2017-06-26 EC Agenda PacketAGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
June 26, 2017, Monday @ 6:30pm
Council Conference Room (across from Council Chambers)
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Rd
1.Call to Order
2.Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of May 22, 2017 (5 min)
3.Comprehensive Plan - Water Resources Goals and Objectives (30 min)
4.GreenStep Cities
a.Inventory – Review Best Practices 6, 7, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25 (40 min)
(Action requested)
b.Step 2 Recognition
5.Program/Project Updates (10 min)
6.Council Updates
7.Other Business
a. Farewell to GreenCorps member Hannah Garry (5 min)
8.Adjourn
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2017\6-June\05-22-17 EC Minutes.doc
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting, Minutes
May 22, 2017
Commissioners Present: Tracy Anderson, Tonia Galonska, Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill,
Larry Johnson, Jim Stremel and Debra Yahle
Staff Present: Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist, Hannah Garry, GreenCorps
Member and Claire Huisman, Administrative Assistant
Also Present: Council Member Larry Fonnest
Absent: None
Call to Order
Lynn Gitelis called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm.
Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes
MOVED by Hill, SECONDED by Galonska, and the motion carried unanimously to
approve the minutes of the April 24, 2017 regular meeting.
Review 2017 Annual Work Plan
Eckman reviewed the Commission’s Work Plan for 2017 which was presented to the
Council by Chair Gitelis on May 9, 2017. The Council made no changes to the work
plan. The complete Work Plan is on file.
Resilience & Sustainability Plan
Eckman presented the draft Goals, Objectives, and Policies from the Resilience and
Sustainability chapter in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Commissioners generally
agreed with the information presented and offered their feedback on numerous items as
each goal, objective, and policy was discussed separately. The suggested revisions will
be taken under consideration during the next phase of writing and will be presented and
discussed at a future Commission meeting.
GreenStep Cities Inventory
MOVED by Hill, SECONDED by Stremel and the motion carried unanimously to
approve Best Practice #17; Action 1: Stormwater Management - Adopt and use
MN Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) - as amended for entry into the
GreenStep Cities website.
Best Practices 6, 13, 19, 23 and 1.6 were tabled until the next meeting held on June 26,
2017.
Election of Officers
MOVED by Yahle, SECONDED by Galonska and the motion carried unanimously
to elect Dawn Hill as Chair.
MOVED by Stremel, SECONDED by Anderson and the motion carried
unanimously to elect Tonia Galonska as Vice Chair.
Program/Project Updates
The complete program/project update is on file.
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
May 22, 2017
Page 2 of 2
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2017\6-June\05-22-17 EC Minutes.doc
Other Business
Brief discussion about the closure of Rhode Island Avenue/10th Avenue in preparation
for replacement of the culverts which carry Bassett Creek under the roadway and
railroad tracks.
Chair Gitelis presented a letter as information only from MN Environmental Partnership
to Governor Dayton and Lt. Governor Smith regarding the Jobs and Energy Omnibus
Bill. This letter is one example of the lobbying efforts that occur during the legislative
session.
League of MN Cities 2017 Annual Conference will be held June 14-16, 2017 at the
Mayo Civic Center in Rochester, MN. Commission members are welcome to attend the
GreenSteps Cities Awards breakfast held June 15th at 7:30am. Golden Valley will be
recognized as a Step 2 City.
Adjourn
MOVED by Stremel, SECONDED by Anderson, and the motion carried to adjourn
the meeting at 8:34 pm.
Claire Huisman
Administrative Assistant
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date:June 21, 2017
To:Environmental Commission
From:Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
Subject:Comprehensive Plan - Water Resources Chapter, Goals and Objectives
As part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan community engagement process, an open house and
Planning Commission meeting were held on June 12, 2017 to discuss the Water Resources goals
and objectives. As a follow-up to these meetings, the Environmental Commission would like to
review the water resources goals and objectives and provide additional comments as a group.
The comments will be forwarded to staff and consultants working on the plan to inform the next
phase of writing.
To prepare for the Water Resources discussion, the following items are attached:
1.June 12, 2017 Planning Commission agenda packet
2.Minutes from June 12, 2017 Planning Commission meeting
Staff involved with the Water Resources chapter will be on hand for the discussion.
AGENDA
Planning Commission
Comp Plan Conversation
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, June 12, 2017
6 pm
1. 6-6:30 pm: Open House (Water Resources)
2. 6:30-7:30 pm: Presentation and Discussion (Water Resources)
Th s locurr c nt is avail l l in lt rnatc ft rn ts upo3 a 72-i ur re u 5t, I ase C II
763-593-8006 (TTY: 7b3-593-396)to n ake a rec uest. Exan ples of alter iate fo iats
m y inclucie larr:prir t,el ctronic, Br ille;audi c ssette,etc,
Date: June 12, 2017
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Jeff Oliver, City Engineer
Subject: 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Water Resources
Summary
Water Resources is the fourth of seven elements to be discussed as part of the 2017 update to the
City’s Comprehensive Plan. Staff will host an open house immediately prior to the Planning
Commission meeting as a way to share information and gather feedback. Members of the public and
Commissioners from the Environmental and Open Space and Recreation Commissions are invited to
stay and participate in the discussion that follows.
Background
The Water Resources Chapter will include a set of coordinated policies and strategies on water supply,
wastewater, and surface water. A major change is required by the Metropolitan Council for this round
of Comprehensive Plans. In the existing Comprehensive Plan, there were three separate chapters on
Water Resources. Staff conducted analyses and created separate plans for each of the three topics.
For the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Cities must adopt an integrated approach to planning and analysis
in order to emphasize how efforts in one area can benefit another. Therefore, Water Resources will
become one chapter with an integrated policy plan and implementation plan. The City’s work will be
influenced by the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan, which moves beyond the
management of these resources only to meet regulatory requirements. Rather, the plan addresses
them as vital resources that must be sustained for future generations.
Outcomes from this Session
1. Consensus on general themes and priorities
2. Preliminary agreement on the 2040 Goals and Objectives
Attachments
Summary of Community Feedback on Water Resources (1 page)
Water Supply Summary (1 page)
Wastewater Summary (2 pages)
Surface Water Summary (2 pages)
Proposed Goals and Objectives for Water Resources Chapter (2 pages)
2
2
2
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
June 12, 2017
A special meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council
Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, June 12, 2017.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blenker, Blum, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and
Waldhauser. Also present were Associate Planner and Grant Writer Emily Goellner, Planning Manager
Jason Zimmerman, Utility Engineer R.J. Kakach, City EngineerJeff Oliver, and BARR Engineering
Consultants Karen Chandler and Greg Williams. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 6:34
p.m.
1.Presentation and Discussion (Water Resources)
Goellner introduced the Water Resources chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and stated that the public
values their water resources. She said the public has emphasized that they want to maintain parks and
green space, embrace sustainability, be inclusive of diversity, accommodate an aging population, and
make improvements to infrastructure.
Goellner introduced the goals outlined in the Water Resources memorandum.
R.J. Kakach, Utility Engineer, presented on wastewater and water resources. He said that only ten
percent of Golden Valley’s sewer system has been lined and rehabilitated, but that fifty-five percent has
been inspected at point of sale. Typically corrections are needed before the house can be sold, which
has improved inflow and infiltration compliance in the city. He said that Golden Valley’s sewer mains run
into a system managed by the Metropolitan Council and that studies done by the Metropolitan Council
have detected a reduction as a result of the Point of Sale program.
Segelbaum asked for more information about inflow and infiltration.
Kakach explained that inflow is when rainwater enters through things such as manholes and private
property sump pumps that feed into sanitary sewer system and that infiltration is when groundwater
seeps into the pipes. He stated that Golden Valley is losing capacity in the sewer system as a result, and
the goal is to maintain capacity and reduce inflow and infiltration.
Waldhauser brought up the fifty-five percent inspection rate and asked if that included both residential
and commercial properties. Kakach confirmed that it did. He explained that the other forty-five percent
has not been inspected because it is a voluntary program and corrections are not required until Point of
Sale. He said that 47% of the city is compliant.
Waldhauser asked how the city knows a property is compliant if not all properties are inspected. Kakach
clarified that the properties not listed as compliant are either noncompliant or unknown.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
2
Kakach brought up challenges facing the City’s system, which are inflow and infiltration, failing clay pipes
from the 50s and 60s damaged by freeze-thaw conditions, and root intrusions which back up pipes. He
said that the average cost per mile to repair the sanitary sewer is half a million dollars, and the challenge
facing the city is how to prioritize the necessary repairs.
Segelbaum asked what the difference was between wastewater and the sanitary sewer. Kakach said that
they are the same system, but that the term “sewer” refers to both sanitary and storm sewers. Kakach
clarified that this presentation refers to the sanitary sewer and that stormwater would be discussed
later.
Baker asked what the difference was between the cost of repairing the pipe and replacing it. Kakach
said the cost he has referenced is an average for all rehabilitation but that repairing costs slightly less
than replacing the pipe.
Blum asked if rehabilitation mitigated root intrusion into the pipes. Kakach said that they could insert a
grout into the pipes which would prevent root intrusions.
Kakach outlined sanitary sewer and wastewater goals, which were to ensure adequate capacity, reduce
or eliminate sanitary sewer overflows, and reduce inflow and infiltration to a manageable level.
Kluchka asked what the frequency of sanitary sewer overflows are. Kakach said that they are rare and
occur mostly during high intensity rainfall.
Baker requested information on what would be considered a manageable level of inflow and infiltration.
Kakach said inflow an infiltration can be tracked based on meters, but is difficult to measure. He stated
that a manageable level would reduce it across the board and they are trying to line or replace as much
pipe as possible.
Kakach began the water supply presentation on drinking water. He explained that New Hope, Crystal,
and Golden Valley purchase water from Minneapolis together and that some of the water main is
owned by the joint commission but most is owned by Golden Valley.
Kakach said that a challenge facing the city is water main breaks because they are difficult to predict
even though water main breaks are tracked. He said that the average cost to rehabilitate the water
mains is 1.4 million per mile, much more than the sanitary sewer.
