct�] . - ,. : „ , ....g. , . ..., .... „... :,. ... • , . i..,..;, E D 1 -Medicine Lake Rd .,.._. - „..._.. '. __.k.. ,,..a..,„ h `,, r s• = I'+'. ,...iie .,..4,'m• f �' r , 4 -p - . (0 T✓C�-.4e, Illionatrut � 1 TT 14I _. i lj h. - ,: = f '.-7 1,1.:J.I'• '`..4iluiLl: I. 3 _ 1 a i {ter. 1 `` iss 1 1i __ ,:r1 \ 1 N . +'{� 1 D; ix I ___ uf. . ►! r 3• 1 � o• S -- a '�j ., $.... ,. -- °-- ew'.' '�' '. .ate ..-o ; , ,. r - 1 • 1' - te« 1 iE Pond D ? 1 Pond G�' ♦i�;, 1 N r • • -- •#'. - J r' .. Iw m 1 t• ..•.•� -- 1 ;'?‘":.%:04%, r • 1 I � y �`�. o n a16;: .1 .:.1.,,,,,,,-::: .,. rn - b -4-7"--'«x4 #� (NI '.J N Q • .�S-.� �' max 4,i'•'- •;a . • N f� • 2• ag S(Twin.Git;es 4 ) .` re,;;,. ki. ^4 ti«••i+J Proposed Project Area 4 B ARR Liberty Crossing Development _ Proposed Conveyance(base of storage 895' MSL) ® Proposed Rhode Island Storage (base of storage 900' MSL) Feet PROPOSED FLOOD 0 120 240 MITIGATION AREAS pip Proposed Underground Storage(base of storage 895' MSL) Approximate Proposed Future Storage (base of storage 894- Liberty Crossing & 902 6'MSL) Pennsylvania Woods Golden Valley, MN city of f a golden MEMORANDUM Physical Development . � Y PDepartment 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 5. B. Second Consideration - Proposed Code Amendment to Section 7.28: Right-of-Way Management Undergrounding Prepared By Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer Summary The City right-of-way is public land that is used for streets, utilities, trails, and other community- benefitting infrastructure. Infrastructure assets built in the right-of-way are predominantly used by the City and private utility companies to deliver goods and services. The City of Golden Valley's current right-of-way ordinance was established as a way for the City to govern and manage the use of the right-of-way and to create an organized process for installing new facilities. When the current version of the right-of-way ordinance was adopted, a strong emphasis was placed on the undergrounding of all overhead utilities. Specifically, the current right-of-way ordinance mandates that all overhead lines being worked on must be buried when a utility company plans to do any form of work on them in excess of 300 feet. By requiring the undergrounding of utilities slowly over time, the hope was that the City may one day be free of overhead utilities, as the overhead lines generally detract from the aesthetic appeal of the community. Over the last several years, advances in equipment and products have spurred the need for new construction by many of the utility companies. However, the cost to underground facilities in a first ring, fully developed suburb like Golden Valley is extremely high. In many instances, the high cost of undergrounding facilities has deterred utility companies from installing equipment and products that would benefit Golden Valley residents and business owners. As such, staff is proposing a number of exceptions to the right-of-way ordinance to all for overhead placement. Generally, the exceptions would allow for overhead placement in areas that already contain overhead utilities and are not in the line of sight of the general public. The addition of a subdivision to Section 7.28 for undergrounding would read as follows: Subdivision 3.5 Exceptions The City may allow the new construction, relocation, or reconstruction of facilities above ground in excess of 300 feet only if, at the sole discretion of the City Manager, or his/her designee, the placement of the facilities are: 1. On existing poles; 2. Are located entirely in the rear yards of residentially zoned parcels; 3. Are not adjacent to areas generally visible to the public, including but not limited to, parks, nature areas, streets, or public or private community gathering spaces; 4. Are not located in or adjacent to an identified or planned development, redevelopment, or project area; 5. Are not located in, adjacent to, or are significantly visible from a local, collector, or arterial right of way; and 6. To be located in an area where historically power outages and service disruptions are limited, and the risk of such in the future is minimal. This topic was discussed at the October 13th Council/Manager meeting, and it was noted that numerous companies have placed many miles of utilities underground since the inception of the current ordinance. If Council believes the current undergrounding ordinance is appropriate, then it should deny adoption of proposed Ordinance #561. Attachment • Proposed City Code Amending Section 7.28: Right-of-Way Management Undergrounding (3 pages) • Ordinance #561, Amending Section 7.28: Right-of-Way Management Undergrounding (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt second consideration Ordinance #561, amending Section 7.28: Right-of-Way Management of the City Code. Otherwise, if Council wishes to maintain the existing ordinance, it should deny adoption of Ordinance #561, amending Section 7.28: Right-of-Way Management of the City Code. § 7.28 Section 7.28: Undergrounding Subdivision 1. Generally Facilities placed in the right-of-way must be located, relocated and maintained underground pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Code and in accordance with applicable construction standards. This Section is intended to be enforced consistently with state and federal law regulating right-of-way user, specifically including but not limited