The URL can be used to link to this page

04-02-19 CC Agenda Packet (entire) REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order A. Pledge of Allegiance Pages B. Roll Call C. Proclamation for the 50th Anniversary of the Golden Valley Federated Women's Club 3‐4 2. Additions and Corrections to Agenda 3. Consent Agenda Approval of Consent Agenda ‐ All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes: 1. City Council Meeting – March 19, 2019 5‐9 B. Approval of City Check Register 10 C. Licenses: 1. General Business License – Amusement Devices 11 2. Temporary Liquor License – 2019 Minneapolis Arbor Day – Theodore Wirth Park 12 3. On‐Sale Wine and 3.2 Malt Liquor License – JLD Group 13 D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission – March 11, 2019 14‐20 2. Board of Zoning Appeals – February 26, 2019 21‐24 3. Open Space & Recreation Commission – November 26, 2018 25‐26 4. Environmental Commission – February 25, 2019 27‐29 5. Human Rights Commission – February 26, 2019 30‐31 6. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission – February 21, 2019 32‐39 E. Bids and Quotes: 1. Award Contract for 2019 Crack Sealing Project No. 19‐04 40‐47 2. Approve Purchase of Module for Water Meter Reading System Upgrade 48 F. Acceptance of Donation for Upgrades for Isaacson Park 19‐25 49‐50 G. Approve Purchase of Utilities Inspection Televising Equipment 51‐53 H. Authorize Contract Extension for the 2019 Spring Brush Pick‐Up Program 54‐55 4. Public Hearing A. Public Hearing – Ordinance #560 – Approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 – 8043 Lewis Road 56‐74 5. Old Business Apr 2, 2019 – 6:30 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting Apr 2, 2019 – 6:30 pm 2 6. New Business All Ordinances listed under this heading are eligible for public input. A. First Consideration – Ordinance #661 – Amendment to the City Code for the Addition of New Micromobility Sharing Operations Section and Amending the Master Fee Schedule 75‐92 B. Second Consideration – Ordinance #659 – Modifications to Right of Way Management Ordinance to address Wireless Facility Aesthetics 93‐116 C. Second Consideration – Ordinance #658 – Amendment to the 2019 Master Fee Schedule for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care Fee 117‐118 D. Review of Council Calendar E. Mayor and Council Communications 7. Adjournment Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 1. C. Proclamation for the 50th Anniversary of the Golden Valley Federated Women’s Club Prepared By Tim Cruikshank, City Manager Summary The Golden Valley Federated Women’s Club is celebrating 50 years of service in the City of Golden Valley and has requested a proclamation recognizing this anniversary. Representatives from the Golden Valley Federated Women’s Club will be in attendance to accept the proclamation. Attachment: • Proclamation for the 50th Anniversary of the Golden Valley Federated Women’s Club (1 page) CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY PROCLAMATION FOR THE GOLDEN VALLEY FEDERATED WOMEN’S CLUB – 50TH ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, the Golden Valley Federated Women's Club (GVFWC) is a local club within the General Federation of Women's Clubs, (GFWC), an international volunteer service organization for women in community service and charted by the US Congress in 1901; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC was established as a federated GFWC women's service organization in 1969, and is celebrating its 50th anniversary in 2019; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC has donated over $250,000 to over 20 community service organizations, such as Crisis Nursery, Toys for Tots, Courage Center, Dinner at Your Door, PRISM, Humane Society, Tree House, Can Do Canines, Ronald McDonald House; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC donates to city government departments and activities such as the teen center at Brookview, the Youth Aiding Senior Chore Maintenance program, the Fire Department (oxygen resuscitator), the Police Department (defibrillators), and the Park and Recreation Department Music in the Park program, the electronic sign and annual scholarships for Golden Valley high school seniors; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC decorated and furnished a room for Home Free Shelter and have continued to support them by providing donated items as part of the GFWC's nation- wide Domestic Violence Project; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC has also donated over 100,000 hours by participating in fund raising projects, Golden Valley Days, Friends of the Library projects and programs of the School District, Golden Valley Historical Society, and community churches; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC established a city-wide recycling project, which earned the club a first place Award in the GFWC of Minnesota's Conservation Contest; and WHEREAS, the GVFWC donated funds and helped to landscape at the Golden Valley Library with plantings and a bridge and adopted Medley Park for five years; and WHEREAS the GVFWC participated in GFWC nationwide projects such as Operation Smile, Save the Children's "Caps to the Capitol" campaign, Katrina Disaster Relief fund, Sew Much Comfort, Easter Seals/Goodwill, and March of Dimes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Golden Valley hereby recognizes the Golden Valley Federated Women's Club on its 50th Anniversary and asks all residents to join in celebrating its many accomplishments and contributions to our community and country on April 9, 2019, when the club is hosting the East Central District Convention of the GFWC of MN, in Golden Valley. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the great seal of the City of Golden Valley to be affixed this 2nd day of April, 2019. __________________________ Shepard M. Harris, Mayor REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm by Mayor Harris. 1A.Pledge of Allegiance 1B.Roll Call Present:Mayor Shep Harris,Council Members Joanie Clausen,Larry Fonnest,Gillian Rosenquist and Steve Schmidgall Staff present:City Manager Cruikshank,City Attorney Cisneros and City Clerk Luedke 2.Additions and Corrections to Agenda MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall,seconded by Council Member Clausen to approve the agenda of March 19,2019,as revised:replacement of pages for Item 3C2 General Business Licenses Refuse and Recycling to include an additional licensee and the motion carried. 3.Approval of Consent Agenda MOTION made by Council Member Clausen,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the consent agenda of March 19,2019,as revised:removal of 3C2 General Business Licenses Refuse and Recycling and 3H Authorize an agreement for the Curbside Textile Recycling Contract and the motion carried. 3A1.Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting March 5,2019. 3B.Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3C.Licenses: 1. Authorize renewal of Amusement Device licenses for the period of April 1,2019, through March 31,2020,as follows:RZMP Corporation and Theisen Vending Company. 2. Authorize renewal of Refuse and Recycling Vehicles 3. Authorize renewal of Gas Station and Gas Dispenser licenses for a period of April 1, 2019,through March 31,2020,as follows:Linn Retail Centers,Inc.,Mainline Transportation,Inc.,Jim Lupient Oldsmobile,Feist Automotive,Holiday Stationstores, Inc.,Speedway 4443 4497,Morrie’s Cadillac SAAB,Gregg and Jim’s Service,Inc., Freddie’s Petroleum,Inc.,General Mills,Regency Hospital,Golden Valley Country Club and Theodore Wirth Par 3. 4. Receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for Children’s Hospital Association. 5. Receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for Cancer Legal Care. Mar 19,2019 6:30 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Mar 19,2019 6:30 pm 2 3.Approval of Consent Agenda continued 3D.Minutes of the Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission February 25,2019 2. Special Human Rights Commission January 10,2019 3. Rising TIDES Task Force January 15,2019 4. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission January 17,2019 5. Joint Water Commission January 2,2019 3E1.Approve purchase of 2019 Ford F 150 Crew Cab Pickup truck from Midway Ford in the amount of 34,947.92. 3F.Authorize a contract with GMH Asphalt Corporation,in the amount of 5,137,716.25 for the base bid plus alternate bid B for the construction of the 2019 PMP 4,761,535.99) and Meadowbrook School Turn Lane Improvements 376,180.26),City Improvement Project No.19 01 and a contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson,Inc.for observation, construction staking,and engineering services on the 2019 PMP,not to exceed 263,500. 3G.Adopt Resolution 19 22,modifying 2019 General Wages and Salary for Certain Positions and Resolution 19 23,amending the 2019 General Fund Budget for Certain Positions. 3H.Authorize an agreement for the Curbside Textile Recycling Contract with WasteZero. 3I.Adopt Resolution 19 24,supporting submittal of Application to Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for Trail Connection at Laurel and Colorado Avenues. 3.ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3C2.General Business License Renewal of Refuse and Recycling Vehicles Physical Development Director Nevinski answered questions from Council regarding the number of vehicles licensed and the waste hauling study. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to authorize renewal of Refuse and Recycling Vehicles licenses for a period of April 1,2019,through March 31,2020,as follows:Ace Solid Waste,Aspen Waste,Baldy Sanitation,Curbside Waste Inc., Darling Ingredients Inc.,Dick’s Sanitation,Randy’s Environmental Services,Republic Services, Suburban Waste,and Waste Management and the motion carried. 3H.Authorize an Agreement for the Curbside Textile Recycling Contract Council Member Fonnest and Physical Development Director Nevinski provided information on the curbside textile recycling program. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to authorize an agreement for the Curbside Textile Recycling Contract with WasteZero and the motion carried. 4.Public Hearing 5.Old Business City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Mar 19,2019 6:30 pm 3 6.New Business 6A.Approval of Flood Proofing Cost Share Reimbursement Policy City Engineer Oliver presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. The Council thanked staff for their work on the Flood Proofing Cost Share Reimbursement policy. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the City of Golden Valley Flood Proofing Cost Share Reimbursement Policy and the motion carried. 6B.Golden Hills Business Park PUD No.78,Amendment 1 5900 6100 Golden Hills Drive Physical Development Director Nevinski presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the plans for Golden Hills Business Park PUD No.78,Amendment 1,as conditioned by staff,and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the amended PUD Permit and the motion carried. 6C.First Consideration Ordinance 659 Modifications to Right of Way Management Ordinance to address Wireless Facility Aesthetics Mayor Harris recused himself from the discussion and vote because he works with a telecom company.Mayor Pro Tem Clausen presided over the item. City Engineer Oliver presented the staff report and answered questions from Council.City Manager Cruikshank answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall,seconded by Council Member Rosenquist to adopt first consideration,Ordinance 659,amending Sections 24 22,24 28,24 30 and 24 43,and adopting a new section 24 52 Wireless Aesthetic Standards.Upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of:Clausen,Fonnest,Rosenquist and Schmidgall,the following abstained: Harris,the following voted against:none and the motion carried. 