Kakach outlined the goals for the city, which are to limit residential demand, limit daily demand, limit
peak purchases from Minneapolis, and limit unaccounted for water, which is the difference between
what is bought and what is sold to residents. He said the city wants to maintain the current level of
service of the system while eliminating large breaks.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
3
Kluchka asked what the difference was between Golden Valley’s capacity and peak usage. Kakach said
that data indicates peak usage was over seventeen million gallons per day and that is has now decreased
to five or six million. He said Golden Valley has even eliminated a pump in the reservoir because demand
had decreased and that he feels comfortable with the capacity of the system. Kakach said he believes
there is enough for current uses and possibly for some expansion. Kluchka asked whether limiting
purchases has an impact on the system. Kakach said that it is considered best practice and good for
sustainability to limit water, but it is also likely easier on the system to not have as much water passing
through it.
Waldhauser asked if there was information specifically on commercial water usage. Kakach said that
records are broken down by land use, but he did not have the information with him. Waldhauser
brought up the issue of water waste in industrial and commercial uses, and Kakach agreed that would be
a good place to look into conservation.
Segelbaum wanted clarification on what was meant by the word “limit” and whether it referred to
reduction in general or if there was a specific goal. Kakach agreed that “reduce” might be a better word.
Segelbaum then asked why demand for water has decreased. Kakach explained that water fixtures have
grown more efficient, and there has been education on water conservation.
Blenker asked what causes water main breaks and how long they typically last. Kakach said they are the
result of freeze-thaw conditions, loading on top of water main, pressure variation, and corrosive soils.
He said that there is variation in how long they are estimated to last, but in Golden Valley’s soils, water
mains have failed earlier than anticipated.
Kluchka asked if there was data on trends in water main breaks and if that data tracks breaks related to
age. Kakach said the he would estimate twenty to thirty breaks a year with an upward trend and that
suspected causes are tracked.
Waldhauser asked about the lining and replacing of water mains. Kakach explained that it can be done
but is more expensive than the sanitary sewer because it is a pressurized system and requires more
work. Waldhauser wondered if anyone was looking at separating potable water from other types of
water. Kakach said that in a commercial setting, some people look at recycling water, but at a City level
there is limited research on the subject.
Blum said that someone at an open house had mentioned to him that the City runs wells and he wanted
to know if that was a program at one point. Kakach said he was unaware of any City run wells at this
point. There are three emergency backup wells owned by JWC located in New Hope and Crystal that
could supply minimal use in an emergency.
Segelbaum asked how long the contract to buy water from Minneapolis is. Kakach stated that the
contract was renewed for 20 years in 2004 and that Minneapolis has been selling water to other cities
and appears comfortable with their capacity.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
4
Kluchka asked what the goal for inflow and infiltration is. Kakach said that there is not a specific goal but
that the Metropolitan Council monitors inflow, as does the City of Golden Valley. The goal is to
specifically address high volume areas and then reevaluate because measuring inflow and infiltration is
difficult. Kluchka wanted to know how Golden Valley’s inflow and infiltration compares to other cities.
Kakach said that the inflow and infiltration program has been successful, although it is difficult to find
comparable cities. He stated that the water main breaks may be slightly worse than comparable cities.
Segelbaum said he was concerned about the age of the system and the financing of the repairs. He
wanted to know if there was a timeline for repairs. Kakach said that it is early to answer these questions,
but that options for financing are being explored, and problem areas are being prioritized. He said that
by 2040 the system will be past its designed life and there is uncertainty about how to fund the needed
repairs. He said there is a chance it may need to be repaired before 2040 but that it is difficult to predict
an exact timeline.
Kluchka asked how many miles of pipe have been lined or replaced. Kakach stated that there has been
limited funding and repairs have been administered based on priority. Slightly over 10 miles of sanitary
sewer have been lined and that he would estimate five to ten miles of water mains have been replaced.
Kluchka recommended discussing what has been rehabilitated in the future draft of this chapter.
Baker inquired about the life expectancy of a lining. Kakach said that the lifespan is fifty to 100 years,
similar to a new pipe. Water main lining, which is a new technology, has a longer projected design life.
Baker asked if, with that in mind, the focus would be more on rehabilitation than replacement. Kakach
said that the sanitary sewer focus is mainly lining. The water main uses both but they are moving toward
lining. Baker asked if there was potential for saving money by doing multiple linings at the same time.
Kakach said there was some potential for savings if nearby parts were done simultaneously.
Baker asked about the safety of the water main linings. Kakach said that the Minnesota Department of
Health signs off on the epoxy resins that are used. Oliver added that the linings being used have been
certified as safe for consumption by the National Science Foundation. Baker asked if a replacement is
higher quality than a rehabilitation. Oliver said there are testing protocols that are used to ensure safety
in 100 years to meet National Science Foundation ratings. Based on what is known today, he said he is
confident in the lifespan of the system because the materials used today are higher quality than they
were when the mains were installed.
Blum asked if the city had looked into the value of using plants to control stormwater. Kakach said he
was not presenting on stormwater and thought that the next presenter could answer the question
better.
Blum asked whether the effects of permeable and non-permeable surfaces had been measured. He also
wanted to know what kind of impact the use of pesticides and herbicides had on the system and how
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
5
much it costs to remove it. Kakach said that there were requirements for herbicide and pesticide use. He
said other people might be able to answer the question better.
Kakach concluded his presentation.
Goellner introduced consultants Greg Williams and Karen Chandler to present on surface water
management. Williams began his presentation by outlining the focus of this section in the
Comprehensive Plan. He said some of the things that were most important to residents were wetlands,
habitats, shoreland, and stormwater runoff, but that other concerns such as infrastructure and water
quality were very important to the City but might not be on residents’ radars.
For wetlands, habitats, and shoreland, Williams explained that the City is the Local Governmental Unit
responsible for administering the Wetland Conservation Act. The City may partner with County and
watershed organizations to manage aquatic invasive species. The City has development and
redevelopment standards that regulate storm water runoff. There are also retrofit and redevelopment
opportunities. In a developed city there is little room to implement new best practices, so
redevelopment is often the best opportunity to improve infrastructure. Williams said things like Minimal
Impact Design Standards had been used to help limit stormwater runoff.
Williams referred to Blum’s question about vegetative management of stormwater runoff. Williams
explained that the scale of precipitation events is an issue. The tree canopy provides interception for a
fraction of an inch, but stormwater management is designed to deal with much larger precipitation
events. Williams said vegetative swales that help slow the runoff once it is on the ground may be a
better practice.
Williams moved on to lake and stream water quality, which is another focus for surface water
management. He said some water bodies in the City are listed as impaired by Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency because they don’t meet state water quality standards, including Bassett Creek,
Sweeney Lake, and Wirth Lake, which does not meet chloride standards.
Baker asked what the source of chloride was. Williams said that in the metro area, it typically comes
from winter road management.
Blum asked what type of precipitation events were typical for infiltration. Williams says that infiltration
practices are best for smaller events because it varies so much depending on the type of soil. He
explained that Golden Valley has a lot of clay soil, which limits infiltration opportunities. Williams said
filtration is another option that is helpful but difficult and operates by binding pollutants in the soil.
Williams said that, as well as restoring impaired water quality, it is also important to maintain areas with
high water quality.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
6
Williams moved onto the topic of education and public involvement, the goal is to promote positive
behaviors. He recommended educating residents about best practices methods for herbicide and
pesticide use. Williams stated that it is important to develop community capacity for educating people
who will be good stewards. He emphasized cooperation with other organizations such as the Bassett
Creek Watershed Commission.
Williams said the next topic, water quantity and flooding, is a significant issue because it can effect
public health and safety. He emphasized the need to minimize risk of floods and minimize impact of
floods. He said there was a need to adapt to changing precipitation patterns because a trend toward
larger and more frequent precipitation events increases the need for stormwater management, which is
exacerbated by tight soils.
Williams explained that erosion and sedimentation from stormwater runoff can carry dirt and pollution
and can be combatted through permitting programs and implementing best management practices on
City projects.
For Infrastructure and Operations, Williams said that the City needs to maintain storm water
infrastructure, including scheduled infrastructure replacement identifying funding for replacing storm
water systems. Williams said he will be detailing these issues in the separate Surface Water
Management Plan to identify issues and create an implementation plan to achieve the City’s goals.
Referring back to Blum’s question about fertilizer and pesticide use, Williams said that the impact
depends on how they are applied and what the chemicals are. Some of what is washed away is treated
through storm water management, but there is no chemical treatment to remove them from the water.
Residues from fertilizer or pesticides either settle or are washed downstream, which may create
problems in other places.
Kluchka asked if phosphorous was currently being treated. Williams said that phosphorous was being
treated through filtration and infiltration, binding the phosphorous to soil particles so it does not pollute
the water. Blum asked if vegetative systems reduce the amount of phosphorous. Williams said that it
may reduce the concentration. However, some does dissolve, and that is much more difficult to treat.
Infiltration is the preferred practice because it does not show up in lakes if it goes into the ground. Alum
can also be added to lakes and storm water flow, which will bind dissolved phosphorous. Williams said
that Twin Lake has received an alum treatment in the past.
Blum wanted to know if there was a metric to measure costs and effects and identify the impact over
time. Williams said that concentration of nutrients in water bodies is commonly used as a metric to
measure water quality and compare it to state standards. Models can also be developed to estimate
how much pollutant loads are being reduced, which has been done on a project specific basis in Golden
Valley. Blum asked if that was done every time a lot was developed. Oliver clarified that larger
developments are required to implement best practices, but that as a fully developed first ring suburb
Golden Valley has adopted a regional approach in stormwater management, conducting studies mainly
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
7
on larger projects. He said that Golden Valley implements best practices strategically, where and when
possible, like the constructed ponds by the Holiday Inn and on Xenia Avenue.
Blum expressed concern about herbicide and pesticide use and said that he does not feel the City
communicates well with residents about the issue. Oliver said that regulating individual properties and
pesticide, herbicide, and fertilizer use is difficult and best approached through education. Oliver said
there is not a metric to measure it but that continued education is key, and he feels that Golden Valley’s
education program is very strong.