to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 161.45, 237.162, 237.163, 300.03, 222.37, 238.084, and 216B.36 and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Title 47, USC Section 253. Subdivision 2. New Extended Facilities A new Facility or a permanent extension of Facilities must be installed and maintained underground when supplied to: A. new installation of buildings, signs, streetlights or other structures; B. new subdivision of land; or C. a new development or industrial park containing new commercial or industrial buildings. Subdivision 3. Undergrounding of Permanent Replacement, Relocated or Reconstructed Facilities A permanent replacement, relocation or reconstruction of a facility of more than three hundred (300) feet must be located, and maintained underground, with due regard for seasonal working conditions. For purposes of this Section, reconstruction means any substantial repair of or any improvement to existing Facilities. Undergrounding is required whether a replacement, relocation or reconstruction is initiated by the right- of-way user owning or operating the Facilities, or by the City in connection with A) the present or future use by the City or other local government unit of the right-of-way for a public project, B) the public health or safety, or C) the safety and convenience of travel over the right-of-way. Subdivision 4. Exceptions The City may allow the new construction, relocation, or reconstruction of facilities above ground in excess of three hundred (300) feet only if, at the sole discretion of the City Manager, or his or her designee, the placement of the facilities are: 1. On existing poles; 2. Are located entirely in the rear yards of residentially zoned parcels; 3. Are not adjacent to areas generally visible to the public, including but not limited to, parks, nature areas, streets, or public or private community gathering spaces; 4. Are not located in or adjacent to an identified or planned development, redevelopment, or project area; Golden Valley City Code Page 1 of 3 § 7.28 5. Are not located in, adjacent to, or are significantly visible from a local, collector, or arterial right of way; and 6. To be located in an area where historically power outages and service disruptions are limited, and the risk of such in the future is minimal. Subdivision 45. Retirement of Overhead Facilities The City may determine whether it is in the public interest that all Facilities within the City, or within certain districts designated by the City, be permanently placed and maintained underground by a certain or target date, independently of undergrounding required pursuant to this Chapter. The decision to underground must be preceded by a public hearing, after published notice and written notice to the utilities affected. At the hearing the City Council must consider items (A)-(D) in Section 7.28, Subdivision 6 and make findings. Undergrounding may not take place until City Council has, after hearing and notice, adopted a plan containing items (A)-(F) of Section 7.28, Subdivision 7. Subdivision 66. Public Hearings A hearing must be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each hearing any person interested must be given an opportunity to be heard. The subject of the public hearings shall be the issue of whether Facilities in the right-of-way in the City, or located within a certain district, shall all be located underground by a date certain. Hearings are not necessary for the undergrounding required under Section 7.28, Subdivisions 2 and 3. Subdivision 67. Public Hearing Issues The issues to be addressed at the public hearings include but are not limited to: A. The costs and benefits to the public of requiring the undergrounding of all Facilities in the right-of-way. B. The feasibility and cost of undergrounding all Facilities by a date certain as determined by the City and the affected utilities. C. The tariff requirements, procedures and rate design for recovery or intended recovery of incremental costs for the undergrounding by the utilities from ratepayers within the City. D. Alternative financing options available if the City deems it in the public interest to require undergrounding by a date certain and deems it appropriate to participate in the cost otherwise borne by the taxpayers. Upon completion of the hearing or hearings, the City Council must make written findings on whether it is in the public interest to establish a plan under which all Facilities will be underground, either citywide or within districts designated by the City. Subdivision 78. Undergrounding Plan If the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to underground all or substantially all Facilities in the public right-of-way, the City Council must establish a plan for such undergrounding. The plan for undergrounding must include at least the following items: Golden Valley City Code Page 2 of 3 § 7.28 A. Timetable for undergrounding. B. Designation of districts for the undergrounding unless, undergrounding plan is citywide. C. Exceptions to the undergrounding requirement and procedures for establishing such exceptions. D. Procedures for the undergrounding process, including but not limited to coordination with City projects and provisions to ensure compliance with non- discrimination requirements under the law. E. A financing plan for funding of the incremental costs if the City determines that it will finance some of the undergrounding costs, and a