6D.Second Consideration Ordinance 656 Therapeutic Massage Licensing,Permitting and Regulation City Attorney Cisneros presented the staff report and answered questions from Council.City Manager Cruikshank answered questions from Council. Mr.Kevin Seeger,owner of Golden Valley Massage Envy,said he appreciates the opportunity to speak to the Council regarding the purposed ordinance.He said with the exception of the sections on the minor restrictions and the ineligible massage enterprise license,he felt the Ordinance looks very thorough.He provided information on his business and comments on the ordinance sections regarding the requirements for minors and ineligible massage enterprise licenses.He answered questions from Council. City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Mar 19,2019 6:30 pm 4 6D.Second Consideration Ordinance 656 Therapeutic Massage Licensing continued There was Council discussion regarding the purposed changes to the Therapeutic Massage Licensing,Permitting and Regulation Ordinance. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest,seconded by Council Member Rosenquist to amend Ordinance 656,Section 16 241(n)to read No person under the age of 18 shall be permitted to receive massage services at the licensed premises unless authorized in writing by their parent or guardian.If consent is given by a parent or guardian,such consent must be signed in the presence of the Therapeutic Massage Enterprise,”and the motion carried. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall,seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt second consideration,Ordinance 656,repealing in its Entirety Article VIII.Massage Parlors, Sauna,and Other Adult Oriented Services and Adding a New Article VIII.Therapeutic Massage Licensing,Permitting and Regulations.Upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Clausen,Fonnest,Harris,Rosenquist and Schmidgall,the following voted against:none and the motion carried. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen,seconded by Council Member Fonnest to approve the Summary of Ordinance 656,for Publication based on the finding that the title and summary clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance and the motion carried. 6E.First Consideration Ordinance 658 Amendment to the 2019 Master Fee Schedule adding a Fee for a Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care Finance Director Virnig presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Rosenquist,seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to adopt first consideration Ordinance 658,amending the 2019 Master Fee Schedule adding a Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care fee.Upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of:Clausen,Fonnest,Harris,Rosenquist and Schmidgall,the following voted against:none and the motion carried. 6F.Second Consideration Ordinance 657 Amending Salaries of Mayor and Council Members City Manager Cruikshank presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall,seconded by Council Member Rosenquist to adopt second consideration,Ordinance 657,amending Salaries of Mayor and Council Members. Upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of:Clausen,Harris and Rosenquist,the following voted against:Fonnest and Schmidgall and the motion carried. 6G.Approval of Elected Official Out of State Travel City Manager Cruikshank presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Mar 19,2019 6:30 pm 5 6G.Approval of Elected Official Out of State Travel continued MOTION made by Council Member Clausen,seconded by Council Member Rosenquist to approve reimbursement of requested out of state travel for Mayor Harris and the motion carried. 6H.Review of Council Calendar Some Council Members may attend the State of the City/Golden Valley Business Council/TwinWest event on March 28,2019,from 7:30 to 9 am in the Council Chambers. Some Council Members may attend the Medley Park Neighborhood Public meeting on April 2, 2019,at 6 pm at Brookview,316 Brookview Parkway. The next City Council Meeting will be held on April 2,2019,at 6:30 pm. Some Council Members may attend the 25th Annual Run the Valley on April 13,2019,starting at 7:45 am at Brookview,316 Brookview Parkway. 6I.Mayor and Council Communication Mayor Harris stated he received letters from two different students.One was regarding garbage hauling and the other was concerns on wild turkeys that he wanted to share with the Council.He also provided information on a Blue Line Coalition meeting that he,Council Member Clausen,and City Manager Cruikshank attended with the new Met Council Chair regarding the METRO Blue Line.Council Member Clausen and City Manager Cruikshank provided additional information on the meeting. 7.Adjourn MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall,seconded by Council Member Clausen and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:31 pm. Shepard M.Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A.Luedke,City Clerk Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. B. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments Document is located on city website at the following location: http://weblink.ci.golden- valley.mn.us/Public/Browse.aspx?startid=717279&dbid=2. The check register for approval: o 03/22/2019 Check Register Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. C. 1. General Business Licenses - Amusement Devices Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary The following establishment has applied for renewal of their amusement device license for the 2019-2020 license term. The applicants have met City Code requirements for the renewal of their license and staff is recommending approval. License No. Applicant License Type Fee 10994 American Amusement 4 Amusement Devices $60 2100 West 96th Street at 6400 Wayzata Blvd Recommended Action Motion to authorize the renewal of the above amusement device license for a period of April 1, 2019 through March 31, 2020. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. C. 2. Temporary On-Sale Liquor License – Brewing a Better Forest, Inc. Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary The Brewing a Better Forest organization, 3800 Bryant Avenue South, Minneapolis has applied for a temporary on-sale liquor license for Friday, April 26, 2019, from 4 to 8 pm for the 2019 Minneapolis Arbor Day event located at Theodore Wirth Park, 2900 Glenwood Avenue. The City Code does provide for temporary sales of liquor with Council approval. Also, required is a certificate of liquor liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured in the amount of 1,000,000. The Brewing a Better Forest organization has provided this certificate for their event. Recommended Action Motion to approve a temporary on-sale liquor license for the Brewing a Better Forest organization, 3800 Bryant Avenue South, Minneapolis for the 2019 Minneapolis Arbor Day event to be located at Theodore Wirth Park on April 26, 2019. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. C. 3. On-Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License – JLD Group Prepared By Kris Luedke, City Clerk Summary JLD Group, LLC dba JLD Group has submitted an application for an On-Sale Wine (including strong beer) and 3.2 % Malt Liquor License. JLD Group will be in the Wirth Chalet located at 1301 Theodore Wirth Parkway which is the former location of Olivia’s Organic Café & Event Center. The City Attorney has reviewed the application, and recommended approval so long as the applicant provides an updated liability insurance certificate. The Golden Valley Police Department has conducted background investigation and recommends approval of the license. Recommended Action Motion to approve the issuance of an On-Sale Wine (including strong beer) and 3.2 % Malt Liquor License to JLD Group, LLC located at 1301 Theodore Wirth Parkway for the period of April 2, 2019, through June 30, 2019, contingent upon receipt of the updated liquor liability insurance certificate. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Vice Chair Johnson. Roll Call Commissioners present: Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Chuck Segelbaum Commissioners absent: Rich Baker, Lauren Pockl Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman Council Liaison present: Steve Schmidgall Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum to approve the agenda of March 11, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried. Approval of Minutes February 25, 2019, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Johnson referred to the fourth paragraph on page seven and said he would like the words “to the I-394 redevelopment area” added to his comment regarding a north/south connection over Highway 55. MOTION made by Blum, seconded by Brookins to approve the February 25, 2019, minutes with the above noted correction and the motion carried. Agenda Item Applicant: American Rug Laundry – CU-165 Address: 8043 Lewis Road Purpose: To allow for carpet and area rug cleaning and restoration in the Light Industrial Zoning District Zimmerman referred to a location map of 8043 Lewis Road and explained the applicant’s request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a laundry which would consist of rug and carpet cleaning and restoration in a Light Industrial Zoning District. He stated that the existing building would be maintained and that only internal modifications would be made. He stated that there will be no direct service of customers and that all rugs will be brought from off-site. The hours of operation would be 7 am to 5 pm Monday-Friday and 4 pm to 8 pm on Saturdays and Sundays and that they will have six employees and three company trucks or vans stored on-site for transporting rugs. Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 2 Zimmerman stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit as it meets all of the factors of evaluation outlined in the City Code. Segelbaum asked for clarification on why the proposed use is Conditional. Zimmerman stated that laundries are one of the conditional uses listed in the Zoning Code for the Light Industrial Zoning District. He said he believes it was most likely put there because typical laundries have more customers and traffic. Segelbaum noted that Bassett Creek is directly behind this property and asked if there is anything the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) requires with this proposal. Zimmerman stated that staff has talked to the applicant about their cleaning processes and they have said they don’t use anything toxic. He added that the drains from this building don’t flow into the creek and that over time in the future the BCWMC might want to work with this property owner to provide more access to the creek. Segelbaum asked if the Commission doesn’t want the applicant to have customers if that is something they should add as a condition or if that is already integrated into the application. Zimmerman said they could have customers. He added that the Conditional Use Permit review process is to see if conditions of approval should be added because there are some impacts caused by the proposed use that aren’t currently there, that would require conditions, then conditions can be placed. Zimmerman noted that if conditions change, the Conditional Use Permit could be amended in the future. Segelbaum asked if there is anywhere on the property that would be appropriate for additional landscaping. Zimmerman stated that there is existing landscaping across the front of the building and that without having any kind of impacts from their proposed use, and the fact that they are not proposing any exterior changes, the City doesn’t have the authority to require additional landscaping. Johnson asked about I/I compliance. Zimmerman stated that the applicant has had an I/I inspection and has provided a deposit for work that will be done in the spring. Johnson asked if the applicant can change their hours of operation in the future. Zimmerman stated that the applicant isn’t limited to the hours they listed in their application and that if their hours of operation become a problem in the future the City can address it. Sam Navab, Applicant, said he is happy to be expanding into Golden Valley. He said his business is one of the longest ongoing establishments in the state and that they are celebrating their 116th year of being in business. He said their current location in Minneapolis is small and that they have been looking for a larger space to use primarily as their cleaning facility. He referred to the question about their cleaning process and said their main cleaning detergent is Dawn dishwashing soap. He said they don’t use any harsh chemicals and are very concerned about the environment. He said he also intends to install solar City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 3 panels on the building. He added that on occasion they may be open to the public for warehouse sales but they don’t anticipate a lot of traffic. Blum asked the applicant what other things they use in their cleaning process. Navab said they use a solvent called “Picrin” that they don’t put into the sewer, they just sometimes spray it on a rug and wipe it off with a towel. He added that they also use vinegar as a cleaning agent. Blum asked how the cleaning supplies would be delivered to the site. Navab said they would be delivered by UPS in boxes. Segelbaum asked the applicant if they’ve ever had chemicals spill in their facility that leaked outside of the facility. Navab said no, not in the 20 years he’s owned the company and he doesn’t think there has ever been any issues or concerns. Segelbaum asked how often they anticipate having warehouse sales. Navab said he would have sales approximately four times per year. Johnson opened the public hearing. Janet Frisch, 7930 Golden Valley Road, said she is concerned about Bassett Creek and that her condo association maintains the wall along the south side of the creek. She said she had an issue where a tree fell from the north side of the creek over to their side of the creek and there were questions about who is responsible for getting rid of that tree. She said there appears to be trees along Bassett Creek behind this property and she wonders how a situation like that, or any kind of damage might be handled with these new owners of the building. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to comment, Johnson closed the public hearing. Segelbaum asked about the requirements regarding sales in the Light Industrial Zoning District. Zimmerman said there is a temporary retail sales permit they would have to apply for and there is a limit to how many sales they can have in a year. Segelbaum asked if people dropping off rugs is considered retail. Zimmerman said no, retail would involve more customers coming and going rather than just an occasional drop off. Blum asked how this would compare to a storage facility. Zimmerman said this would be similar to a storage facility in that there is the occasional coming and going. Blum said he is concerned about the proximity of this use to the creek. He said he has to believe there are other things being used besides Dawn dish soap. He said he was unable in his quick search to find a chemical by the name “Picrin” and he would like a list of all the chemicals being used and he wants to know if any of them are exceptionally harmful to the environment. He said that if there is something City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 4 hazardous being used that would go to their elements of approval or disapproval and the factor of evaluation regarding other effects upon the general public health, safety, and welfare especially with its proximity to Bassett Creek. He said that it seems like it wouldn’t be a gross imposition to ask for a berm or for some landscaping in accordance with the Code if there is a risk. He said that making this decision without knowing about the chemicals doesn’t feel responsible to him. He added that he isn’t saying he doesn’t want this business at this location or in Golden Valley, but they should use reasonable caution and diligence in examining what the applicant is doing and what they are using before they make a final decision. Johnson questioned if there are any licensing or permitting processes that would help address what Commissioner Blum mentioned. Zimmerman said Golden Valley does not issue business licenses and that the Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and is comfortable with it. He said staff could reach out to the BCWSMC to make sure they don’t have any concerns. He said the use of vinegar and Dawn dish soap don’t raise concern from City staff. In terms of the other industrial uses in this area and elsewhere, there is probably not a high risk in this case, but is something they want to be thinking about. Johnson asked if there are disclosures required by the City for chemical holding, containment, or management on industrial properties. Zimmerman said there aren’t any Zoning Code regulations, but there may be Fire regulations or processes. Blum reiterated that he thinks it is reasonable as part of their decision making to ask what chemicals are being used. Segelbaum said he thinks it’s wonderful that this company wants to have a location in Golden Valley and he is in favor of posing this to the BCWSMC in order to have additional information available for the Council. Johnson said another option would be to have the applicant certify whether they have toxic or harmful chemicals as opposed to providing an inventory of what they are using. He questioned if it is unfair to request that from this applicant because the Planning Commission has never asked these types of questions to other applicants. Segelbaum said they have examined things in the past with more scrutiny when they are next to the creek. Blum said there are distinctions that are unique with this proposal. One is the use of chemicals other than water as a primary part of their business, and two is the proximity to the creek which makes the use of chemicals an important question to ask. He said he likes the idea of getting the opinion of the BCWMC. Brookins said he lives downstream cares about the creek as well. He said he is more concerned about the comments made in the public hearing about trees falling and encouraged the applicant to work with the City Forester in regard to creek bank restoration. He said he sees that as a greater value for the City than getting too caught up in what chemicals the applicant uses. He said he is very comfortable with the proposed use and he looks forward to them partnering with the City on the clean-up of the creek and taking some trees down and providing a buffer over time. Zimmerman added that the City has been working on creek restoration in various locations which also includes removing invasive species and stabilizing the banks so they will most likely be working on that with this property owner in the future. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 5 Johnson asked about the liability for any kind of damage from one part of the creek to another. Zimmerman said he is not sure if damage across the creek is different from damage across any other property line, but said he would get clarification from the City Attorney and have information available at the City Council meeting. Johnson summarized that he is hearing from the Commissioners that they would like an analysis or opinion from the BCWMC regarding the chemicals used at this facility and additional information regarding the liability that this property owner has regarding any type of damage on any neighboring properties. Brookins suggested three recommendations. One is that the applicant provide a detailed chemical list, two is obtaining comments from the BCWMC, and three is getting further information regarding potential liability of property owners for any damages. Segelbaum said he is fine with those recommendations without them being requirements or conditions of approval. Blum suggested that the submission of a detailed chemical list be required because without that the other things can’t happen. Segelbaum said presumably the BCWMC will know more about the chemicals and what to look for so he would rather see that recommendation be required. Johnson said the applicant would be able to give the City an inventory list within days, whereas it may delay the applicant to have to wait for the BCWMC to provide comments. MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum to recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 allowing for carpet and area rug cleaning and restoration in the Light Industrial Zoning District at 8043 Lewis Road subject to the findings and recommendations listed below and the motion carried: Findings: 1. Demonstrated Need for Proposed Use: Standard met. The applicant has operated the existing business at a location in Minneapolis for decades and is in need of additional space to manage their products. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: Standard met. The proposed use is not inconsistent with the Light Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan, which allows for laundries and dry cleaners. 3. Effect upon Property Values: Standard met. There are no anticipated modifications to the exterior of the building. 4. Effect on Traffic Flow and Congestion: Standard met. Traffic flows are not anticipated to be substantially different from those that currently exist. Up to six employees would arrive and depart from work and various loads of rugs and carpets would be transported to and from the Minneapolis location in the three company vehicles during regular business hours. 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: Standard met. Due to the nature of the proposed use, there are no anticipated increases in population or density. 6. Compliance with the City’s Mixed-Income Housing Policy: Not applicable. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 6 7. Increase in Noise Levels: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive noise. 8. Generation of Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas, or Vibration: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibrations. 9. Any Increase in Pests or Vermin: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 10. Visual Appearance: Standard met. Although additional landscaping would improve the visual appearance of the property, the absence of planned exterior modifications allows the current non- conforming situation to be legally continued. Future improvements to the parking lot will need to incorporate minimum landscaping standards. 