Blum asked Williams to address the impacts of permeable and non-permeable surfaces and whether
there was a way to monitor it. Williams explained that there are development standards that limit the
rate of water coming off a property, and the best way to meet that is to limit the impervious surface. He
said that there are policies to promote permeable surfaces and reduce runoff, which can be done partly
by informing developers of best practices and indirectly through City regulations.
Chair Segelbaum opened the floor for public comments at 8:00 p.m.
Dawn Hill, resident of the City and Environmental Commissioner asked about drinking water and
whether a situation like Flint, Michigan, could happen in Golden Valley. She wanted to know whose
responsibility it would be to fix that and asked whether drinking water safety should be included in the
Comprehensive Plan. She also wanted to know whether lining the pipes would reduce capacity.
Marty Micks, 90 Louisiana Ave S, asked about Twin Lake. She said it was pristine in the 1990s and
wanted to know how it went from being pristine to needing an alum treatment. She said she does not
think residents are penalized for using additional water and that she thinks there should be some type
of penalty to encourage residents to keep their water usage down. She also wanted to know what trees
are best to plant near water pipes to avoid root intrusions and whether the City has looked into how the
lining placed in Winnetka Avenue in 1994 is doing.
Seeing no one else come forward, the floor was closed for comments.
Answering the question about trees, Oliver said that forestry staff have a list of tree species that will do
well. He said that trees with deep roots may impact pipes, but that there has not been a need for tree
removal.
Referencing Hill’s question about whether lining water mains might reduce capacity, Oliver explained
that friction is a factor in capacity, and the new lining is smoother. Even though the diameter is smaller
the capacity remains the same or improves. He clarified that the sewer mains on Winnetka were
replaced, not lined. Lining is a newer approach that was not in use at the time. He said some liners have
done very well and that they are moving in the right direction.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
8
Referencing the comment on incentives to reduce water use, Oliver explained that the City has a tiered
rate based on usage of water for bills, with a slight increase with more water use. However, the low
range of a tiermay pay as much as the high range of a tier. It is not charged per gallon.
Waldhauser brought up the question on drinking water quality. Oliver explained that the lead poisoning
in Flint, Michigan was a unique combination of water chemistry and lead service pipes and that Golden
Valley does not have those types of pipes. The water chemistry is consistent throughout the City of
Minneapolis, and widespread contamination of water, like what happened in Flint, Michigan is not
anticipated.
Returning to the alum treatment in Twin Lake, Chandler explained that the alum treatment was actually
a positive case. The Basset Creek Watershed Commission had a goal to protect bodies that have good
water quality. Some phosphorous seemed to be causing water quality to decline in Twin Lake, so the
alum treatment was used to address the phosphorous coming into water from the sediment. There was
budget set aside for two treatments, but the second treatment has not been needed yet. Chandler
emphasized that this was a positive story in which a potential issue was addressed right away and did
not become a big problem.
Baker wanted to know what the source of phosphorous from sediment was in the Twin Lake case.
Chandler said it may have been as a result of higher temperatures in the summer. Oliver said that
phosphorous in the sediment comes from natural sources and reminded the commission that the
peninsula was a pasture for a long time, which may be a contributing factor in the increased
phosphorous.
Chair Segelbaum closed the public hearing at 8:15.
Chair Segelbaum asked if the Planning Commission should table the discussion of the goals for the
Comprehensive Plan Water Resources Chapter until the next meeting since there was also a Regular
Meeting Planned for the same night. Goellner recommended tabling the item on the agenda for the
Regular Meeting instead since it was less time sensitive than the Comprehensive Plan discussion. She
also suggested not focusing on specific language in the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives but
focusing instead on broader topics and solutions.
Segelbaum pointed out that Goals 4, 5, 6, and 7 and said that they seemed to relate to the sanitary
sewer and water mains, whereas Goals 1, 2, 3, and 4 seemed to relate to surface water. He proposed
beginning with the second half of the Goals and Objectives.
Segelbaum brought up an element that had already been discussed: the word “limit” used in Goal 6,
where the intent was “reduce”.
Waldhauser asked what a realistic improvement would be and how that would be implemented in the
planning process. Segelbaum expressed that he would like to see a more quantitative approach.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
9
Goellner clarified that this is a policy plan which does not generally have specific number targets, but
that the implementation section of the chapter would have specific targets. The Commission agreed to
wait and see what the specific targets in the chapter were.
Baker brought up the idea of a metric to measure these things better. He said that seemed especially
suitable for Goals 1-3, and that they should be measuring and reporting to the community. He pointed
out that in other chapters there had been metrics and measurements provided.
Segelbaum brought up the phrasing “manageable level”. Baker said he would like that to be defined
more specifically.
Blenker asked about suggested implementation steps and said that she had seen those provided in
other chapters. Segelbaum agreed that previous chapters had implementation steps listed and wanted
to know why this one did not. Goellner said that working with three consultants on this chapter had
complicated coordination and that that the strategies are likely to be similar now to what they were ten
years ago.
Baker brought up the second objective of Goal 5 and wanted to know what strategies it was referring to.
Oliver said that when it comes to stormwater management the system is so large and so expensive that
upgrades are often implemented when the opportunity arises rather than based on objective goals. He
said that the current information is incomplete, which makes it difficult to set goals. With precipitation
the focus will be on flood storage and minimizing property damage, which is already being done.
Segelbaum asked for clarification about Goellner’s earlier comments on implementation. He said
hearing that the same strategies are being used as ten years ago worried him and that it sounds like the
City is not making progress. Oliver said he agreed with Goellner’s comment. The goals laid out in the last
Comprehensive Plan remain the same because they are still applicable. He said the trend throughout the
region has been to move away from reliance on groundwater to surface water, which Golden Valley
already does. He emphasized that the goals are viable but very difficult to measure and that he believed
Golden Valley is ahead of many comparable cities in dealing with these issues.
Segelbaum asked whether the City was pushing off necessary infrastructure repairs and what should be
done to ensure that future residents are not burdened by lack of action now. Oliver agreed that the
condition of infrastructure is important and that if the Commission thinks so they should rank that
priority accordingly. Goellner added that there are more policies in the water resources chapter than
any other chapter, totaling 22 policies. She said she thought it would be better to focus on prioritizing
which goals are most important during this night’s meeting.
Blum said he thought that to choose what is most important he needed some type of concrete measure
to see what is being done over time. Johnson said there seemed to be a lot of data and was not sure
what Blum was looking for. Blum said that he thought staff understood the metrics best and would like
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
10
more guidance from staff about what is being done. Baker suggested that objectives for some of the
goals be to provide or develop monitoring metrics.
Oliver emphasized that there is regular monitoring by the Bassett Creek Watershed Commission and
required standards that must be met. He said that there is continued progress on Sweeney Lake and
Wirth Lake. He said that while not every project and goal is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan they
were being worked on consistently. Segelbaum asked whether they should request that staff report
these measurements, and the Commission agreed.
Baker said that he thought there could be better integration of the goals. He said the integration of what
used to be three chapters into one chapter did not seem effective and he thought staff could improve
that. Waldhauser pointed out that Goal 4 effectively mentioned all components of water resources. She
mentioned that many of the potential problems relate to Goal 4 and infrastructure. Segelbaum said that
some of the goals do not pull all the aspects of water resources together.
Segelbaum asked if any commissioners had further comments on Goals 4-7. Johnson brought up the
third objective of Goal 5 and wanted to know that the data in the forecasts was legitimate. He also said
he thought there needed to be a plan to pay for the cost of rehabilitating the pipes and that the goals
and objectives should address this. Segelbaum agreed and said it was important to the community to
show that steps are being taken to improve the situation.
Waldhauser brought up Goal 7. She said she thought there was a public education component to all of
the goals and that education did not necessarily need to be its own goal. She said she would rather see
an objective for each goal addressing the public education component. Baker agreed that there is a
public education component in each goal and suggested leaving the education goal but crafting an
education policy for each goal.
Blum suggested changing Goal 7 to “incentivize” the public rather than “involve”. Segelbaum said he
believed incentives could be built into the other goals. Goellner agreed that “involve” was a loose verb
and that she liked the idea of incentivizing. Baker said that being more educated on a topic should
incentivize people to do the right thing. Kluchka recommended that incentives be a policy and that the
incentives be used to achieve a goal. He said he also believed that incentives should be addressed across
the chapters of the Comprehensive Plan.
Moving onto Goals 1-3, Segelbaum asked if any of the other commissioners had input on those goals.
Blum said that rather than achieving standards, he thought residents might like to see Golden Valley
exceed the standards. He proposed more positive language like “exceed” rather than achieve.
Segelbaum asked engineering staff if exceeding those standards was realistic. Oliver said that it is very
difficult just to meet the minimums, and that while exceeding them would be admirable, he thought it
would be very difficult. He said staff will discuss the desire and incorporate it in a way that makes sense.
Segelbaum said that, where realistic, he thought the city should aim high. Baker said that knowing when
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
11
exceeding was reasonable should be up to staff. Blum pointed out that Comprehensive Plans are
aspirational, and that not all goals would be achieved.
Johnson pointed out that the last bullet from Goal 1 was replicated in Goal 5. Goellner explained that
had been done in an attempt to integrate more, but that using the same language may not have been an
effective way to do that.
Baker said he thought there should be an objective under Goal 1 to reduce the use of chloride in street
maintenance. Segelbaum asked if there were other options, and Baker said that they could let staff deal
with that since the Comprehensive Plan is aspirational. Segelbaum suggested adding it as a policy
instead of an objective. Blum suggested generalizing it to say “reduce the use of harmful chemicals in
maintenance”, and Segelbaum agreed that sounded good.
Waldhauser wanted to know what “minimize hydrological alterations to Bassett Creek” means. Williams
clarified that referred to anything that might change the velocity or flow of water and have unintended
negative environmental consequences. Baker asked if that could be framed in a more aspirational way
to enhance the creek. Williams replied that he thought that had been addressed in other goals.
Segelbaum asked whether the language could be changed to make more sense to laypeople.
Waldhauser said she was surprised to see it there because there had been alterations to Bassett Creek
that seemed positive. Williams said that recent alterations had been done to undo previous changes,
which has been prioritized by the Minnesota Division of Natural Resources. He clarified that the
language is in the spirit of maintaining things as they would occur naturally. The commission agreed they
thought that point needed revision.