determination and verification of the claimed additional costs to underground incurred by the utility. F. Penalties or other remedies for failure to comply with the undergrounding. Golden Valley City Code Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 561, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending Section 7.28 Undergrounding Regarding Addition of Undergrounding of Permanent Replacement, Relocated or Reconstructed Facilities Exceptions The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Section 7.28 Undergrounding is amended by adding Subdivision 4. Exceptions to read as follows and renumber subsequent Subsections as needed: Subdivision 4. Exceptions The City may allow the new construction, relocation, or reconstruction of facilities above ground in excess of three hundred (300) feet only if, at the sole discretion of the City Manager, or his or her designee, the placement of the facilities are: 1 . On existing poles; 2. Are located entirely in the rear yards of residentially zoned parcels; 3. Are not adjacent to areas generally visible to the public, including but not limited to, parks, nature areas, streets, or public or private community gathering spaces; 4. Are not located in or adjacent to an identified or planned development, redevelopment, or project area; 5. Are not located in, adjacent to, or are significantly visible from a local, collector, or arterial right of way; and 6. To be located in an area where historically power outages and service disruptions are limited, and the risk of such in the future is minimal. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 7.99 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 20th day of October, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk city of ' . golden11MEMORANDUM Physical Development Valley Department Y P 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 60 day deadline: November 10, 2015 Agenda Item 6. A. Boone Avenue Convenience Center PUD No. 110, Amendment No. 1 - 600 Boone Avenue North - Linn Investment Properties, LLC, Applicant Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary Stephen Linn, representing Linn Investment Properties, LLC, is seeking approval of a Minor PUD Amendment to allow for the construction of seven additional parking stalls in the northwest corner of his property. These spaces would replace existing turf and provide additional parking near the Boone Avenue/Golden Valley Road intersection. As outlined in the Section 11.55, Subd. 10, of the City code, a PUD amendment may be considered to be a minor amendment if it does not violate any of the eight thresholds which would qualify the amendment as a major amendment and trigger a greater level of review. The City Council has the right to approve or deny a minor amendment by a simple majority vote without a public hearing or to refer to matter to the Planning Commission for their input and recommendation. Background The PUD was created in 2013 and facilitated the renovation of the gas station and the construction of the retail/service facility on the east end of the site. There are currently three tenants in the new building. Due to heavy lunch time use, the applicant has stated there is often not enough parking on-site to meet the needs of customers. When the initial PUD was under review, the amount of parking was discussed by the Planning Commission at both the Preliminary and Final stages. At that point, there was some concern that parking may be challenging depending on the types of tenants that would eventually be located in the new retail building. That was offset by concern over the amount of impervious surfaces proposed for the site (63.6% for the entire PUD). Ultimately, the applicant indicated that the amount of parking that was proposed was appropriate based on his market research and the plans were approved. At this time, the applicant states that the businesses have been much more successful than even he anticipated and the corresponding level of parking demand - particularly that generated by Which Wich - is creating a problematic and even unsafe situation. Analysis Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and has comments regarding three aspects of the proposal. First, the proposed parking spaces would be located within the front yard setback of the site (within 35 feet of the property line). The requirements of the Commercial zoning district indicate that this area be maintained as a landscaped green area. Although seven parking spaces were allowed to be constructed within the front yard setback as part of the initial PUD, these were located further to the east along Golden Valley Road - away from the intersection - and in an area where additional green space was available due to a curve of Golden Valley Road. Second, the proposed parking spaces would increase the amount of paved surface within the PUD. While the applicant is proposing to use pervious pavement filtration with draintile, Engineering has expressed some concerns regarding this solution and would prefer an alternate approach. Finally, while parking may be considered to be a problem over the lunch hour on weekdays given the current tenants, staff is concerned that creating permanent parking spaces on the site in order to address congestion that occurs only 5 to 7.5 hours per week may be in excess. The Fire Department has commented that the level of congestion on the site at some periods of day could be