11. Other Effects upon the General Public Health, Safety, and Welfare: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to have any other impacts on the surrounding area. The amount of water used during the cleaning process will not impact the ability of the water supply system to adequately serve surrounding properties Recommendations: 1. A list of chemicals used by the applicant in their operations shall be required and shared with the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission for their comments. 2. More information should be obtained by staff regarding the issue of liability concerning any kind of damage originating from the applicant’s property. Short Recess-- Council Liaison Report Council Member Schmidgall stated that at the last City Council meeting the Fire Chief gave a presentation about the use of City facilities in the event of an emergency. He said the Council also considered amendments to the massage therapy ordinance which was rewritten from an adult business to a health care focus. Schmidgall told the Commission that there is going to be a discussion regarding an HRA levy for developing affordable housing at the March 12 Council/Manager meeting. Zimmerman added that a levy could be used for other HRA functions as well. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings No reports were given. Other Business The Commissioners discussed the Conditional Use Permit approval process and when to require conditions or when they can identify themes the Commission should address when reviewing Conditional Use Permit requests. Zimmerman reminded the Commission that any conditions placed on a Conditional Use Permit have to be related to the impact caused by the proposed use and based on the 11 factors of consideration listed in the Zoning Code. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Mar 11, 2019 – 7 pm 7 Adjourn MOTION by Johnson, seconded by Blum and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:03 pm. Ron Blum, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Chair Nelson. Roll Call Board Members present: Nancy Nelson, Richard Orenstein, David Perich and Planning Commissioners Rich Baker and Andy Johnson Board Members absent: Andy Snope Staff present: Senior Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman Approval of Minutes MOTION made by Perich, seconded by Orenstein to approve the minutes of January 22, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried. Member Nelson and Commissioner Baker abstained. Agenda Item 106 France Avenue South Scott Hagg and Tessa Gunther, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(c)(2) Side Yard Setback Requirements 1.3 ft. off of the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 11.2 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements 22 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 13 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(4) Side Wall Articulation Requirements The resulting side wall (north) would be longer than 32 ft. without articulation as required to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. Feb 26, 2019 – 7 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting Minutes Feb 26, 2019 – 7 pm 2 Goellner referred to a location map and photos of the property and explained the applicant’s proposal to construct an addition that would include a new screened porch above the existing garage and storage space that would replace an existing non-conforming shed. Goellner referred to the side yard variance request and explained that the existing garage is located 11.2 feet, rather than the required 12.5 feet, from the north side yard property line. The proposed addition would also be 11.2 feet from the north side yard property line. Goellner referred to the front yard variance request and stated that the property has two front yards east and west) and that the existing house and garage were built 13 feet from the east front yard property line due to the topography of the lot. She stated that the proposed addition would be located on top of the existing flat roof garage and would also be 13 feet, rather than the required 35 feet, away from the east front yard property line. Goellner referred to the articulation variance request and explained that this variance is required because the north wall of the house is longer than 32 feet with no articulation. However, the façade is broken up with varying structure heights, roof heights, openings and a chimney. Orenstein asked if the entire addition will be located above the existing garage structure and if the existing home is already longer than 32 feet. Goellner said yes. Baker asked about the length of the north side wall. Goellner said it is approximately 69 feet long. Goellner stated that the applicant has said the unique circumstances in this case include the fact that the home was built on a hill on the far east side of the lot, a previous variance was granted which brought the property into conformance, the proposed addition utilizes the existing footprint of the garage, steep slopes limit the buildable area, the property will be enhanced with a front porch overlooking the park, neighboring properties won’t be impacted because they are separated by steep slopes, and the proposal removes a non-conforming shed. Goellner stated that staff is recommending approval of the requested variances with a condition added that the existing shed be removed. She explained that staff feels additional living space and storage are reasonable uses of the property, the buildable area to the rear of the home is limited by the topography, the existing home was built in a non-conforming location, it would be difficult if not impossible to build an addition without a variance, the proposed addition won’t be any closer to the front and side yard property lines than the existing garage already is, it is a modestly sized addition that fits with the surrounding architecture and character of the neighborhood, removal of the shed improves the character of the area, and there is no obvious way to reduce the size of the variance requests in a practical way. Baker referred to the 1986 variance materials and noted that the variance granted at that time was for an addition. He asked if there was ever a variance granted for the garage. Goellner said her City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting Minutes Feb 26, 2019 – 7 pm 3 understanding is that the garage was a part of the 1986 variance request because it was already there and that the house is now conforming. Mike Sharratt, Architect representing the applicant, stated that they considered many other ideas. He said the primary issue is that a pre-cast garage roof is leaking and that putting a porch above the garage is a way to spend time outside enjoying the view of the park. He noted that the applicants didn’t create the existing setbacks and they will remove the shed currently on the property. He added that the addition is essentially a wood deck built on top of the garage and that they tried to keep in low in scale. Orenstein asked if the proposed new storage space is attached. Sharratt said yes and that there will be no new foundation. Johnson asked why the storage space isn’t considered an accessory structure. Goellner said because it is attached. Baker said he likes that the proposed addition doesn’t impose on the view from the park. He asked if the pitched roof is being used because of the leaking issue. Sharratt stated that a pitched roof was part of the solution, but it is an open porch so the new roof will have to be waterproof. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Orenstein said he has no problem with the proposal and that the requested variances have been well supported. Perich agreed and added that in regard to the articulation variance he feels that the intent and spirit of the articulation requirement have been met. Nelson also agreed and said the proposed addition doesn’t affect the character of the locality and removing the existing shed will improve the property. MOTION made by Baker, seconded by Perich to approve the variance requests listed below with the condition that the existing shed be removed and the motion carried. 1.3 ft. off of the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 11.2 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. 22 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 13 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. The resulting side wall (north) would be longer than 32 ft. without articulation as required to allow for the construction of a screened porch and storage space addition. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 7:29 pm. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting Minutes Feb 26, 2019 – 7 pm 4 Nancy Nelson, Chair Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant GOLDEN VALLEY OPEN SPACE & RECREATION COMMISSION Meeting Minutes November 26, 2018 7 . Call to Order Mattison called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 2. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Roger Bergman, Cindy Carow-Schiebe, John Cornelius, Kelly Kuebelbeck, Bob Mattison, Kimberly Sanberg, Matthew Sanders, and Della Daml. Staff Rick Birno, Director of Parks and Recreation; Greg Simmons, Recreation and Facilities Supervisor; Mike Ward, Golf Course Maintenance Manage; Ben Disch, Golf Course Manager, Gillian Rosenquist, City Council; and Sheila Van Sloun, Administrative Assistant. Residents Lorna Reichl, Bruce Feld, and Todd Hedtke. Absent: Max Hyberger and Dawn Speltz. 3. Agenda Changes or Additions None. 4. Approval of Minutes - October 22, 2018 Sanberg asked about an incomplete sentence in paragraph two of item 8/9. Van Sloun stated she would fix the error and correct the minutes. MOTION: Moved by Bergman and seconded by Sanberg to approve the October 22, 2018 meeting minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Proposed Turkey.Management Plan Review and Public Input Birno gave a brief summary of the proposed Turkey Management Plan. Concerns and comments from residents and Commissioners included: Resident Feld has concerns with a neighbor in a townhome complex near him, that has high invasive species where turkeys gather, as well as concerns about the neighbor feeding the turkeys. Resident Hedtke has concerns with the turkeys chasing his children and being aggressive in his yard, as well as neighbors feeding the turkeys. Resident Reichl said the problem is with residents feeding the turkeys and overgrown vegetation where they like to gather. She likes the education piece of the proposed plan. She hopes laws can be enforced with residents and property managers. Mattison asked if the Council adopted an ordinance regarding feeding. Birno said the recodification is in process however it has not been formally adopted by the City Council. Kuebelbeck said there should be a fine for feeding written into the ordinance. Birno said he would review the current ordinance and make recommendations for changes. 