Waldhauser said she liked Goal 2 and appreciated the emphasis on water as a desirable amenity.
Segelbaum asked if she thought it was emphasized sufficiently, and Waldhauser said that she thought
Goal 2 was very well done. Baker said he liked the second-to-last objective on Goal 2 and hoped to build
on that as an opportunity to improve shoreland protection.
Blum said that he frequently hears questions about pest control for mosquitoes and wanted to know if
that should be addressed in this chapter. Segelbaum said that he agreed some of these items should be
balanced with the livability of the community since it is difficult to enjoy the community with the
mosquitos. Blenker wanted to know if the city was involved in mosquito control. Goellner replied that
there is a regional body that dealt with the mosquito population. Baker said he thought that the regional
mosquito control body does a good job and he was not worried about it. Goellner suggested raising the
question to the environmental commission.
Segelbaum asked what the next steps would be for this chapter. Goellner said that the document would
be presented to the City Council the next day, after which the consultants would begin work on writing
the chapter. She said a completed document would be presented to the Planning Commission in the fall
with a full detailed policy plan that they would be able to give feedback on.
Special Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
12 June, 2017
12
Segelbaum adjourned the meeting at 9:09 p.m.
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date:June 21, 2017
To:Environmental Commission
From:Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
Hannah Garry, MN GreenCorps Member
Subject:GreenStep Cities Inventory
Best Practices 6, 7, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25
Golden Valley entered the GreenStep Cities program in April 2016 and was recognized as a “Step
2” city on June 15th 2017. In order to become a “Step 3” city, Golden Valley must document the
completion of 16 best practices, including 10 specific best practices required by the program.
Each best practice encompasses a variety of actions a city may take in order to complete it.
The attached 17 entries describe actions the City has taken or is currently taking and serve as a
way to benchmark the City for future progress. After being rated, these entries should be
sufficient for completion of Best Practices 6, 7, 13, 15, 19, 23, and 25. Please review these for the
June Commission meeting. After brief discussion, staff requests that the Commission consider
making a motion to approve these for entry into the GreenStep Cities website.
Best Practice 6 – Comprehensive Plans
Action # 1 Adopt a comprehensive plan
Action # 2 Demonstrate regulatory ordinances comply with comprehensive plan
Action # 3 Include requirements in plans for intergovernmental coordination
Action # 4 Include ecologic provisions in the comprehensive plan
Best Practice 7 – Efficient City Growth
Action # 1 Limit barriers to higher density housing
Action # 2 Encourage higher density housing
Best Practice 13 – Efficient City Fleets
Action # 2 Use fuel-efficient vehicles that are of the optimal size and capacity
Action # 3 Establish no-idling practices
Action # 4 Phase in bike, foot or horseback modes for police, inspectors, and other
City staff
Best Practice 15 – Sustainable Purchasing
Action # 1 Adopt a sustainable purchasing policy or guidelines
Action # 4 Require purchase of U.S. EPA WaterSense-certified products
Best Practice 19 – Surface Water Quality
Action # 4 Adopt a shoreland ordinance for all river and lake shoreland areas
Action # 5 Adopt goals to revegetate shoreland
Action # 6 Implement an existing TMDL implementation plan
Best Practice 23 – Local Air Quality
Action # 2 Regulate outdoor wood burning
Action # 3 Conduct one or more policy or behavior change campaigns
Best Practice 25 – Green Business Development
Action # 4 Strengthen value-added businesses utilizing local waste products
BP6—Comprehensive Plans
Action#1—Adopt a comprehensive plan
One star:Adopt a comp plan that is less than ten years old or adopt a land use plan that was
adopted by the county or a regional entity less than 15 years ago
Two star: Include in your plan a sustainability section/chapter, an active
living/placemaking/bike-ped section,or integrate sustainability goals and strategies into all
chapters of your comprehensive plan,or articulate land development principles for creating a
complete, compact and connected community
Three star:Adopt a development goal that new/infill projects generate enough tax revenue to
pay for the related public infrastructure maintenance/replacement over multiple life cycles;
reference a capital improvement plan that catalogues public system maintenance obligations by
date and cost.
Implementation Details
In 2008 City Council adopted a comprehensive plan laying out the vision for the Golden Valley through
2030.The plan included a transportation chapter that addressed making improvements to bicycle and
pedestrian facilities as well as improving trail connectivity.
The 2040 comprehensive plan will include a chapter on sustainability and resilience and sustainability
goals will be highlighted in all of the chapters.A specific bicycle and pedestrian section will be included
in the transportation chapter including recommendations made by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning
Task Force.
The Comprehensive Plan references the City's Capital Improvement Plan that catalogues public
investments by date and cost,and the Planning Commission reviews the CIP every year for its
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
For more information contact:
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
jzimmerman@goldenvalleymn.gov
763-593-8099
Descriptive Links:
http://www.oldenvallevmn.ov/plannin/comprehensiveplan/
BP6—Comprehensive Plans
Action#2—Demonstrate that regulatory ordinances comply with the comprehensive plan including but
not limited to having the zoning ordinance explicitly reference the comprehensive plan as the
foundational document for decision making.
One star: Document where in the zoning code or development regulation the comprehensive
plan is referenced as a foundational document or that the purpose of the code is to implement
the comprehensive plan
Two star: Comprehensive plan referenced in all land use and development ordinances and
regulations in addition to zoning code ordinances
Three star: Individual ordinances or ordinance sections should be introduced with a "Purposes"
section that includes language such as the following: "The XXX regulations specifically
implement the following goals from the Comprehensive Plan"
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details:
Chapter 11.90, Subdivision 7 (part B)of the City Code reads "The Comprehensive Plan for the City as
adopted pursuant hereto,and any parts thereof or amendments thereto, shall serve as a guide to the
City and its public officials as respects future development and zoning actions of and within the City."
Reference to the Comprehensive Plan is often found in the "Purpose and Intent" subdivision of each
section within the Zoning Chapter. It is also found in the Conditional Uses section.When planning
applications(PUDs, CUPs, Rezonings and Land Use Re-guidings) are reviewed the "findings" section will
acknowledge the application's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
For more information contact:
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
jzimmerman@ oldenvallevmn.ov
763-593-8099
Descriptive Links:
http://weblink.ci.olden-vallev.mn.us/Public/2/doc/502414/Pa el.aspx
BP6—Comprehensive Plans
Action#3—Include requirements in comprehensive and/or other plans for intergovernmental
coordination addressing land use and watershed/wellhead impacts, infrastructure, economic
development and city/regional services.
One star: Include plan requirements (in a comp plan or another planning document) on
coordinated action with surrounding or overlapping jurisdictions for several of these issues: land
use, watershed/groundwater impacts,transportation, sewer and water,economic
development, housing and foreclosures, police, fire, health; adopt a wellhead/source water
protection plan
Two star: Convene discussions or enter into agreements (joint service or others)with
surrounding communities on at least 3 of these issues.
Three star:Jointly invest in infrastructure to avoid duplication or improve performance; as part
of inter-city discussions mentor another GreenStep city
Implementation Details
The Water Supply,Surface Water,and Transportation chapters of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan
all include policies that specifically outline continued cooperation and agreements with regional and
state partners in order to accomplish the City's goals.
The City purchases water from Minneapolis through the Joint Water Commission (JWC)which includes
Golden Valley, Crystal and New Hope.The City is also a member of the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission (BCWMC) along with eight other cities and has staff representatives on the
BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee as well as the BCWMC Aquatic Plant Management/AIS
Committee.
The City has service agreements in place with St. Louis Park for inspections of properties located on the
border of the two cities. Both Golden Valley and Saint Louis Park fire departments have mutual aid
agreements in place as well. Lodging taxes from Golden Valley hotels go towards funding for Discover St.
Louis Park,which promotes tourism in St. Louis Park and Golden Valley.The City also partnered with the
City of Minnetonka and the City of Plymouth to enter into its current recycling contract.
The City has agreements with several entities to ensure residents have access to parks and athletic
facilities within City limits, including those owned by Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board,
Independent School Districts(ISD)#270 and#281, and the State of Minnesota. In 2015,the City entered
into a joint powers agreement with Three Rivers Park District and the City of Robbinsdale for the
establishment of Sochacki Park.The City additionally has an agreement with Saint Louis Park allowing
residents of both cities use of Brookview Golf Course and Saint Louis Park's outdoor aquatic park at a
reduced rate.
The City also works with other municipalities and organizations to share public works equipment for
milling and overlaying streets.
Outcome Metrics/Measures
As of 2017,the City has completed milling and overlaying on 3 miles of street using shared equipment.
BP6—Comprehensive Plans
In 2015,the JWC replaced a deteriorating 36-inch concrete water main delivering water from
Minneapolis to Golden Valley, New Hope, and Crystal with 24 inch ductile iron pipe, which is more
resistant to breaking.
In 2016,the City began jointly funding the reconstruction of Douglas Drive (County Road 102)along with
Hennepin County.
IN 2017,the BCWMC completed a hydraulic and hydrologic modeling project to determine flood
elevations across its member cities and evaluate the impacts of proposed projects on flood levels.
For More Information Contact:
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Directory
763-593-8008
mnevinski@goldenvalleymn.gov
Partners:
Joint Water Commission, Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, Hennepin County, Saint
Louis Park, Plymouth, Minnetonka,Three Rivers Park District, Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board,
ISD#270, ISD#281
BP6—Comprehensive Plans
Action#4—Include ecological provisions in the comprehensive plan that explicitly aim to minimize open
space fragmentation and/or establish a growth area with expansion criteria.
One star: Conduct a natural resource inventory(NRI) and incorporate the results into your
comprehensive plan or long-term city vision.
Two star: Prioritize the NRI results through a natural resource assessment(NRA) involving the
public so as to minimize the fragmentation and development of agricultural,forest,wildlife, and
high quality open space lands in and around the city.
Three star: Identify priority natural resource protection areas in the comp plan and recommend
strategies for integrating protection into the development process.
Implementation Details
The City updated its 2002 natural resource inventory in 2013 and used it to develop a Natural Resource
Management Plan (NRMP)which was adopted in 2015.The NRMP incorporated feedback from a survey
that was distributed to residents which included questions about level of satisfaction with the quality of
nature areas and open spaces and what changes could be made to improve and protect them.