considered unsafe in that access by emergency vehicles may be hindered. While they agree the issue should be addressed, they are indifferent with regard to how it is solved - either through the proposed amendment or by some other means. Based on the above analysis of the proposal, staff does not support the minor amendment and is recommending denial. Staff would prefer to have the property owner work to reach an agreement with a neighboring property - where there may be an excess of parking- and utilize those spots for employees, thereby freeing up spaces on-site for customers. However, should the City Council choose to approve the amendment and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the amended PUD permit for Boone Avenue Convenience Center PUD No. 110, Amendment No. 1, staff recommends the following conditions be included: 1. The stormwater management plan must be modified and resubmitted with a stormwater management permit application. Due to the fuel-related use and the underlying soils, the proposed best management practices (pervious pavers and subsurface filtration) are not acceptable to staff. The applicant must look at improving the performance of the existing stormwater management treatment devices on this site, or propose another alternative. 2. Enhancing the landscaping is generally a benefit to the site. However, the landscaping must not interfere with sight lines and corner visibility. Landscaping plans will be reviewed by staff at the time of permitting. The owner must work with the City now and in the future to address any issues that may arise due to the installation of landscaping. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Applicant's Narrative (1 page) • Plans from Sambatek submitted September 11, 2015 (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to deny Boone Avenue Convenience Center PUD No. 110, Amendment No. 1. 730 :'./...,, 213 8400 ..--- * 730 221 ___,...-8300 745 30;3301 32 31 0 '01 710 320 8501 - ' Prril (------ - • 884(883E8834883(882488188816 8812 880(8804 \ :: 1 140• • • • • • • • • • • • • ,ip • e ? .:. 8836 8832 8820 881 4 8808 ' A z Subject Property GO1,e‘ 110 a, 8800 125 *I 700 130 150 .13- 7th Ave N • ' 34(3 ro 8525 2201 003 Z • C3 8845 300 • ;1 e , 605 1 600 • 2 10i100 > .1( a, a 8806 o 0 W4 ca N 4 * -- .—_. r '30/clen 1... sUite"*Il ._r•--:.-"'- ..........._____ .... ..-- 140755 0.001"......---- state ..,- -- ..: -;•!•:,_ 1111._ -- mod ai ti _ _,________ _ cli 881 5 t* c.-. .-,-------- .4..,....,...,39 tilliblr- Z 440 it; al c a) > (S Brookview Community Center& Golf Course 433— < fia li.7 432 ' 8811 Pa 11 u 423— 0 AI, 0 424 -- 1 416 ...11‘. 1 Following the remodel and expansion of 600 Boone Ave, which was formally branded BP and later converted to Holiday, gasoline volumes increased by over 25% and convenience store sales by nearly 50%, led by strong food service sales.The overwhelming response truly gives validation that the improvements were well received and resulted in creating nearly 10 new jobs within the convenience store. In addition the newly constructed retail center to the east at 8525 Golden Valley Blvd, with its three tenants, Which Wich, Papa Murphy's and Waxing the City, all have seen tremendous response and have created many new jobs within the community.The current parking request is necessary to maintain safety for our customers and employees especially during the peak lunch rush when both the convenience store and the retail tenants seem to be most busy. Currently there are times when some customers park in non-designated areas, blocking others and creating hazards such as poor visibility. • I 1 r. _--wEs.i;.INE:Gi,SCiUTIi=AST QUAR RR .e..4 ,, 5 'o f °$ A 6J1 I. y O f ` o 1 : :. l S : m • ti • c z V m m. - .. s.:::______,: • f. _,t A, • 1 p It slegs .Y : ,, ::, , , : ,, .".. ,. „if , , , 66 ,,,, ,. .. . - - ' ' I :� i • } Ax o +,, m zsm z} m m • F/„. • n • • • ts N -, q v 1 o o. z : i rl1`, i. / i / 4 d 1 , ;y d rr , , ,; 1 X 1 L ` .s 4w'i.,j r. i 1 \;. • Aa8c ,,,,,fig;,,, A,,,,,,,m,8§56. .0, $m m4,8v 4 t$A8Q f —,,,,,..,„,,, ,0!„,,,,,..,,,„„,r,„„ ,.., a 8.; > OliTclm ti m a W N .- II 331 zyzzzzolm II m f m l `z$ II SS D D n O n D D O C D D D D D > s u 13 Fr " ,k" v,"F"yio Oxx F oz° F F 0 Amz zysn '^ 0 c z z z z m l r z'^'^ z oaz o o m zci ��zoo°y m ^' o z m z ci m m p ="o p E,-,t' oo ppommmm O rn 7D naz a 3 3 < a�oy < m < 'm aoti i '^ a � m vx c''',:,- —c,'„7,o � r .1, ; �3 Z 0 o H F m D P r O y Q A '� �' O --11 ^` `2 T'^ 2 Z O f,_-;-=,, 1 O 0 C 1'1," : ' p2v O D ..,11#, a ps g th .4747 N c i N G z ci 3 F o m �y o !r4 v'a D \`t< s ti-a$$ .,.: ' A m mz ° o oi< z o m ,nm yD� Z I I o < Fm o 11'11'.' I N �O ,o p L,- * m O y p31 i2 _i.It ,;:•; "3 ^�, zom o o Z ,r,;',is, I m m� b , �m -at' ' aim m e m g r 1'1�' m o m z H 3 o z �m A o Z A 1 •`„ f,3 - a >2 2 05 S; twitiify.44giv3_/ m mo ° mH z ,,, D = O 21. m rr- it Z O °4Or m D > N� pN g2 80›q11 n m m YO 128 om Vg o �� N a< 2 _ > Am I N'$m yD 7. N H iji $i y 4 m o m 7, �"�$ fp z o A 2 o�zg^ _ rid im 4 i i i Sod ci��,o9 ,N �Qg� >$ "z S oo§." 'm "< og'$ �� 8 z op a Ovane c?,, 51 ,54'p,- . D -...x, �g z pe gaen r of N cn a 70 a Fr of A < m co F N 12 N 2 ...c,/ n e n �• w =-I� m o� 3 .o DO � � � D � O• 3m � fi. z ' i "-�y `o.-,3 asnp3j �FIli m r Zo �' 0 g to Z III Z cD "� � 5-x d: 8 '< �/ G Z D Z Z Z> 2 a ,, i : y F, 70 N Zg w 11.-..,„ 7 3 1 o Ofl'I LA rn. m o c !n Ul • Cirt v O 1/1 0 0 rn ,.< , x ao we, 0T j ° a'm wo 3 F / ,. _ ________ .