6. Proposed Goose Management Plan Review and Public Input Birno gave a brief summary of the proposed Goose Management Plan. Birno shared strategies for decreasing the goose population at Brookview Golf Course and Brookview Park and said the plan is going to be an ongoing journey. Concerns and comments from residents and Commissioners included: Sanders said the plan should include task force groups from surrounding businesses with a similar problem. Birno said down the road they may be added. Resident Reichl said she liked that the plan looks at specific problem areas. She believes it's going to be a continuous problem. She suggested tagging the geese to see if the efforts are successful. Kuebelbeck asked if the golf course could prevent them from nesting on the grounds. Birno noted this would be a difficult goal considering the golf course grounds are perfect for geese to build nests and loaf. Kuebelbeck wants to know how it's decided when or if efforts become too much. Birno agreed that based on the potential annual investment, we will need a measurement tool to assess the impact and determine if the results are appropriate for the fiscal resources utilized. He said we can't be Open space& Recreation Commission Minutes November 26, 2018 Page 2 sure until they get into the implementation of the plan. Kuebelback added that she would like to see a threshold for the efforts. Sanders said he believes its worthwhile to give the plan a try for a number of years to measure impact. He added that it's important for the City to have a pian in place for issues that arise. 7. Wildlife Management Plans General Wscussilon and Recommendation Comments from the Commissioners on the Turkey Management Plan are as follows: Mattison wants to see an effective ordinance that is very clear about feeding with real penalties. Sanberg said that education to the community on why not to feed may be helpful. Carow-Schlebe added that education on the importance of keeping yards maintained would be helpful as well. Kuebelbeck would like to see a tiered fine system put in place for the feeding wild animals ordinance. MOTION: Moved by Kuebelbeck and seconded by Carow-Schiebe to recommend the proposed Turkey Management Pian to the City Council for approval subject to the recommendations listed above. Motion carried unanimously. Comments from the Commissioners on the Goose Management Plan are as follows: No Discussion MOTION: Moved by Sanders and seconded by Bergman to recommend the proposed Goose Management Plan to the City Council for approval. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Commission and Staff Updates Commissioner Updates Cornelius mentioned the pickleball players are looking for indoor space. He said a local church was looking for information on how to set up courts in their facility. Bimo said ice should be in early if the weather continues to cooperate. Sanders said he really enjoys the rinks and believe they are a great asset to the city. He also thanked the staff for their work on the rink's.. LimeSike Update - Birno said the Council received a report on the LimeBikes at a recent City Council/Manager work session. He said City received a low volume of complaints. He added that the LimeBike organization was very responsive to reported issues. The City plans to renew their agreement next year and a -bikes will be added to the mix of transportation options. Mattison inquired about injuries. Birno said he was not aware of any injuries in Golden Valley. He added Limebike is an independent entity and not affiliated with the City of Golden Valley. Mattison suggested a Limellike education write-up in a future newsletter. January Meeting - Birno said the January meeting will be a joint City Council and Commission meeting on Tuesday, January 29 from 6-8 pm. December Meeting - Birno reminded the Commission that there is no meeting in December. 9. Adjournmen# MOTION: Moved by Sanders and seconded by Berman to adjourn at 8:15 pm. Motion carried unanimously. ATT S ' Sheila Van Sloun, Administrative Assistant w - Bob Mattison, Chair REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm by Chair Hill. 2. Roll Call Commissioners present: Tracy Anderson, Tonia Galonska, Dawn Hill, Joseph Ramlet, Scott Seys, and Jim Stremel Commissioners absent: Lynn Gitelis and Debra Yahle Council Liaison: Larry Fonnest Staff present: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Supervisor (arrived at 7:05pm), Drew Chirpich, Environmental Specialist and Claire Huisman, Administrative Assistant 3. Approval of Agenda – No motion recorded. 4. Approval of Minutes MOTION by Commissioner Stremel, seconded by Commissioner Seys to approve the minutes of January 29, 2019 as submitted and the motion carried. Chair Hill commented that along with the request to find out where Simple Recycling Co. does its sorting, she also wanted to know the process for determining what items are kept and/or rejected. It was decided not to amend the minutes at this time. 5. Old Business – No items. 6A. GreenStep Cities – Step 4 Metrics – Green Buildings After a brief discussion of Step 4 Optional topic area, Green Buildings, led by Drew Chirpich, the Commission made the following motion. MOTION by Commissioner Galonska, seconded by Commissioner Stremel to approve the Performance Metrics entry for Step 4 Green Buildings as amended into the GreenStep Cities website at the time when all core topic areas and optional topic areas are completed and the motion carried. The amendment included adding verbiage on Data Element 2.7 to state that this element included “Energy Star” rated buildings only. 6B. 2019 Commission Sponsored Workshop Chirpich presented information on the next MetroBlooms workshop called Healthy Soils. The base cost to the Commission is $1500 which includes a Q&A group discussion after the presentation. MetroBlooms advises charging $15/person to attend the presentation. They feel this will insure that those who have signed up to attend will actually show up. Commission members feel $15/household is more of a fair price. It was also suggested by Commissioner Seys to change the name of the workshop to February 25, 2019 – 6:30 pm Council Conference Room Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley Environmental Commission Regular Meeting Minutes Feb 25, 2019 – 6:30 pm 2 something more appealing to the public. This workshop would take place at Brookview in the spring of 2019. MOTION by Commissioner Ramlet, seconded by Commissioner Galonska to approve hosting the Healthy Soils Workshop and the motion carried. 6C. 2019 GreenCorps Application MOTION by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Ramlet to support the application to the MPCA GreenCorps for the placement of a GreenCorps member with the City of Golden Valley and the motion carried. If selected by MPCA, the GreenCorps member would work at City Hall full-time from September 2019 to August 2020 to assist the City with waste reduction, recycling, composting/organics management goals, objectives and implementation actions. 6D. Program/Project Updates Items discussed: The City was awarded a $50,000 DNR’s Conservation Partner’s Legacy (CPL) grant with a required 5,000 match from the City for the Bassett Creek Nature Area to aid in removing invasive species and restoring with native species. The WasteZero Contract is still under review by WasteZero. DeCola Ponds B & C Improvement Project held an open house on February 6. Eight people attended and four comments submitted, most in support of the project. Kings Valley Pond Maintenance Project is substantially complete. Restoration and touch-up in the spring. Limebike has removed its bikes and scooters for the winter but will be back in the spring through 2019. The year-end recycling report for 2018 showed that the community had a 92% recycling participation rate. The complete Program/Project Update is on file. 6E. Citywide Pollinator Policy Eckman discussed with the Commission, the creation of a Citywide Pollinator Policy in the form of a resolution which would be adopted by council. Resolutions from other Cities in the metro area on the protection of pollinators and their habitats were presented to aid in the draft of the resolution for Golden Valley. The volunteer group, People for Pollinators Golden Valley (sponsored by the Golden Valley Garden Club), would like to assist the City with the resolution and implementation of pollinator actions within the community. A draft of the resolution will be presented to the Commission at next month’s meeting. Comments from Commissioners included: Does the volunteer group need to be a legal “non-profit”? Craft language in the resolution to allow for the dismissal or change of the volunteer group. What if the volunteer group was to disagree with certain City decisions? Would the volunteer group request money for their services? Appoint someone to perform an advisory role to keep the group focused. Resolutions get forgotten over time. Create a policy or plan that would stay in effect. Also, require an annual report from the volunteer group. City of Golden Valley Environmental Commission Regular Meeting Minutes Feb 25, 2019 – 6:30 pm 3 Does the City make sure that plantings come from approved nurseries? The 4 points under “Practice” in the Current Pollinator Activities in Golden Valley should be included in the resolution. Bring in volunteer group to discuss the draft resolution with the Commission. Does the Commission want an outside group to take over? Or would the City delegate certain tasks for them to manage? The resolution should have language stating that the City will also use best practices for projects within the City that require plants, trees, sod, etc. Tie this with GreenStep Cities to satisfy a Best Practices Action Item to move the City forward in Step 5. 6F. 2019 Draft Work Plan Eckman presented 12 plan ideas for the 2019 Work Plan which will need to be finalized and presented to the Council in May. The Commission decided to keep items one to five on the top priority list along with item nine; complete a ready and resilient guide for the community. It was noted that item seven, revising City code to remove barriers to producing local food, will be handled by the Planning Commission when they revise zoning codes. Item six, revision of City code to allow temporary use of goats for vegetation management, will be moved down to last on the list. It was also suggested to move item 10, solar and wind ordinances, up on the list as well. 6G. Council Updates Council member Larry Fonnest gave a brief update to the Commission regarding waste and recycling hauling. He stated that the Council will make a decision by summer of 2019 as to what direction the City will take on the solid waste hauling issue. Also, the League of Women Voters will be holding a public forum to give their report on residential waste hauling and recycling after conducting surveys with residents and visiting waste and recycling facilities within the metro area. 6H. Other Business – No items 7. Adjournment MOTION by Commissioner Stremel, seconded by Commissioner Anderson to adjourn the meeting at 8:25pm and the motion carried. Dawn Hill, Chair ATTEST: Claire Huisman, Administrative Assistant REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm by Chair Harris. Roll Call Commissioners present: Maurice Harris, Gloria Peck, Carrie Yeager, Jonathan Burris, and Teresa Martin, Eve Clarkson, Chris Mitchell Commissioners absent: Lauren Barry, and Kyle Scott Staff present: Maria Cisneros, City Attorney Approval of Agenda MOTION to approve agenda. Motion carried. Approval of Minutes MOTION to approve minutes from December 26, 2018 Regular Meeting and January 10, 2019 Special Meeting. Motion carried. 