The 2040 comprehensive plan will incorporate the NRMP into the Parks and Open Space chapter which
will identify natural resource protection areas and recommend strategies for integrating protection into
the development process.
For more information contact:
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
763-593-8084
eeckman@ oldenvallevmn.gov
BP7—Efficient City Growth
Action#1—Limit barriers to higher density housing by including in the City zoning ordinance and zoning
map:
a. Neighborhood single-family density at 7 units/acre or greater
b. Multi-family housing at a gross density of at least 15 units/acre adjacent to a commercial
zoning district or transit node
One star: Have at least one single-family zoning district or selected area that requires or allows
7-unit/acre (or greater)
Two star:A mixed-or single-use zoning district that sets a minimum density for single family at 7
dwelling units/acre and minimum gross density for multi-family at 15 dwellings per unit area
DUA)(a level that supports 1 bus/15 min.). Multi-family housing includes attached housing,
apartments and condos
Three star:A minimum residential gross density of 20 units/acre when adjacent to a permanent
transit node or pedestrian-oriented commercial retail district
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details
The moderate (R-2), medium (R-3), and high (R-4)density residential zoning districts all allow for over 7
units per acre. R-2 allows up to 8 units per acre, R-3 allows for up to 10 units per acre (with a potential
for 12 units per acre with density bonuses), and R-4 allows for over 12 units per acre.There are several
places in the City where R-3 and R-4 zoning districts are adjacent to commercial zoning districts.
The Land Use Chapter in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update will include consideration of increasing
the allowed densities in both the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts.
For more information contact:
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
izimmerman@goldenvallevmn.ov
763)-593-8099
Descriptive Link:
http://www.oldenvallevmn.ov/zonin/map.php
BP7—Efficient City Growth
Action#2—Encourage higher density housing through at least two of the following strategies:
a. Incorporate a flexible lot size/frontage requirement for infill development
b. Use density and floor area ration (FAR) bonuses in selected residential zoning districts
c. Tie a regulatory standard to comprehensive plan language defining compact city expansion
zones that limit low-density development
d. Allowing accessory dwelling units or co-housing or tiny houses/apartments by right in selected
zoning districts
One star: Use a process/ordinance (planned unit development or other)that allows
increased density and approves development on substandard lots through flexible frontage
and lot sizes; create a density bonus in one residential or commercial zoning district; allow
accessory dwelling units in one single-family zoning district or overlay area
Two star: Have a density bonus in multiple areas in the city; bonus for underground parking
or proximity to transit or multifamily playground space; allow accessory dwelling units
and/or co-housing developments in multiple single-family districts; allow tiny houses (^'400
sq.ft.) on small lots or small (^'350 sq.ft.)apartments
Three star: Create an additional density bonus linked to a transfer of development rights
program that protects agricultural or natural resource land on the fringe of the urban area.
Tie ADUs explicitly into a plan for increasing affordable housing and/or reducing
homelessness.Allow rooming or boarding houses; uncap the number of roommates who
may share a dwelling unit
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details
Density bonuses are allowed in the Medium Density Residential Zoning District(R-3)for providing
underground parking, locating near a transit route, or providing substantial recreation facilities onsite.
Senior and physical disability housing in the R-3 Zoning District may be allowed a density in excess of 12
units per acre or up to 5 stories or 60 feet in height after review by the Planning Commission and
approval by the Council.The Planned Unit Development(PUD) Ordinance allows for increased density.
For more information contact:
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
jzimmerman@ oldenvalleymn.ov
763)-593-8099
BP13—Efficient City Fleets
Action#2—Right-size/down-size the city fleet with the most fuel-efficient vehicles that are of an optimal
size and capacity for their intended functions.
One star:Survey each fleet vehicle by type, MPG and use; implement at least one right-size or
down-size improvement (for example, use of a sedan instead of a pick-up truck for inspection
work, use of a full electric utility vehicle in parks/public works,or one multi-purpose vehicle
instead of two vehicles)
Two star:Adopt a vehicle purchasing policy/practice; right-size all vehicles in one portion of the
city's fleet(for example, police,fire, public works, inspections) and report any vehicle reductions
and improvement in the fleet's average MPG
Three star: Right-size all vehicles in the city's fleet and report vehicle reductions and
improvement in the fleet's average MPG
Golden Vallev Entry
Implementation Details:
Public works staff routinely survey vehicles by department for usage,function,and miles per gallon.
Outcome metrics/measures:
The City has 22 vehicles that are E85 compatible.
For more information contact:
Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager
763-593-3981
btracy@goldenvalleym n.gov
BP13—Efficient City Fleets
Action#3—Phase in no-idling practices, operational and fuel changes, and equipment changes including
electric vehicles,for city or local transit fleets.
One star: Monitor fuel usage and costs on a regular basis. Report data to fleet managers and
users. Implement maintenance schedules that optimize vehicle life and fuel efficiency.Adopt a
no-idling policy/practice or conduct training for more efficient driving.
Two star:Achieve a 1-Star rating and complete one or more of: (a) purchase or lease at least
one highway-usable electric/hybrid-electric vehicle (EV); (b)add vehicles(and fueling stations as
needed) using lower-carbon fuels(ethanol flexfuel,compressed natural gas,straight vegetable
oil, biodiesel above the State-mandated 5%, other advanced biofuels); (c) add other alternative
fuel vehicles
Three star:Achieve a 1-Star rating and add a full-electric vehicle, and/or install a solar-charging
EV station (or purchase renewable electricity for EV charging)
Golden Vallev Entry
Implementation Details:
Staff take a proactive approach and have regular preventative maintenance done at set intervals,
depending on the classification of the vehicles. Staff periodically reviews vehicle fuel usage and costs
and have found that regular oil changes and fuel additives help to optimize the fleet's fuel efficiency and
extend vehicle life.
In 2013, public works staff reviewed its snowplowing zones and routes for streets and sidewalks in order
to optimize fuel and labor efficiencies. In addition,the City purchased GPS (global positioning
system)/AVL(automatic vehicle location)technology and installed it in all snow removal equipment.
These actions have resulted in improved efficiency in operations, and a reduction in fuel usage and the
application of chemicals (salt).
Golden Valley City Council adopted a no-idling policy for City staff in 2008.
Outcome metrics/measures:
The City has 22 vehicles that are E85 compatible.
For more information contact:
Marshall Beugen,Vehicle Maintenance Foreman
763-593-8085
mbeu en@ oldenvallevmn.ov
BP13—Efficient City Fleets
Action#4—Phase in bike,foot or horseback modes for police, inspectors and other city staff.
One star: Police patrols on bike,foot,Segway or horseback
Two star:City inspectors or other staff on bike,foot or horseback
Three star: Report outcome measures resulting from actions: decreased costs, reduced vehicle
miles traveled,fleet reductions,or other metrics
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details:
Bike patrol is primarily used by the Golden Valley Police Department as an outreach tool. Every summer
bike patrol and the Golden Valley Fire Department host weekly events in public parks to strengthen
connections with families in the community. GVPD also offers an annual bike-along where residents can
tour Golden Valley trails with two police officers and learn about bike safety. Bike patrol is also used for
enforcement in parks and on trails and in situations where it's beneficial for officers to be more covert.
Outcome metrics/measures:
In 2015 about 20 residents participated in the annual bike-along.
For more information contact:
Jason Sturgis, Chief of Police
763-593-8059
istur is@ oldenvallevmn.ov
BP15—Sustainable Purchasing
Action#1—Adopt a sustainable purchasing policy or administrative guidelines/practices directing that
the city purchase at least:
a. EnergyStar certified equipment and appliances and
b. Paper containing at least 30%post-consumer recycled content
One star: Have a written policy/guidelines/practices specifying at minimum the purchase of
Energy Star equipment/appliances and recycled-content paper(at least 30%post-consumer).
Two star: Have a formal policy adopted by the city council; note if this includes centralized
purchasing into one office/person.
Three star: For the city's top 10 categories of spend,track the purchases of sustainable
products/services purchased annually compared to non-sustainable products/services
purchased;join with other cities in joint purchasing of environmentally preferable products and
summarize EPP purchases.
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details:
In 2017, new sustainable purchasing guidelines were sent out to all City employees.These guidelines
included specifications for the purchase of EnergyStar and WaterSense certified products, Green Seal,
EcoLogo and/or US EPA Safer Choice cleaning products, and at least 30% recycled-content paper.
For more information contact:
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Directory
763-593-8008
mnevinski@goldenvalleymn.gov
SUSTAINABLE PURCHASING GUIDELINES
Purpose
Purchasing decisions should reflect the City's commitment to sustainability and the protection of human
health and the environment.These specifications will guide the City's efforts to procure environmentally
sustainable products and services.These guidelines are intended to promote the conservation of natural
resources, minimize environmental impacts such as pollution, support strong recycling markets, and
lower overall costs by considering product life cycle costs(operation, maintenance, resource
consumption,disposal,staff time, and labor).While not all of these guidelines will be feasible in every
procurement of goods and services,the City will make an effort to incorporate these preferences to the
maximum extent possible in its procurement decisions.
Guidelines
The following guidelines are to be followed by the City of Golden Valley:
1. Recycled Paper Products and Recycled-Content Products
Per Minnesota Statute 16C.073 and per the Federal Environmental Protection Agency's(EPA)
requirements,the City of Golden Valley will purchase paper products containing the highest
post-consumer content practicable, but no less than 30% recycled-content for copy paper,
letterhead, and envelopes.The City should purchase other products made with recycled
material whenever such products are available, practicable, and financially feasible.
2. Energy Saving Products
All appliances and equipment purchased by the City,for which the US EPA Energy Star
certification is available,will meet Energy Star certification.This includes, but is not limited to,
exhaust fans, heating and cooling systems, office equipment, computers, exit signs, water
heaters,and appliances, such as refrigerators, dishwashers, microwave ovens, light bulbs, and
lighting systems. Light bulbs and lighting systems will be LED or the most efficient option
available at the time.