__ ,7 _ . _ .7., _ _ _ „„ . . G ^Fm - - oz nm = Z moms Al 3 2,1 a, G C 2r-S18 al XP DO z iN : 0 � c o N ci NFo E©®©III®© rw o D c= A Y m Z , , IIL �� ������( I / J li c,-„7, 0 D -5 I N Imo.✓ q I v C E u -t. Q r. . ,I , c, ! , , . . . , , , �I N o N C . I- ,...,-, ,,....-' ,\ 0 / '' ' j ‘ I Wti o > w r.6 e� mN P“.. ti. Z!;.1 P. :-.,9, aw ^"t. A� , s 2;r m 3 m F A D F Z m P w w r n T a A D 2 2 v v Z C S Z 2 3 D r D 2 y D 9 D 0 2 D 2 Z y y k T II 6N"o D m a D"'k M,-In vma� o_crM-7922�6:�myo�F65Fo6x6,F52FAnF6 -. ii m2xomm Zommx xx G1 ,� 5 ANmm nti> � mcp5`�3mmay o �zFrm< x nnn �'z zo y�ov c���N<�mnn?nsnnmznn v xmAp>>>W C y _ 9 jr3m-012 2 �°O4 gC2n82'5,1§V/�i-.1 yyn Zcm OOA yAOOyOO z �,.�v E' ,d <DO!'Dr � xo2OZ 2Z25Z_I A Z A^y�n alalIlOZ OZ O,cirz LZla_25 mNZO�2 2m3DZOO22 � lDnlmYN�L'ln?2�ZZ /��DO2 ZpZZ Z �� � T m g G7 D<�Gf Gf grIs yN 6N-o A-Gat yy,9 p yy Z y D - ,2 !.!f !1(yt �iFi F!:1H3 Q N O Z S n LOC)Z y 20 Z K Z C Z C D 9, O g O 1 2-?n O?O O D y,D Z n C G m n'^O D ' p OP n O,(^m'x m 2.D D A<O y y m y y r u u �m _ 'tiFYZZ .Apm<yDmm 0, y - x Z m�,,, 4A 2 OOr ` rDm22O xv�Z01,7sOO - o m '� p m T <szm6acfamFoo"Va0 - r,T, o3nx < ap3D�5Nroiyoo Sznm z 7g,2' z noir. mnmxxcxx Z x , c� 4yH 0x {/1 DA ODzFy ZZvmZ 2 p 2<O3c CAC�nA D^m' ayivZi Z OZ DD 2a11 D DOFF D = n, rxmAF'S q,p iKmn co pym),HN3zn5 62 rrcDy o AmncT,32 Fo M-5 P, m rl? O n r ., �,- Anm zmn2i cic,2y„E 2 n^^+ �? ,y;oimm iooyyciz2`a ` imFr -1 Na��Az„2^,o'A2o room m ,1- 2nm 3nzm2�rn-3 z�mnm •J; p wzaff3Acm PI 3T ', -'^z Vj 3m T o •- Tax mDN3 om ^^ amAr n `� C Vxo yG) zoo N 5 0 g-,, <2o �i, Ammmmnim `P o 2 54�, a0 F.Y. ccs_I- ^,cizzAr paDzmxc = ran AFmy 'm"626.,74 z„x, - m+,� AH 0 26 D y m mp<DmSzmry pZV3rm HHPyy5 4 oom'rJ ,czi! J]Ammm poo-m 5ypm -�A›OD-262 D.Or Aa2OO. 1, ,, y CZ O Am Dn,_OOZDv2imr r r r r r ZO 56aA,zp m'4S"G O�im�w cZCZymF 2o� mOZCmLI mr 2ocA 9-r O n D6 Y ND 0. m›.0.F Zm �� F.14 z z2y N6^m63z OxnO6DOr rOIAO rOmmmyx�p Oyoe% on 2 =_;_, 4 zGO z om 209 00 3 666„4<D F nz zop^ot,,, zmar <ain22rcyv,7,oryzn Aym - ppn. n � 5Nm4^n y�,v mo 4., Nommo yF?o nazx;oq0, m m nmDmNSo'^moD zy a mN Ozxmoz2 oyz3 �°"'nn m6 ,8DSm xm-im m A>z 9ymyyoc m;, 2zo . cm 'ozF� xANoyyyr �!^"'o poomoG m �N6 azFim-y =�� �e ToroA Oyu p 1-, M hq rwy y^y- 1a rs6D2 2m n ,1 2 �y4 •,.'" mym5 o Fpm zoa'm"c a c�F „7.' �mA yD OZy Omw2� N"rAOai < 2=rm 2a 2n y42�o v 2Z2 mFZO2T Za o'm"moci mm��o6H NAm D Sy m 2 OOG Om p 44O m,n- F�n Sa S m8G2i _- . P),]P' w g mom;bg- i U 3zmv3 yma",DP NomOm z-o ',VP" cr•�^ mG3y oA rp:•�pr�SAo o�6 oia2 ' aoaocn 9yomm�A ona y2 z'`A�n �F E ',VP" NpmA Dx < H Otia Do'^ZCNw a y .- 94,26-M2,3 6- ZO2 A py y F max 0, ›E, ~m m m 3 N 2 m A v 2(t S O vyi r O v O- m m y p 6 5 D 0 2 6 y S k ,� D r mZ A [7;6,4 O y 2 o D F S m 2 D N O m D rz Ali o � 'z 2 yz.6mmF5c,n mm mzoFr omzAz ormv6�,2n�� of . om'OS nnmo x96F, z y zLtv."mp,f0,6: 4E, (34,:6 P cx �oOcmp -x62 �o -GS .m m � �y� O OmN-,1m Os=0 0$9� 6 2msOm^p ~mODA mCDmm �nmD X2 2 Om mm 0= 6 K O �''°'P O yoc?)Oz yDZD Fcis"_' 'a 4o Y yyon^, iO4, 3„r g nA m F ` ,.L 2 r L1 r m c 2 2 m a,11.12;m; O a D A m A m Z ,n p m y < rm O cr O O� o9pm3 2mA<m O yox- �„ Z a x '�f� O owm � A rn "zz9 5 Z A ;o 20��am yo�"6`z °6^„G'N', .-` � A Z Do 5.6, Lt ow aO4 z 6n_ m Csrm cis 5 z o 66x.60 > zycpA z;N m 0O .k ,-n. zs3a „^,A im So i y p g a NO2 DD z25m mNNm Z 2 Cy8OZmr 2 O o3clmv� , 3 3r Ho 02 C m y ; °AD2 mv�pD OAv Z G 3 ymArG2j2rym Am Namoc ZN D N2 yDGls pA aC 6 D / m <io A2in2 OAN p r m r c3Dono .5,,,-^ 4 a� ny mg4p n o5 So 3 n.''^^ tl A NG - cznoop a 6-7 �+ yyi Qy cmoo �m,^,3 n < ,-�- ompm=o 9m�o �2my6 z o2 qc ,',143; me m2 nA m,^�z6m "amf, q,,;-4 c a amrop , 6664§'^ o Vm y �' mmm xmr °z � y z oyN f a i VP o$ r y5 TAP op S- 3 �non 5m o _ D n 0 3 S�2 V§ g;,q `:r7;n Z m L''' Or iy3Am=m Cy maDO Z m3 2 ZztS '�= mO a2 ) DD 00 29F rnN'r^ Z o o ? �m°'Sii2-Z2 mvmi �3 ., �OTz Cc': N m oy .i' wO FN _ r2 S 2 m ym2m Nr Dm y OO m D mO ���` N. ..z mo F -= noir p m 4mFq . SDAm yn n z o3 4a oxmr 5 °z z nm � m'�z 5o cry mm ,,`2`' vO Dm r ym t n F 2 F.4,MxO2 OFxy O4 I N OP ," N 'a N P Som `� N w a� 7,y 7,z $ p= is >z _A Z q W 2244 z r,,^, 2 " 3Smmm O pA nOn ~�2 //�� 00 n� 2 D m O z i o m m L1 m O x O -.6;.=20X v i m A?c D 1,0 D 0 GG 0 c p < NCA r z� 0126 oZScm i n r ,S oi'c" oz o,4 p$ o m �0 ; AN 27, 02 ri g g',?:7,g € g m�Z 5 m N O~ 3 m N 7,a, 2 O 2 rn o 0 2 2 D 5 =4 0 2 3 Om O F m 0 =,, p O n mOX �z A D z p y - r -+- m 3 �zix xN n n Mg n y n 2g,, mm my D v D m yo i n „,@,,. 2 Fw z� 3F A Mg o 3 m m m'^cm 'in ao m 9 �' a z�3czi am 2F <a � ��`;�` _ am ma HUHI cncr m o 2 2ocp!mAN O D2y�i,o 2 AOFO rii m zN DaO c5 gN .2.., > 3 N9 z o m c y > xp^ Oyu co yora 4 �Zg o mrmm> mm Nneon A oo �mz o f or � 00 vz- z z $3m y DmStm^z a 2m82 6 o c y 3Fmn Wi F ynci z y'.5.1 m z y Nr am '-Jri x ^ F ng, x< c �^y Z D p o m o m om o� a o om x C.. AO D mzrm y < m3OO ,Z rp Dm m z S � N n a m D A Ag a 2 F� , o - 20 m O y p C 2 OT A Z w 2Z 2 O D2 ti m NGH D m < rGl m Ap 2 'a^ '" m N r 3 D 7, `'m o me _ m 0 0 ‘ kren I': n o D 4 _'1$ 2 Mir I o vl 9JJ a.M2.o. I- m c Z �� s °' �% ori m - co r - gyp ."