2018 Annual Report Commissioners received draft 2018 Annual Report prepared by City Communications staff and Staff Liaison Santelices. Discussion was had regarding possible changes and Commissioners agreed to review draft before March meeting and submit questions and suggested revisions to staff by March 18, 2019. 2019 Work Plan Preparation Commissioners received draft 2019 Work Plan and agreed to review draft before March meeting and submit questions and suggested revisions to staff by March 18, 2019. 2019 Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Recap Commissioners discussed the 2019 Sweet Potato Comfort Pie event and all agreed it was a success. Commissioners will add Sweet Potato Comfort Pie event to the Commission’s annual work plan. Review of Council/Board/Commission Annual Meeting and Action Steps Commissioners discussed the 2019 annual Council/Board/Commission dinner, the Council’s goals and action steps that came out of that meeting, and how the Commission might incorporate those goals into its 2019 Work Plan. Feb 26, 2019 – 6:30 pm Council Conference Room Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road City of Golden Valley Feb 26, 2019 -6:30 pm Police Academy Recap Human Rights Commission Regular Meeting Minutes 2 Commissioner Yeager shared her experience at the Police Department's Citizens Academy and recommended other Commissioners consider attending or promoting the event to their networks. Adjourn MOTION to adjourn. Carried. ATTEST Maria Cisneros, Interim Staff Liaison Respectfully submitted, Maria Cisneros, City Attorney/Interim Staff Liaison flt Maurice Harris, Chair 1. CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL On Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 8:33 a.m. in the Council Conference Room at Golden Valley City Hall (7800 Golden Valley Rd.), Chair de Lambert called the meeting of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) to order. Commissioners and city staff present: City Commissioner Alternate Commissioner Technical Advisory Committee Members (City Staff) Crystal Dave Anderson Vacant Position Mark Ray Golden Valley Stacy Harwell Absent Eric Eckman and Jeff Oliver Medicine Lake Clint Carlson Absent Absent Minneapolis Michael Welch Vacant Position Liz Stout Minnetonka Mike Fruen Absent Chris LaBounty New Hope Absent Absent Megan Hedstrom Plymouth Jim Prom John Byrnes Ben Scharenbroich Robbinsdale Michael Scanlan Absent Richard McCoy and Marta Roser St. Louis Park Jim de Lambert Absent Erick Francis Administrator Laura Jester, Keystone Waters Engineer Karen Chandler, Jen Koehler, Patrick Brockamp, and Mary Sands with Barr Engineering Recorder Dawn Pape, Lawn Chair Gardener Creative Services Legal Counsel Dave Anderson, Kennedy & Graven Presenters/ Guests/Public Chuck Schmidt, New Hope resident Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting Thursday, February 21, 2019 8:30 a.m. Golden Valley City Hall, Golden Valley MN BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8 2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Schmidt asked if the water level in Winnetka Pond will be the same after the dredging project as before the project. Commission Engineer Chandler confirmed that it would be the same. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Prom seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] 4. CONSENT AGENDA The following items were approved as part of the consent agenda: January 21, 2019 Commission meeting minutes, acceptance of the 2018 fiscal year-end (January 2019) financial report and the February 2019 financial report, payment of invoices, approval to resolution 19-03 designating depositories for BCWMC Funds, approval to designate Finance and Commerce as the Official News Publication of the BCWMC, approval of agreement with Three Rivers Park District for curly- leaf pondweed control and financial contribution for inspections at Medicine Lake, approval of County State Aid Highway CSAH) 9 (Rockford Road) and I-494 Interchange Project, approval to Reimburse Commissioner Fruen for MAWD Conference registration. The general and construction account balances reported in the FY2018 Year-end Financial Report (January 2019) are as follows: Checking Account Balance $ 586,572.33 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $ 586,572.33 TOTAL CASH & INVESTMENTS ON-HAND (01/31/19) $3,729,542.76 CIP Projects Levied – Budget Remaining ($3,874,557.20) Closed Projects Remaining Balance ($145,014.44) 2012-2016 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $ 3,896.47 2017 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $ 3,148.89 2018 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $ 10,316.57 Anticipated Closed Project Balance ($127,652.51) MOTION: Commissioner Carlson moved to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Scanlan seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] 5. ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING A. Elect Officers Chair de Lambert noted that he is not seeking nomination for the chair again this year. However, Commissioner Scanlan is willing to continue as secretary and Commissioner Harwell is willing to continue as treasurer. Commissioner Prom expressed interest in becoming chair. Commissioner Scanlan nominated Commissioner Welch as vice chair. Commissioner Welch explained that typically the position of vice chair is a stepping stone to being chair and that he is willing to serve if no one else steps forward, but he is not willing to serve as chair in the future. Commissioner Welch BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8 nominated Commissioner Prom as chair, himself as vice chair, Commissioner Scanlan as secretary, and Commissioner Harwell as treasurer. MOTION: Commissioner Carlson moved to elect the full slate of nominees. Commissioner Fruen seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] Commissioner Welch recognized Chair de Lambert’s contributions noting that he has been very fair and even handed. Commissioner de Lambert said it had been a pleasure to serve and that he would remain an active participant. Commissioner Prom chaired the remainder of the meeting. B. Review 2019 Commission Calendar and Areas of Work Administrator Jester highlighted important dates that should be on the commissioners’ calendars for the upcoming year as well as the work of committees. Commissioners indicated the calendar/areas of work document should remain a living document to be updated and included in the monthly meeting materials. C. Appoint Committee Members The following appointments were made to Commission committees: i. Administrative Services Committee: Commissioners Scanlan, Prom, Harwell, Welch, de Lambert ii. Budget Committee: Commissioners Scanlan, Anderson, Prom, and Alternate Commissioners Byrnes and McDonald Black iii. Education Committee: Commissioners Scanlan, Harwell, Fruen, and de Lambert; and Alternate Commissioners Byrnes and Noon iv. Technical Advisory Committee Liaison: Commissioner Scanlan D. Review Open Meeting Law Administrator Jester reminded commissioners that Commission business should not be discussed if there is less than a quorum and that includes discussions via email. She noted that one easy way to comply with the law is to never “reply all” to a Commission email. Commissioner Harwell asked if she could Skype into a committee meeting. There was a brief discussion on the complexities of that practice and the instances where it is allowed. E. Review Year End Financial Report (Feb 1, 2018 - Jan 31, 2019) Administrator Jester reported that the Commission ended the year in the black. She noted that although some line items were over budget, the overall budget was $41,000 under budget. There were no questions from the Commission. 6. BUSINESS A. Review 50% Design Plans for DeCola Ponds B & C Improvement Project Engineer Koehler reviewed the 50% design plans on behalf of the City of Golden Valley. She reminded the Commission that the primary goal of this project is flood mitigation and that additional benefits include water quality improvements and habitat restoration. Engineer Koehler gave a detailed timeline of the steps in the design process. At the May 2018 meeting, the Commission approved the final feasibility study for this project. In August of 2018, the Commission ordered the project and approved an agreement with the City of Golden Valley to implement the project. The 50% designs include 24 acre-feet of additional flood storage, 2 acres of open water expansion, 8.5 lbs/yr of phosphorus removal, 3 acres of restored wetland and upland habitat, Medicine Lake Road 100-year flood depth reduced by approximately 2 ft, and reduction of flood level on ponds from 0.1’-0.5’. Engineer Koehler noted the BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8 EAW process is complete and that a dewatering permit will be needed along with (possibly) a Phase I archeological study. Engineer Koehler noted the estimated cost of the whole project is $4.1 million with multiple funding sources including Minnesota DNR, Hennepin County, City of Golden Valley, and BCWMC. She reported on the public engagement activities, including an open house held on February 6th. There was a brief discussion about the new trails. Engineer Koehler noted the trails will be impervious because ADA compliance and accessibility is important to daily users. Commissioner Welch offered that there are alternatives to bituminous that still meet ADA requirements. Mr. Eckman added that a lot of imperviousness has already been removed in that area, but that he would explore alternatives. There was some discussion on project permitting, draw down and tree removal. The restoration plan will be more complete with the 90% design, which will likely be presented at the April meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve the 50% design plans as presented. Commissioner Prom seconded the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Welch inquired about the cost vulnerability if the project gets delayed a year. Mr. Eckman responded that there is not a timing issue with the DNR grant. Commissioner Scanlan asked if there are potential funding changes. Engineer Koehler said based on current planning and funding secured, she feels comfortable with the budget. Commissioner Welch noted that Administrator Jester may need to be involved with public relations because it’s going to be a large project with much disruption to a popular park. Administrator Jester answered that she is happy to fulfill this role, but also noted that the City of Golden Valley has been handling communications with the public and local residents very well up to this point. Commissioner Harwell asked if there will be educational signage. Commissioner Prom agreed that this would be a good opportunity for education. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0, with the City of New Hope absent from the vote. B. Consider Providing Additional Funds for Winnetka Pond Dredging Project TAC member Mark Ray explained that during the construction of this project, contaminated sediment was unexpectedly found in Winnetka Pond that will require expensive disposal. He reported the City of Crystal can contribute $25,000 toward the extra costs, but is still requesting additional funds for this project so that it can be built as originally designed. He noted the city is requesting an additional $114,301 for the project from the BCWMC and the ability to use the city’s $9,050 in Channel Maintenance Funds toward the project. Commission Engineer Chandler introduced the project manager (Patrick Brockamp) and brownfields expert (Mary Sands). Engineer Chandler explained that MPCA-recommended sediment testing was done during the feasibility study but the contamination was not discovered and the project was bid as the sediment being “unregulated fill.” She reported that after the project started, diesel range organics (DRO) were found, so considerably more testing was performed. It was finally determined that the upper two feet of sediment for a significant portion of the pond was contaminated and that after negotiating with the contractor, the additional costs would be $148,351. Administrator Jester reported that the Commission’s Closed Project Account should have approximately $215,000 available after the 2015 Main Stem Restoration Project is closed within the next 30 – 60 days. Commissioner Carlson asked that if the contamination was discovered during the feasibility study, would its disposal have been less expensive. Engineer Chandler replied no. Commissioner Carlson asked if there could have been more testing beforehand. Engineer Chandler explained that testing isn’t very expensive but there are so many contaminants to test for it’s impossible to test for them all. There was further discussion about what level of testing might be warranted for future projects. BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8 Mr. Scharenbroich estimated that it is $56/cubic yard to dispose of contaminated soil. He found this cost to reasonable because it can easily be $100/cubic yard. MOTION: Commissioner de Lambert moved to approve providing additional funds for the Winnetka Pond Dredging Project based on the contingency that the closed project account has funds available. Commissioner Scanlan seconded the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Carlson wondered if the contamination could be left in place. Engineers Chandler and Sands explained that since it’s now known to be there, it should be removed. Commissioner Welch asked what the plan is for the future. Mark Ray said they will try to determine the source of the contamination, but it likely happened prior to the 1960s. Commissioner Welch asked if the MPCA will require further investigation. Engineer Sands responded that DRO is ubiquitous and not highly toxic. She noted it’s likely that the city will only be required to determine the extent (boundaries) for remediation. There was some discussion about whether the city can put additional funding toward disposal. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0, with the City of New Hope absent from the vote. C. Consider Agreements with Wenck and City of Minneapolis for Bassett Creek Valley Study i. Contract with Wenck Associates ii. Bassett Creek Valley Study Proposal iii. Agreement with City of Minneapolis Administrator Jester reminded Commissioners that the City of Minneapolis, the Commission engineers and herself, the MPRB, and other partners have been discussing the complicated nature of the Bassett Creek Valley and the likely redevelopment for the area. She noted the City wishes to have Wenck Associates, Inc. perform a Floodplain and Stormwater Management Study for the Bassett Creek Valley Development area to evaluate options to unlock the potential in natural resources, recreation, and redevelopment by integrating floodplain and stormwater management into a regional solution for the area. She noted the City wishes for the Commission to hire Wenck to complete this study and then the City will reimburse the Commission for the total cost of the study along with other Commission expenses related to the study (less $2,000). She reported the contract with Wenck and agreement with the City were reviewed by Commission legal counsel and the study proposal was reviewed by Commission Engineers. TAC member Liz Stout reiterated that it is not appropriate to look at this area parcel by parcel because there are significant floodplain issues. Commissioner Harwell asked about the models that will be used. Ms. Stout and Engineer Chandler explained the Commission’s model, the City’s model and the P8 model will all be used. Commissioner Welch noted that the holistic approach to the redevelopment is warranted, but expressed concern about how Wenck can avoid conflict of interest with their other clients, i.e. Wellington. Chris Meehan with Wenck responded that a regional solution is important, even for the current client. He said it’s good to have many partners working together. Commissioner Anderson suggested conditional approval of the contract with Wenck, with the condition that the agreement between the Commission and Minneapolis is fully executed.. MOTION: Commissioner Welch moved to approve the contract with Wenck on condition that the reimbursement agreement with Minneapolis is fully executed. Commissioner Prom seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] D. Consider Applying for 319 Grant for Sweeney Lake Alum Treatment & Carp Management Administrator Jester explained that the Commission has the rare opportunity to apply for 319 grant funds for up to 700,000 for an alum treatment in Sweeney Lake and carp management in Schaper Pond. She noted the City of Golden Valley and the TAC agreed the grant application was a good idea. BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8 MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved to authorize staff to apply for the 319 Grant. Commissioner Welch seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0 [City of New Hope absent from the vote] E. Consider Recommendations from CIP Prioritization Committee and Technical Advisory Committee Commission Engineer Chandler explained that starting last April, the CIP Prioritization Committee met 6 times to determine if and how capital projects in the watershed can be prioritized for implementation. She reported the committee recommends the use of a scoring matrix to help rank potential CIP projects against each other when developing the 5-year CIP. She reported the TAC discussed and considered the committee’s recommendations and added a few recommendations of their own. She then walked through the TAC and CIP Committee’s detailed notes and process. She noted the TAC requested that the scoring matrix be revisited within the next three years. Commissioners Prom and Welch explained that this matrix is a useful tool that the committee worked hard to develop. Commissioner Welch noted that a committee or workgroup might also be useful, along with more involvement from the administrator, in identifying possible CIP projects. He noted that opportunities to collaborate with redevelopment projects might still fall through the cracks due to the timing. MOTION: Commissioner Welch moved to adopt the matrix as a tool to develop the 5-year CIP and to accept recommendations of CIP Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee. Commissioner Scanlan seconded. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] F. Consider Resolution 19-04 to Approve Robbinsdale Local Surface Water Management Plan Commission Engineer Chandler reported that the Robbinsdale Local Surface Water Management Plan was reviewed and is consistent with the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Plan and requirements. Staff recommended approval of the resolution. Commissioner Welch asked if Robbinsdale City Council will adopt their local controls so the city’s ordinances are consistent with the watershed plan. Mr. McCoy responded that it is up to the elected officials. Commissioner Welch further inquired whether the city plan has a schedule for ordinances to be adopted. Engineer Chandler confirmed that it does and that it is in the resolution. MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve the Robbinsdale Local Surface Water Management Plan. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] G. Consider Resolution 19-05 to Approve Medicine Lake Local Water Management Plan 2018 Update Commission Engineer Chandler reported that the Medicine Lake Local Water Management Plan Update was reviewed and is consistent with the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Plan and requirements. Staff recommended approval of the resolution. MOTION: Commissioner Anderson motioned to Approve Medicine Lake Local Water Management Plan 2018 Update. Commissioner Scanlan seconded the motion. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] Commissioner Welch requested that the agenda of a future Commission meeting include an update on the adoption of local ordinances as required by the BCWMC Plan. H. Identify Date and Format for 50th Anniversary Event Administrator Jester reported that last year the Education Committee developed various ideas for commemorating the Commission’s 50th Anniversary and that one favorite idea was to hold an event including a light meal, BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8 presentation, display of historical documents, and optional watershed tour for elected and appointed officials. She asked for recommendations on a date and format for the event so that planning can begin. After some discussion there was consensus that June 27th is the preferred date with a late afternoon tour followed by an evening reception. I. Review Letters of Interest Proposals from Legal and Engineering Firms Administrator Jester reminded commissioners that in January, the Commission submitted a solicitation for proposals for legal and technical engineering services in order to comply with State Law. She reported the Commission received one proposal (from Kennedy & Graven) for legal services and three proposals for engineering services from Barr Engineering, RESPEC, and ProSource. She noted that since the proposals are not public documents, they were not included with meeting materials but were emailed to commissioners. Staff recommended that the Commission continue to use their current consultants. There was some discussion about whether or not the TAC should provide a recommendation on the engineering proposals. There was consensus that TAC review wasn’t needed in this case; that the Commission wasn’t seriously considering interviewing other engineering firms. MOTION: Commissioner Harwell moved that upon appropriate solicitation, the Commission continue to contract with Barr Engineering Co., and Kennedy & Graven for their engineering and legal consulting, respectively. Commissioner de Lambert seconded the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Scanlan mentioned that he knows of a competitor that speaks highly of Barr Engineering. Commissioner Carlson noted that the Commission should be careful not to “bury its head in the sand” and to keep looking closely at expenses. Many other Commission members spoke in favor of Barr and noted excellent work. Upon a vote, the motion carried 8-0. [City of New Hope absent from the vote] J. Consider Approval of Resolution 19-06 Consenting to Representation from Kennedy & Graven and Acknowledging Potential Conflicts Administrator Jester noted that at the December meeting, the Commission discussed the possible need for a resolution acknowledging there to be potential conflicts of interest regarding legal representation and consenting to continued representation by Kennedy & Graven. Commissioner Welch said this is not how conflicts of interest should be handled. Commission Attorney Dave Anderson weighed in by saying they have a legal obligation to notify their clients if conflicts of interest arise and that to date there aren’t any conflicts of interest. He noted this resolution is a way to acknowledge the