3. Water Saving Products
All fixtures and products that use water purchased by the City will be WaterSense certified when
such products are available and financially feasible.This includes, but is not limited to, sinks,
toilets, urinals,showerheads, pre-rinse spray valves,and irrigation controllers.
4. Cleaning Products
Cleaning products purchased by the City will meet the Green Seal, EcoLogo, and/or US EPA Safer
Choice cleaning product standards when such products are available, practicable, and perform
to an acceptable standard.
5. Waste Minimization
The City will buy in bulk whenever practicable to reduce packaging. Packaging that is reusable,
recyclable,or compostable is preferred,when suitable uses and programs exist.
Procedure
When purchasing products and services for the City, staff will:
Ensure that specifications support the use of reusable, recycled,or environmentally preferable
products
Evaluate environmentally preferable products to determine the extent to which they may be
used by the department and its contractors
Facilitate data collection on purchases of designated environmentally preferable products by the
department in order to determine the effectiveness of the products and services
Communicate and coordinate bulk purchases between departments in order to better facilitate
cost savings and waste reduction
Use a standard of accepting up to a 10%increased cost for these items as compared to the
standard product model.Authorization from the City Manager may be required for the
purchase.
Responsibility
All City departments are responsible for implementation of these guidelines and to ensure their
respective employees are aware of the City's preference for purchasing environmentally preferable
products. City staff will implement these guidelines in conjunction with the City's normal purchasing
procedure and with consideration of the above price differential.
Definitions
The following terms,as used in this document, shall have the meanings stated:
Environmentally Preferable Products and Services: Defined by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency(US EPA) as products or services that have a lesser or reduced effect on
human health and the environment when compared with competing products or services that
serve the same purpose.This applies to raw materials, manufacturing, packaging,distribution,
use, reuse,operation, maintenance,and disposal.
Energy Star:The U.S. EPA's energy efficiency product labeling program
Water Sense:The U.S. EPA's water efficiency product labeling program
Safer Choice:The U.S. EPA's safe chemical-based product labeling program
Green Seal:An independent, non-profit environmental labeling organization.Green Seal
standards for products and services meet the U.S. EPA's criteria for third-party certifiers.The
Green Seal is a registered certification mark that may appear only on certified products.
Post-consumer Recycled Material: Material that has served its intended use and has been
discarded for disposal or recovery, having completed its life as a consumer item,and is used as a
raw material for new products.
Practicable:Whenever feasible and compatible with State and Federal law,without reducing
safety, quality,or effectiveness.
BP15—Sustainable Purchasing
Action#4—Require purchase of U.S. EPA WaterSense-certified products.
One star: Require that all city purchases of water-using products,and all city development or
renovation, meet WaterSense certification
Two star:Achieve 1 Star AND publicize the City's requirement and encourage citizens and
businesses to purchase WaterSense
Three star:Join EPA WaterSense program; achieve 1 Star AND work with local vendors to stock
and routinely promote WaterSense rated equipment
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details:
In 2017, new sustainable purchasing guidelines were sent out to all City employees.These guidelines
included specifications that all new fixtures and products that use water(including, but not limited to,
sinks,toilets, urinals, showerheads, pre-rinse spray valves,and irrigation controllers)will be WaterSense
certified when such products are available and financially feasible.
For more information contact:
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Directory
763-593-8008
mnevinski@goldenvalleymn.gov
BP19—Surface Water Quality
Action#4—Adopt a shoreland ordinance for all river and lake shoreland areas
One star: Have a shoreland ordinance approved by the DNR or one consistent with state-wide
shoreland standards (MR 6120.2500-06120.3900)
Two star:Adopt the Alternative Shoreland Standards or similar alternatives reviewed and
consistent with recommendations of the DNR Area hydrologist that exceed the minimum
standards of the DNR shoreland rules
Three star: Document 60-75%forested shoreland; achieve 2 Star rating and include one or both
of: (1)a menu of mitigation measures,one or more of which to be attached to shoreland
variances; (2) provisions for restoration of shore impact area and vegetative buffer with
permanent protection for all new shoreland development
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details
The City has a shoreland management ordinance (Section 11.65 of City Code)approved by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.All new shoreland development or alteration requires
protection or restoration of shore impact area including a vegetative buffer. In the case of new
development,the dedication of permanent conservation easements over a significant portion of the
shoreland is required.
For more information contact:
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
763-593-8084
eeckman@ oldenvallevmn.ov
Destriptive links:
http://weblink.ci.olden-vallev.mn.us/Public/DocView.aspx?dbid=2&id=257326&pa e=1&cr=1
BP19—Surface Water Quality
Action#5—Adopt goals to revegetate shoreland and create a local program or outreach effort to help
property owners with revegetation
One star:Collaborate with DNR and others and support/initiate an effort to measure shoreland
status and set goals for needed restoration work and to locally promote DNR revegetation
incentives and technical assistance
Two star:Achieve 1-star and report progress toward meeting goals for restoration of a specific
percentage of shoreland
Three star: Enact a point-of-sale regulation that ensures shoreland revegetation as property is
sold
Golden Vallev Entry
Implementation Details
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC),of which Golden Valley is a member,
established the goal to, "maintain or improve shoreland integrity and implement stream restoration
measures to maintain or enhance ecological functions as well as human health,safety, and welfare" in
its 2015 Watershed Management Plan.This plan also identified the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources shoreland habitat restoration grant program as a state funding source that cities and/or the
BCWMC could obtain to fund shoreland projects (Section 5.2.2.4).
The BCWMC Channel Maintenance Fund can be utilized by private property owners in the member cities
to cover part of the costs of restoring and revegetating shoreland areas along streams.
In the Surface Water chapter of its 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Golden Valley established the goals to
Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and maintain shoreland integrity" and "Improve the
quality of Bassett Creek and City lakes to enhance the aesthetics and recreation opportunities in Golden
Valley."The chapter also includes a water resources implementation program identifying projects that
will improve water quality, potential funding sources,and proposed years of implementation. Several of
these projects have been completed, are ongoing,or are planned.
Outcome metrics/measures:
The City has established over 4 miles of stream bank buffer since 2007.As of 2016,over 30 private
properties had stabilized their own shorelines, 5 with the assistance of the Channel Maintenance Fund.
20 private properties have restrictions regarding vegetation and shorelines established through
conservation easements.
For more information contact:
Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist
763-593-8084
eeckman@ oldenvallevmn.ov
Descriptive Links: http://bassettcreekwmo.or/document/wmp-plans
BP19—Surface Water Quality
Action#6—Implement an existing TMDL implementation plan.
One star:Convene on a regular basis all entities that have been assigned waste load allocations
for point and non-point source pollution sources)to coordinate action on reducing waste loads
Two star:Work with all entities to jointly raise money,fund work and measure progress
Three star:Schedule work aimed at completing the TMDL plan within 10 years
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details:
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC),of which Golden Valley is a member,
has a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan for Sweeney Lake.The Main Stem of Bassett Creek was
included in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)'s Upper Mississippi River Bacteria TMDL and
Protection Plan which was approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in 2014 and
addresses the impairment due to fecal coliform.TMDL plans are carried out through the BCWMC's and
individual member cities' Capital Improvement Programs and Surface Water Management Plans.
All members of the BCWMC meet on a monthly basis to make sure TMDL implementation plans are
being carried out. Golden Valley residents provide funding for BCWMC projects, including TMDL plans,
through taxes collected by Hennepin County.
Outcome metrics/measures:
In 2014,as a result of the coordinated efforts of the BCWMC,the City of Golden Valley,the City of
Minneapolis, Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board, and the MPCA to implement a TMDL plan,Wirth
Lake was delisted from the Impaired Waters List.
Descriptive Links:
Main Stem Basset Creek: http://www.bassettcreekwmo.or/lakes-streams/main-stem-bassett-creek
For More Information Contact:
Jeff Oliver, City Engineer
763-593-8034
joliver@ oldenvallevmn.ov
Partners:
Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
BP23—Local Air Quality
Action#2—Regulate outdoor wood burning, using model ordinance language, performance standards
and bans as appropriate,for at least one of the following:
a. Recreational burning
b. Outdoor wood boilers
One star: Regulate outdoor wood burning using nuisance ordinance language, referencing the
MN Fire Code
Two star: Regulate outdoor wood boilers using the MPCA model zoning language
Three star: Ban (on a permanent or interim basis)or enforce performance standards for specific
types of burning
Golden Vallev Entry
Implementation Details
Golden Valley has a City ordinance that regulates recreational fires(Section 10.23 of City Code) and
provides guidance for recreational burning on the City website.
Descriptive links:
http://weblink.ci.olden-vallev.mn.us/Public/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=470694&pa e=1&cr=1
For more information contact:
lason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
jzimmerman@ oldenvalleymn.ov
763-593-8099
BP23—Local Air Quality
Action#3—Conduct one or more policy or education/behavior change campaigns on the topics below
and document:
a. Decreased vehicle idling in specific locations
b. Participation in the Air Aware Employers program
c. Adoption of a smoking-free policy at one or more multi-unit housing buildings, private or public
d. Replacement of gasoline-powered equipment with lower polluting equipment
e. Increased sales by retail stores of low and no-VOC household products
One star: Participate in the Air Aware Employers program;OR report the dimensions of and
results from your vehicle-idling actions:for example, no idling in the downtown core. Report no-
idling policies for city and school fleets in best practice 13 and for business fleets under 23.4
Two star:Adopt a non-smoking ordinance for parks; report on your campaign with retail stores
OR gasoline-replacement efforts
Three star: Report on the reach of your smoking-free policy
Golden Vallev Entry
Implementation Details:
Golden Valley adopted a Smoke Free Environment ordinance (Section 10.67 of City Code) in 2005.The
ordinance prohibits smoking in: both indoor and outdoor dining areas of liquor and food establishments,
within 25 feet of any outdoor dining area at any liquor or food establishment, public places, places of
work, within 25 feet of entrances, exits, open windows, and ventilation intakes of public places and
places of work,and in public parks and recreation facilities.
The City adopted a no-idling policy for City staff in 2008.