+ � r-. r► of m � NZO � �+ Er etir C m m ata, ZR. w o 0 0 o I 3 3 6 ww o•" F-' 3 ' m m w o 3/\ city of golden11 Physical Development Department Y 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting October 20, 2015 Agenda Item 6. B. METRO Blue Line Extension Update Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Project Summary The topics covered with the Issue Resolution Team,Technical Project Advisory Committee, Community Advisory Committee, Business Advisory Committee, and Corridor Management Committee over the past two weeks include a summary of the ongoing issues and negotiations with BNSF, a recommendation to relocate the existing Xcel towers to the west side of the rail trench and replace the current lattice structures with monopoles, and a recommendation to locate two Traction Power Substations within Golden Valley. Details about the exact locations and design of the last two items will be addressed at a future point in the process. Representatives from the Project Office attended the Council/Manager meeting on October 13 to discuss parking at the Golden Valley Road station, environmental issues, and the municipal consent process and how it will dovetail with the release of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Following this agenda item,the Council discussed six draft position statements related to light rail and directed staff to prepare a resolution for the November 4 City Council meeting that would provide direction and support for the City's representative on the CMC. A public open house at City Hall will be held from 5:30 to 7 pm on Wednesday, October 28,to discuss environmental issues associated with the light rail line. The revised project scope and cost estimate will be presented to the CMC on October 29. Action by the CMC on the scope and cost estimate is scheduled for November 12. The calendar of meetings remaining in the Project Development phase of work is listed below: Oct 26 TPAC Presentation of revised project scope/cost estimate Oct 26 CAC/BAC Oct 29 CMC Nov 2 TPAC Discussion of revised project scope/cost estimate Nov 2/3 CAC/BAC Nov 4 MPRB Resolution on project as it relates to park properties Nov 12 CMC Action on revised project scope/cost estimate Nov 23 Met Council Transportation Committee recommendation on revised project scope/cost estimate Dec 9 Met Council Action on revised project scope/cost estimate; authorize Municipal Consent process Attachments • Emails regarding METRO Blue Line Extension (7 pages) Recommended Action Receive and file METRO Blue Line Extension Update. Date: Sun 10/10/2015 2:24 PM From: Linda Gallant As some of you already know, I have been following the LRT plans in detail for a few years. I just saw Jason Zimmerman's Executive Summary about the upcoming LRT station decision- making. The LRT staff has been looking for parking, at the urging of this Council, for nearly a year; there is no currently available site for parking. A vote on a proposed resolution without far more information about parking, or the lack of parking, is inappropriate. There were 6 potential parking sites; there is now only one. It is the Park Board's "triangle property," ownership of which the LRT proposes to share with the MPRB, though there has not been an official proposal. The LRT and the MPRB are also talking about potentially trading properties, none of which to the best of my knowledge has been assessed. The "last-minute" issues before the MPRB are overwhelming-transferring and/or sharing property for parking, which the MPRB has never done before; the environmental impact of the proposed terrace lot, which has not been studied and is not now being studied in the final EIS; the long and complicated process for transferring and/or sharing ownership; anticipated responsibility for the shared property; and more. These issues are "last-minute" because putting a parking facility at GV Rd. is a "last-minute" idea. To me, it is inappropriate at this point to ask for your support for the GV Rd. station on the basis of a vague presumed future agreement with the MPRB - and it would be grossly unfair for the LRT to put the MPRB in the position of either later agreeing with the LRT's proposal or being "at fault" for denying the parking, upon which the Council based its vote(s). It is unfair to the Council to ask you to support a resolution that states that "parking must be provided" when it is absolutely clear that currently, there is no parking available. This situation is not likely to change in the next few months, and neither the CMC vote nor the later municipal consent can be "conditional." I believe the Council must withhold its support of any resolution in support of the LRT station at GV Rd. until and unless the LRT can tell the Council that there IS parking, rather than that they are looking for and/or hoping for and/or studying proposals for parking. The issue of parking at a potential GV Rd. site was originally analyzed and rejected in the Draft EIS; its study is not in the anticipated final EIS. Parking has been studied for years. There is no more time for continued study. A more appropriate resolution would support continued pursuit of parking, but withhold station support until there is a real, reliable answer to the parking issue. The neighbors are gravely concerned that support from GV is being pursued BEFORE the "public parking [that] must be provided" is anywhere near a certainty. And yes, we are aware that the only other "public parking" analysis relies on residential on-street parking. As always, I am happy to discuss this further. I have studied each and every report/analysis/paper about the GV Rd. station. I have grave questions about the parking situation (and about the anticipated ridership figures). Call me or email me if you would like to discuss this further, either with me or with our neighbors or the McNair Manor Coalition. Copies of