For more information contact:
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
izimmerman@ oldenvallevmn.ov
763-593-8099
Descriptive Links:
http://weblink.ci.olden-vallev.mn.us/Public/2/doc/493862/Pagel.aspx
BP25—Green Business Development
Action#4—Strengthen value-added businesses utilizing local waste products and renting
products/services
One star:These are businesses that reuse, remanufacture and recycle local material and
arbitrage surplus capacity of existing service/product businesses.
Two star:City BR&E (business retention and expansion) efforts explicitly assist value-added
businesses.
Three star: Provide explicit incentives such as loans/grants to such businesses
Golden Vallev Entrv
Implementation Details
The City annually hosts Mighty Tidy Day to provide residents with a monitored site to dispose of items
that cannot be donated.To put on this event,the City contracts with several local,value-added
businesses including Shred-N-Go,Tech Dump,and Better Futures.
The City regularly contracts with companies that use recycled materials in street re-construction
projects.The City has permitted development projects that recycled asphalt,concrete,and other
building materials for reuse on their site.
Woody organic material and yard waste collected by the Public Works Department is taken to the
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Recycling Facility that turns this waste into compost and
compost blends for retail and wholesale purchase.
For more information contact:
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Directory
763-593-8008
mnevinski@ oldenvallevmn.ov
Descriptive Links:
https://shakopeedakota.org/enterprises/or anics-recyclin-facilitv/
PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES—June 2017
NATURAL RESOURCES
Forestry
The City is working with Tree Trust again in 2017.The 2017 project is located in the Pennsylvania Woods
Nature Area.Work items include: restoring the existing natural surface trails, removal of buckthorn and
volunteer vegetation, planting and mulching around new shrubs, maintaining benches, installing split
rail fence,and improving areas experiencing erosion.
Community Engagement
A resident has volunteered to remove the invasive species Garlic Mustard from several parks and nature
areas in the City.This work is having a direct positive impact on the ecology and aesthetics within the
parks and is helping the City fulfill its natural resources management goals. Hannah Garry has been
working with the volunteer as part of her GreenCorps service hours.
RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY PLAN
After receiving feedback from the Environmental Commission at its May meeting, staff worked with the
consultant to revise the objectives and policies of the Resilience and Sustainability Plan and create draft
implementation strategies to achieve each goal.Staff will look for additional feedback from the
Environmental Commission on a draft of the entire plan at the July meeting. Once completed the plan
will be included as a chapter in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
COMMUNICATIONS TOPICS
City Website Updates
The Sustainability and Resilience webpage has been updated with links to information about GreenStep
Cities, Natural Resources,Waste and Recycling, Floodplain Management, and the Environmental
Commission.A link to the Environmental Commission's 2017 Annual Report has been added to their
webpage. Planned updates include adding a webpage about Solar and a webpage about Pollinators
which will both be accessible from the Sustainability webpage.
WATER RESOURCES
2016 Bassett Creek Native Vegetation Project-Trees and shrubs were planted last week,this
completes the planting phase of the project. The contractor will continue to monitor and manage the
vegetation through the end of 2018.
Stormwater Program Public Hearing
Staff presented details of the City's storm water pollution prevention program at the June 20,2017 City
Council meeting. Holding an annual public meeting and taking public comment is a requirement of the
City's permit with MPCA.The City's permit with MPCA includes six minimum control measures:
1.Public Education and Outreach
2.Public Involvement and Participation
3.Illicit Discharge, Detection, and Elimination
4.Construction Site Runoff Control
5.Post Construction Runoff Control
6.Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping
MPCA Audit
MPCA staff visited the City on May 31, 2017 to complete an audit on portions of the City's storm water
pollution prevention program.The audit covered Public Education and Outreach and Public
Participation/Involvement.The City's program was found to be compliant.The full report is attached.
PLANNING AND ZONING AND DEVELOPMENTS
t
Food Trucks in Residential Areas (Zoning Code Text Amendment)—The Planning Commission voted to
recommend approval (6-0) of allowing food trucks in residential areas for private events such as weddings
or graduation parties at the May 22 meeting. The City Council will consider this Zoning Text Amendment
on June 20.
Places of Assembly (Zoning Code Text Amendment)—Consider modifications to the Zoning Code to
better comply with the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), amending where
and how religious uses can locate. Scheduled for discussion on June 12.
Skylab Glass Arts–8838 7t''Ave S (Conditional Use Permit)—CUP to allow accessory retail sales and small
class instruction at a new glass blowing facility located in a Light Industrial Zoning District. Scheduled for a
public hearing on June 26.
2040 Comprehensive Plan—The fourth Comp Plan Conversation will take place on June 12. A mini Open
House focusing on Water Resources will be held from 6 to 6:30 pm in the Council Conference Room. At
6:30 pm, staff and consultants will discuss topics in the proposed Water Resources chapter with the
Planning Commission. Other Commissioners and members of the public are welcome to attend this 60
minute-long session.
For a complete schedule of all of the Comp Plan Conversations planned in 2017, visit the Community
Engagement section of the 2040 Comp Plan web site: bit.ly/GV2040CompPlan.
1401 Winnetka Ave N–Zoning Compliance Update—The shed located at the back of the property has
been modified to come into compliance with the limitations on height for accessory structures in the
Single Family Residential Zoning District.
Additional information about current development projects may be found on the c t r E usite.
Minnesota Pollution Cc ntrol Agencyfl .%
520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,Min esota 55755-4194 651-29b-6300
80{-657-38tu1 651-282-5332 TTY j w ww.pcastat.mrr.us EqualOpportunityFmplr yer
June 5, 2017
Thomas Hoffman
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
RE: City of Golden Valley Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)6eneral Permit No. MNR040000—
Audit Report
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
On May 31, 2017,the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) conducted an audit of the City of Golden
Valley's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).The purpose of the audit was to assess your
overall success in meeting the conditions and requirements contained within the MS4 Permit (Permit)as well
as the overall performance of your SWPPP.
We have evaluated the information obtained during the audit and have prepared a final report.The final
report of the MPCA's audit findings is enclosed.The report outlines findings specific to individual Permit
requirements and Minimum Control Measures (MCMs). Each of the report's findings has been characterized as
compliant(C), noncompliant(N), not inspected (NI)or not applicable(NA).
A compliant finding indicates that your SWPPP is fulfilling the requirement identified in the Permit.A
noncompliant finding indicates your SWPPP is not satisfying the requirement in the Permit and required
corrective actions are outlined to address the noncompliance.There were not any noncompliant findings
identified as part of this audit.
If you believe there are findings that do not accurately reflect the City of Golden Valley's stormwater program,
provide a response which includes detailed information to support your position within 14 days of your receipt
of the audit report.
Please feel free to contact me at 651-757-2384 with any questions.
Sincerely,
L yvh.Pi %lil'!'WAr lvh.
This document has been electronically signed.
Anne Gelbmann
Principal Planner
St. Paul Office
Municipal Division
Enclosure
cc: Eric Eckman,City of Golden Vally Public Works Specialist
File]
wq-strm4-29c • 4/19/17 • Doc Type: SWPPP Audit Report
Minnesota Pollution M54, QUd t RepOrt
Control Agency
Zo afayet e Road t+aorth
Municipal Separate Storm
st,Pau,MN 55155-4194 Sewer Systems (MS4) Program
Doc Type: Permit Approval
Audit information
MS4 permittee: City of Golden Valley Date of audit(mm/dd/yyyy): 5/31/17
Permittee contact name: Thomas Hoffman MPCA evaluator: Anne Gelbmann
Contact title: Water Resource Specialist Evaluator title: Principal Planner
Contact phone: 763-593-8044 Evaluator phone: 651-307-4277
Contact email: thoffman@goldenvalleymn.gov Evaluator email: anne.gelbmann@state.mn.us
Audit participants
Name Title Phone Email
Tom Hoffman Water Resources S ecialist 763-593-8044 thoffman oldenvalle mn. ov
Eric Eckman Public Works S ecialist 763-593-8084 eeckman olvenvalle mn. ov
Anne Gelbmann Princi al Planner 651-757-2384 Anne. elbmann state.mn.us
M54 program area - MCM* 1 public education and outreach (Part III.D.1.)
C=Com liant N=Noncom liant NI=Not ins ected NA=Not A licable C N NI NA
1. Distributed educational materials or conducted equivalent outreach activities on stormwater-related issue(s)of
hi h riorit .
2. Distributed materials or conducted e uivalent outreach activities on illicit dischar e reco nition and re ortin .
3. Implementation plan that consists of the followin : 9.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
a. Tar et audience s , includin measurable oals for each audience. 9.........................................................................................9.....................................................9.........................................................................................................................................................
b. Res onsible erson s in char e of overall lan im lementation. P...............................P...........................).....................................................................P.........................P............................................... .............. . .
c. Specific activities and schedules to reach measurable oals for each tar et audience. 9.................................................................9..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
d. A description of any coordination with and/or use of other stormwater education and outreach
pro rams bein conducted b other entities, if a licable. 9......................................9.....................................................Y.......................................................................P.P............................................................................................................................
e. Annual evaluation to measure the extent to which measurable goals for each target audience are ' ; ; ;
attained.
4. Documentation of the followin information: 9...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
a: A description of an stormwater-related issues. Y.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
b. An im lementation lan. P..................................................P..................................................................................
c. Any modifications made to the ro ram as a result of the annual evaluation. P.........9................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ....................
d: Activities held, includin dates,to reach measurable goals.
e. Quantities and descri tions of educational materials distributed, includin dates distributed.
MCM=Minimum Control Measure
Comments:
Great job on your public education and outreach materials and coordination. You are doing a great job in integrating stormwater
into other parts of your City!
Recommended actions:
None
Required corrective actions:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-296 • 4/6/16 Page i of 5
None
MS4 program area - MCM 2 public participation/involvement (Part III.D.2.)
C=Compliant N=Noncom liant NI=Not inspected NA=Not Applicable C N NI NA
1. Provide a minimum of one opportunity each year for the public to provide input on the adequacy of the
SWPPP.
2. Provide access to the SWPPP Document,Annual Reports,and other documentation for public review upon
re uest.