this email are being sent to our neighbors, all of whom are concerned about this process. Thank you. Date: Tue 10/13/2015 12:05 PM From: Sue Astin My husband and I are neighbors of Linda Gallant, and we both support her email that is listed below: The LRT staff has been looking for parking, at the urging of this Council, for nearly a year; there is no currently available site for parking. A vote on a proposed resolution without far more information about parking, or the lack of parking, is inappropriate. There were 6 potential parking sites; there is now only one. It is the Park Board's "triangle property," ownership of which the LRT proposes to share with the MPRB, though there has not been an official proposal. The LRT and the MPRB are also talking about potentially trading properties, none of which to the best of my knowledge has been assessed. The "last-minute" issues before the MPRB are overwhelming-transferring and/or sharing property for parking, which the MPRB has never done before; the environmental impact of the proposed terrace lot, which has not been studied and is not now being studied in the final EIS; the long and complicated process for transferring and/or sharing ownership; anticipated responsibility for the shared property; and more. These issues are "last-minute" because putting a parking facility at GV Rd. is a "last-minute" idea. To me, it is inappropriate at this point to ask for your support for the GV Rd. station on the basis of a vague presumed future agreement with the MPRB - and it would be grossly unfair for the LRT to put the MPRB in the position of either later agreeing with the LRT's proposal or being "at fault" for denying the parking, upon which the Council based its vote(s). It is unfair to the Council to ask you to support a resolution that states that "parking must be provided" when it is absolutely clear that currently, there is no parking available. This situation is not likely to change in the next few months, and neither the CMC vote nor the later municipal consent can be "conditional." I believe the Council must withhold its support of any resolution in support of the LRT station at GV Rd. until and unless the LRT can tell the Council that there IS parking, rather than that they are looking for and/or hoping for and/or studying proposals for parking. The issue of parking at a potential GV Rd. site was originally analyzed and rejected in the Draft EIS; its study is not in the anticipated final EIS. Parking has been studied for years. There is no more time for continued study. A more appropriate resolution would support continued pursuit of parking, but withhold station support until there is a real, reliable answer to the parking issue. The neighbors are gravely concerned that support from GV is being pursued BEFORE the "public parking [that] must be provided" is anywhere near a certainty. And yes, we are aware that the only other "public parking" analysis relies on residential on-street parking. As always, I am happy to discuss this further. I have studied each and every report/analysis/paper about the GV Rd. station. I have grave questions about the parking situation (and about the anticipated ridership figures). Call me or email me if you would like to discuss this further, either with me or with our neighbors or the McNair Manor Coalition. Copies of this email are being sent to our neighbors, all of whom are concerned about this process. Thank you. Date: Tue 10/13/2015 12:29 PM From: Darla Pardo Dear Sirs and Madams- As a long time resident of Golden Valley particularly in the area of BOTH of the proposed Golden Valley station sites I am very interested in your plans going forward. First let me state that I believe that the route as currently planned is a huge mistake. If the mission of LRT is to "build community-based power to advance local and regional equity and community health by securing community benefits, changing policies and systems to support the creation of wealth and well-being of historic communities of color, immigrant/refugees, migrants, people living with disabilities and low-income communities", you have missed the mark. If this is indeed your desire, the line would run through those areas to link more of the stated population to this necessary form of mass transit. To continue to state that as your primary goal in misleading. Having said that, we must go forward with your ill advised plan of running a mass transit train through park lands, where NO ONE LIVES, with multiple stops. One stop in Golden Valley is enough. Two stops blocks away from each other is costly, redundant and slows 'rapid' transit. As there is no parking in the current design, walk up ridership naturally favors a station/stop at Plymouth road at the Wirth Park Chalet area. Makes sense, right? But Golden Valley council wants a 'legacy stop' at Golden Valley road. This is going to lead to widening Golden Valley road to accommodate increased traffic and allow for pull off areas for riders to be dropped off. Both stops will naturally lead to non resident parking on our neighborhood streets. We took a quick poll of about 60-70 homeowners in the immediate areas and the general consensus was nearly 99% 1 station only at the Chalet. The need for two stops seems to be bolstered by your 'updated rider numbers'. I am left wondering, where these numbers came from? EXACTLY how does the 900 figure break down - how many walk-ups; how many on the