3. Consider oral statements and written comments b the ublic re ardin the SWPPP.
4. Documentation of the followin_information..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
a. All relevant written in ut submitted b ersons re ardin the SWPPP. P.........................................................Y...P......................................9.....................................................................................................
b. All responses from the permittee to written input received regarding the SWPPP, including any
modifications made to the SWPPP as a result of written in ut received. P....................................................................................................................................................
c. Date s)and location s of events held for ur oses of com liance with this re uirement. P.........P..................................................P.......................................................................... .9...................................................................................................................................................................................
d. Notices provided to the public of any events scheduled to meet this requirement, including any
electronic corres ondence.
Comments:
Recommended actions:
None
Required corrective actions:
None
MS4 program area - MCM 3 illicit discharge detection and elimination (Part III.D.3.)
C=Compliant N=Noncompliant NI=Not ins ected NA=Not Applicable C N NI NA
1. Completed a storm sewer system map showing the location the following:
a. The permittee's entire small MS4 as a goal,but at a minimum,all pipes 12 inches or greater in diameter,
including stormwater flow direction in those i es.P...P........................... ......... .......
b. OutFalls, including a unique identification(ID)number assigned by the permittee,and an associated
eographic coordinate.
c..........._Structural stormwater BMPs that are...part of the...permittee's small MS4......................................................................................................................................................._.........._........_0.....
d. All receivin waters.
2. Regulatory mechanism(s)that effectively prohibits non-stormwater discharges into the small MS4, except
those non-stormwater dischar es authorized under Part 1.B.1.
3. Incor oration of illicit dischar e detection into all maintenance and ins ection activities.
4. Trainin of all field staff in illicit dischar e reco nition and re ortin illicit dischar es for further investi ation
5. Identified priority areas likely to have illicit discharges, including at a minimum,evaluating land uses
associated with business/industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been identified in the past,
and areas with stora e or lar e uantities of si nificant materials that could result in an illicit dischar e.
6. Written Enforcement Response Procedures(ERPs)to compel compliance with regulatory mechanism(s)of
this MCM.
7. For timely response to known,sus ected, and re orted illicit dischar es:P.....................................................P........................................................................9...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
a. Procedures for investi atin , locatin , and eliminatin the source of illicit dischar es. 9................9.............................._9.............................................................9...........................................................................................................9................................................................................. ..
b. Procedures for res ondin to s ills. P.........................................P............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ..
c. Procedures include the immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty
Officer if the source of the illicit dischar e is a s ill or leak as defined in Minn.Stat. 115.061.
8. Documentation of the following information:
a. Date(s)and location(s)of illicit discharge inspections conducted
b. Reports of alleged illicit discharges received, including date(s)of the report(s),and any follow-up ; ; ; ;
action(s)taken
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-29b • 4/6/16 Page 2 of 5
c. Date(s)of discovery of all illicit discharges
d. Identification of outfalls,or other areas,where illicit discharges have been discovered
e. Sources includin a descri tion and the res onsible art of illicit dischar es if known
C=Compliant N=Noncompliant NI=Not inspected NA=Not A licable C N NI NA
f. Action(s)taken, including dates,to address discovered illicit discharges
g. Enforcement conducted by the permittee pursuant to the ERPs shall be documented. Documentation
shall include,at a minimum,the following information:
1) Name of the person responsible for violating the terms and conditions of the permittee's regulatory ; ; ; '
mechanism(s)
2) Date(s)and location(s)of the observed violation(s)
3) _Description of the violation s ,includin reference s to relevant re ulato mechanism s9 .... ... ...).................. . . 9......... rY .........C.................................................................................................................................
4) Corrective action(s)(including completion schedule)issued by the permittee
5) Date(s)and type(s)of enforcement used to compel compliance(e.g.,written notice,citation,stop ; ; : ;
work order,withholding of local authorizations,etc.)
6)........._Referrals to other regulatory_organizations_(if any)..............................................................
7 Date s violation s resolved
Comments:
Recommended actions:
Required corrective actions:
MS4 program area - MCM 4 construction site stormwater runoff control (Part III.D.4.)
C=Com liant N=Noncom liant NI=Not ins ected NA=Not A licable C N NI NA
1. A regulatory mechanism(s)that establishes requirements for erosion and sediment controls and waste
controls that is at least as stringent as the Construction Stormwater General Permit.
Note.lf marked Noncom liant N,see A ndix A at the end of this document for details.
2. Written site plan review procedures to ensure compliance with requirements of regulatory mechanism(s).
Procedures include notification to owners and operators proposing construction activity of the need to apply
for and obtain covera e under the Construction Stormwater General Permit.
3. Written procedures for site inspections to determine compliance with the requirements of the regulatory
mechanism s .
4. Written Enforcement Response Procedures(ERPs)to compel compliance with regulatory mechanism(s)of
this MCM.
5. Written rocedures for recei t and consideration of re orts of noncom liance or other information.
6. Documentation of the following...information...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
a. For each site plan review—The project name, location,total acreage to be disturbed,owner,and
I operator of the proposed construction activity, and any stormwater related comments and supporting , ,
documentation used by the permittee to determine project approval or denial.
b. For each site inspection—Inspection checklists or other written means used to document site
inspections.j
a Enforcement conducted by the permittee pursuant to the ERPs shall be documented. Documentation I '
shall include,at a minimum,the following information: 1
1) Name of the person responsible for violating the terms and conditions of the permittee's
regulatory mechanism(s) y
2) Date(s)and location(s)of the observed violation(s)
3) Description of the violation(s), including reference(s)to relevant re ulatory mechanism(s)
4) Corrective action(s)(including completion schedule_issued by the permittee
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-29b • 4/6/16 Page 3 of 5
5) Date(s)and type(s)of enforcement used to compel compliance(e.g.,written notice,citation,stop ;
work order,withholding of local authorizations,etc.)
6) Referrals to other regulatory or anizations(if any)_
7 Date s violation s resolved I :
Comments:
Recommended actions:
Required corrective actions:
MS4 program area - MCM 5 post-construction stormwater management (Part III.D.5.)
C=Compliant N=Noncompliant NI=Not ins ected NA=Not Applicable C N NI NA
1. Regulatory mechanism(s)that incorporates all of the requirements of Part III.D.5.a.
Note:If marked Noncom liant N,see A ndix B at the end of this document for details.
2. Written procedures for site plan reviews prior to the start of construction activity to ensure compliance with
re uirements of the re ulato mechanism s .
3. Written Enforcement Response Procedures(ERPs)to compel compliance with regulatory mechanism(s)of
this MCM.
4. Documentation of the following information:
i
a. Any supporting documentation used by the permittee to determine compliance with its regulatory I ;
mechanism or ordinance, including the project name, location, owner and operator of the construction
activity, any checklists used for conducting site plan review,and any calculations used to determine ;
Icompliance. _
1
b. All supporting documentation associated with mitigation projects authorized by the permittee.
c. Payments received and used for mit ation purposes.
d. All legal mechanisms drafted for the long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs, including I I
date(s of the agreement s and name s of all responsible arties involved.P .........
e. Enforcement conducted by the permittee pursuant to the ERPs shall be documented. Documentation :
shall include,at a minimum,the followin information:9......................................................................................................................................................................................... ..
1) Name of the person responsible for violating the terms and conditions of the permittee's regulatory : ;
mechanism(s .
2 Date(s and location s of the observed violation s .
3 Descri tion of the violation s , includin reference s to relevant re ulato mechanism s . P..............................................................................)...................................9......................................._....)..........................................................................!X....................................................).............................................................................................................................
4 Corrective action s includin com letion schedule issued b the ermittee. 1._..............................9....................P...........................................................)....................................Y.................P...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
5) Date(s)and type(s)of enforcement used to compel compliance(e.g.,written notice,citation,stop . + ; .
work order,withholdin of local authorizations,etc. .9..................................................................................................
6 Referrals to other re ulato or anizations if an . 9.....................rY..........9............................................................Y)...................................................................................................................................................................................................._:.................._:.................._:...................:....................
7 Date s violation s resolved.
Comments:
Recommended actions:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-29b • 4/6/16 Page 4 of 5
Required corrective actions:
MS4 program area - MCM 6 pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
Part III.D.6.)
C=Compliant N=Noncom liant NI=Not ins ected NA=Not Applicable C N NI NA
1. Facilities inventory of permittee owned/operated facilities that contribute pollutants to stormwater
dischar es.
2. Development and implementation of BMPs for inventoried facilities and municipal operations,such as
those described in Part III.D.6.b. 2 a — I .
3. Development and implementation of BMPs for stormwater discharges that may affect Source Water
Protection Areas.
4. Procedures and a schedule for determining Total Suspended Solids(TSS)and Total Phosphorus(TP)
treatment effectiveness of all ermittee owned/o erated stormwater onds.
5. Annual ins ections of all structural stormwater BMPs.
6. At least one ins ection of all outfalls and onds rior to the ex iration of the Permit.
7. Quarterl ins ections of all stock iles,stora e,and material handlin areas.
8. Repairs, replacement,or maintenance activities for structural stormwater BMPs based on inspection
findin s.
9. Employee training program commensurate with employee's job duties and addresses the importance of
protecting water quality. Includes a schedule that establishes initial training for new and/or seasonal
employees,and recurring training intervals for existing employees to address changes in procedures,
ractices,techni ues,or re uirements.
10. Documentation of the followin information:
a. Date s and descri tion of findin s of all ins ections conducted in accordance with Part III.D.6.e. P................................................9........................................P...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
b. An ad'ustments to ins ection fre uenc as authorized under Part III.D.6.e. 1 . Y...........1...........................................................P..................................._9...................Y......................................................................................................................................C.....)..........................................................................................................................................................................................
c. A descri tion of maintenance conducted, includin dates,as a result of ins ection findin s. P_...........................................................................................................................................................9.............................................................................................P...............................................9..............................................................................................................................................
d. Pond sediment excavation and removal activities, including:
1) The unique ID number of each stormwater pond from which sediment is removed.
2) The volume of sediment removed from each stormwater pond.
3) Results from any testing of sediment from each removal activity.
4) Location(s)of final disposal of sediment from each stormwater pond.
e. Employee stormwater management training events,including a list of topics covered, names of
em lo ees in attendance,and date of each event.
Comments:
Recommended actions:
Required corrective actions:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-T9b • 4/6/16 Paqe 5 of 5