bus from the west; how many, if any, on the bus from the east; how many being dropped off(the old "kiss and ride'); how many from a yet to be decided on parking lot. And does the "walk up" figure presume the existing residential neighborhood or the desired "developed" neighborhood? And there is a busy park and ride about 1 mile away, at the shopping center at Highway 100; with a good sized larger parking lot and bus transit that goes directly downtown, with no intervening stops - is the LRT intended to reduce the buses at that site? (I doubt that many GV residents who currently use that site would want to change to a much smaller lot, a mile away, with a longer ride to downtown.) I look forward to having these specific questions answered this evening as well as the many others that you plan on covering. Thank you for your consideration. Date: Tue 10/13/2015 7:06 PM From: Susan Fitze To: Mayor Harris and members of the Golden Valley City Council, I am writing to you in support of the email that you received from Linda Gallant on October 10th. I support all of the issues that Linda brought up to the council and I share her concerns. I am very grateful for the work that she and several other neighbors, including my husband John, have done and continue to do, in studying and staying on top of these issues. I believe it is most important that you know that these folks are the more active voices, for a large number of residents who do not have the time to be as involved as they might wish to be, but who also have great concerns about the decisions that are being made, or not being made, related to the proposed GV LRT Station. I am personally supportive of Light Rail Transit, and my concerns are not about having the LTR station in my backyard, so to speak. I am concerned about putting a station in an area that would benefit/create the largest ridership possible. I do not believe GV Road to be that place. I have concerns about whether the "greater" Golden Valley residents has been surveyed to see how many would actually use the light rail, and if they are aware that there is no plan for parking at the station. How can we make sure that all residents, not only those close to the station are informed of these concerns? I am concerned about the lack of transparency as to the ridership numbers that have been put forth for both the GV Rd. and Plymouth Ave. stations. Ridership numbers and parking availability must not be misrepresented to satisfy the needs required for this project to be guaranteed federal monies. How can we change that lack of transparency?And last of all, how can we be guaranteed that there will be no municipal consent signed until these issues are resolved? I want to believe that you have our backs and will not fold to pressure from the MET Council and other LRT partners that are stakeholders in this process. I trust that you will hold our best interests at heart until you truly know that the concerns of your citizens have been taken seriously and have been satisfactorily resolved, even, if the end result is that there is no station built at Golden Valley Road. Sincerely, Susan Fitze Date: Wed 10/14/2015 10:14 AM From: Jen Severson To: Mayor Harris and members of the Goiden Valley City Council, I am writing to you in support of the email that you received from Linda Gallant on October 10th. I support all of the issues that Linda brought up to the council and I share her concerns. I am very grateful for the work that she and several other neighbors have done and continue to do, in studying and staying on top of these issues. I believe it is most important that you know that these folks are the more active voices, for a large number of residents who do not have the time to be as involved as they might wish to be, but who also have great concerns about the decisions that are being made, or not being made, related to the proposed GV LRT Station. I am personally supportive of Light Rail Transit, and my concerns are not about having the LTR station in my backyard, so to speak. I am concerned about putting a station in an area that would benefit/create the largest ridership possible. I do not believe GV Road to be that place. I have concerns about whether the "greater" Golden Valley residents has been surveyed to see how many would actually use the light rail, and if they are aware that there is no plan for parking at the station. How can we make sure that all residents, not only those close to the station are informed of these concerns? I am concerned about the lack of transparency as to the ridership numbers that have been put forth for both the GV Rd. and Plymouth Ave. stations. Ridership numbers and parking availability must not be misrepresented to satisfy the needs required for this project to be guaranteed federal monies. How can we change that lack of transparency?And last of all, how can we be guaranteed that there will be no municipal consent signed until these issues are resolved? I want to believe that you have our backs and will not fold to pressure from the MET Council and other LRT partners that are stakeholders in this process. I trust that you will hold our best interests at heart until you truly know that the concerns of your citizens have been taken seriously and have been satisfactorily resolved, even, if the end result is that there is no station built at Golden Valley Road. Thank you. Respectfully, Jen S. Severson 1825 Zephyr Place Golden Valley