possibility of a conflict of interest and that Attorney Gilchrist was going to suggest the other cities adopt similar resolutions. It was noted that the current resolution opens the Commission to liability. Attorney Anderson said that Commissioner Welch raised a good point and that the resolution is not necessary, but was a good faith approach to show transparency. Commissioner Anderson stated that he is not sure that this is the best way to proceed. Harwell departed.] MOTION: Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve Resolution 19-06 Consenting to Representation from Kennedy & Graven and Acknowledging Potential Conflicts. There was no second. Motion failed. K. Consider Approval of Resolution 19-07 of Support for Chloride Limited Liability Legislation Administrator Jester said she learned from the Stop Over Salting group while attending the Road Salt Symposium that a few local governments and organizations have passed resolutions supporting the chloride limited liability legislation. She noted that given that this is such an important topic in the watershed, she thought the attached BCWMC February 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 8 resolution would be appropriate for the Commission to consider. She reported that last year the Commission submitted letters to bill authors supporting the legislation. MOTION: Commissioner Prom moved to table Resolution 19-07 supporting chloride limited liability legislation. Commissioner Scanlan seconded. Upon a vote, the motion carried 6-1, with the City of St. Louis Park voting against the motion and the cities of New Hope and Golden Valley absent from the vote. 6. COMMUNICATIONS A.Administrator’s Report Administrator Jester commented on the following items: i. Reminder to complete conflict of interest forms ii. Report on Road Salt Symposium iii. Commission received part of their AIS grant and the other parts are being funded in different ways B.Chair Chair Prom stated he appreciates the position. C.Commissioners i. Commissioner Carlson attended an informative meeting about AIS held at Barr Engineering offices. He noted a new method of controlling zebra mussels with light and he’s seeking more information about it. ii. Commissioner Scanlan reminded everyone that community members watch the actions of the Commission. D.TAC Members i. Mark Ray is the new TAC chair. The next meeting is March 8th. Commissioners Welch and Prom may attend that meeting. E.Committees i. Nothing to report F.Legal Counsel i. Nothing to report G.Engineer Engineer Chandler reported that the BCWMC’s request to drawdown the Mississippi River for a tunnel inspection was denied and that there will be no tunnel inspection in February. 7. INFORMATION ONLY (Information online only) A. CIP Project Updates http://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/projects B. Grant Tracking Summary and Spreadsheet C. Local News Story on Winnetka Pond Dredging D. WCA Notice of Decision, Plymouth 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:35 a.m. Signature/Title Date Signature/Title Date Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. E. 1. Award Contract for the 2019 Crack Sealing Project No. 19-04 Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Tim Kieffer, Public Works Maintenance Manager R.J. Kakach, PE, Assistant City Engineer Summary The City’s Pavement Management Program (PMP) addresses the needs of the City’s streets. The program includes asphalt maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Through this program, timely and cost-effective measures are taken to construct and extend pavement life. As asphalt pavement ages, it is subject to the weathering effects of water, air, cold winters, and hot summers. As pavement naturally expands and contracts through the seasons, it forms thermal cracks that extend from one edge of the street to the other. Crack sealing is a maintenance effort in which a hot asphaltic material is placed inside of the pavement cracks. This is done to prevent water seepage into the pavement and subgrade and in turn substantially extends the life of the pavement. Crack sealant lasts approximately 2-5 years. The City’s 2019 Crack Sealing Project will be located in Maintenance Zone 2, as shown on the attached map. Quotes for the 2019 Crack Sealing Project City Improvement Project 19-04 were received on March 22, 2019, and are listed below: Seal Tech, Inc. $53,500 Allied Blacktop Company $73,700 Fahrner Asphalt Sealers $99,550 Staff has reviewed the quotes and found them to be accurate and in order. Financing The financing for this contract is summarized below: Funding for this project is in the 2019 Street Maintenance Budget (1440.6440) which includes $170,000 for striping, concrete shaving, pavement preservation and crack sealing. It is expected that construction will begin as weather permits in May of 2019 and be completed in this summer. Attachments Crack Seal Location Map (1 page) Contract with Seal Tech Incorporated (5 pages) Recommended Action Motion authorizing a contract with Seal Tech, Inc. for the 2019 Crack Sealing project No. 19-04 in the amount of $53,500. Dulu th St 10th Ave N Olym pia St KellyDrKnoll StSumter Ave NPennsylvania Ave NQuebec Ave NValders Ave NCountry Club Dr Sandburg Rd Zane Ave NWinsdale St Brunswick Ave NFlorida Ave NWestbend Rd Hampshire L nLindsay St Winnetka Ave N Oregon Ave NPhoe nix StTh otlan d Rd Edgewood Ave NAdairAve NNevada Ave NBrookviewPkwyNWynnwood Rd Turners Cr ossroadNMeanderRd JerseyAve NMaryland Ave NIdahoAve NRhode Island Ave NGeorgiaAve NCirUnityAveND awnview Ter BrookridgeAveNWinfieldAveManches te r Dr Westbrook RdLamplighterLn Wel comeWinnetka Avenue North / County Road 156Lewis RdHalfMoonDr RidgewayRdRhodeIslandAveNSki Hill R d PaisleyLnLoringLn Woodstoc k A v e Cutacross Rd Xenia Ave NKent uckyAveNTopelRd GreenValleyRd LouisianaAve NDuluthLn WestmoreWay WolfberryLn HampshireAve NKentle yAve FaribaultSt Arch erAve N K ing s t on C irVarnerCirValdersCt G reenview LnHampshire Ave NWinnetka Phoenix StKellyDrKnoll St Lilac Dr NRhode Island Ave NPlymouth Ave N Lilac DrNJersey Ave NWinne tka Heigh ts Dr Louisiana Ave NZane Ave NHarold Ave FloridaAveNJerseyAve NP h o e n i x S tLouisianaAveNGlenden ValeCrestRdN Frontage Rd Ave NWes tchesterCirCloverLnLilacLoopG oldenV alleyRdM innaq u aDrHeritageCir StCroix Ave N ConstanceDrEAve NWelcomeAveNDouglas Drive / County Road 102WinsdaleSt Sandburg LnMadisonAve W H aroldAve Yosemite CirYosemiteAveNOak GroveKennethWay WelcomeEllis LnJonellen Ln ColoradoValley-woodCir Medicine LakeRoad / County Road 70 SchullerIdahoAve NValders Ave NYosemiteAve NWinsdaleStEdgewoodAveNIdahoAve NKnoll Westb ro okRd BrunswickWynnwood Rd Unity Ave NTer St Heights Dr 25th Ave N Lilac DrNLilacDrNSt C roix AveNToledoAveNLilac Dr NLilac Dr NAveConstance Dr WCir Z a n e Av e NCir Unity Ave NHighway 100GlenwoodAvePennsylvania Ave NG oldenValleyRdMaryla ndAveNHampshirePl Plymouth Ave N Orkla DrValders Ave NS F r o ntage RdWesleyCommons 4-1 PROJECT NO. 19-04 CONTRACT FOR THE 2019 CRACK SEALING PROJECT NO. 19-04 THIS AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), entered into the 2nd day of April, 2019 between the City of Golden Valley (the “City”), a municipal corporation, existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and Seal Tech Incorporated, a Corporation, under the laws of Minnesota (“Contractor”). ARTICLE 1. The Contract Documents. The Contract Documents consist of: this Agreement, the Proposal and Bid of the Contractor, the Contractor’s Bonds, the General Conditions, Special Conditions, the General Conditions and any supplementary conditions, drawings, plans, specifications, addenda issued prior to execution of this Agreement, other documents listed herein or in any of the foregoing documents, and Modifications of the same issued after execution of this Agreement ( collectively the “Contract” or “Contract Documents”). A Modification is (1) a written amendment to the Contract signed by both parties, (2) a Change Order, (3) a Construction Change Directive, or (4) a written order for a minor change in the Work issued by the Engineer. ARTI CLE 2. The Work. Contractor, for good and valuable consideration the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, covenants and agrees to furnish all materials, all necessary tools and equipment, and to do and perform all work and labor necessary for 2019 Crack Sealing Project No. 19-04 (the “Project”) according to the Plans and Specifications and all of the Contract Documents (the “Work”). Contractor shall commence and conclude the W ork in accordance with the Contract Documents. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. Accordingly, Contractor shall complete the Work in accordance with the time schedule for commencement and completion of the Work set forth in the Contract Documents. Contractor shall complete the W ork in every respect to the satisfaction and approval of the City. ARTICLE 3. Contractor’s Bonds. Contractor shall make, execute and deliver to the City corporate surety bonds in a form approved by the City, in the sum of Fifty-three thousand five-hundred dollars and no cents ($53,500.00) for the use of the City and of all persons furnishing labor, skill, tools, machinery or materials to the Project. Said bonds shall secure the faithful performance and payment of the Contract by the Contractor and shall be conditioned as required by law. This Agreement shall not become effective unless and until said bonds have been received and approved by the City. ARTICLE 4. The City’s Responsibilities. In consideration of the covenants and agreements stated above, the City shall pay Contractor the sum stated in Contractor’s proposal or Bid (the “Contract Price”). Installment payments, if any, on account of the Work shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the General Conditions. Final payment shall be due and payable on or before thirty (30) days after receipt of a Certificate of Final Completion issued by the City Engineer confirming that the W ork has been fully completed and the Contract fully performed by Contractor. 4-2 PROJECT NO. 19-04 ARTICLE 5. Acceptance of the Work. The City, through its authorized agents, shall be the sole and final judge of the fitness of the Work and its acceptability, and no payment shall be made to Contractor hereunder until the Work shall have been accepted by the City and a certificate of final completion shall have been issued. ARTICLE 6. Records. Contractor shall keep as complete, exact and accurate an account of the labor and materials used in the execution of the Work as is possible, and shall submit and make this information available as maybe requested by the City. ARTICLE 7. Payment. All payments to Contractor shall be made payable to the order of Seal Tech, Incorporated, and the City does not assume and shall not have any responsibility for the allocation of payments or obligations of the Contractor to third parties. ARTICLE 8. Cancellation prior to Execution. The City reserves the right, without liability, to cancel the award of the Contract at any time before the execution of the Contract by all parties. ARTICLE 9. Termination. The City may by written notice terminate the Contract, or any portion thereof, when (1) it is deemed in the best public, state or national interest to do so; (2) the City is unable to adequately fund payment for the Contract because of changes in state fiscal policy, regulations or law; or (3) after finding that, for reasons beyond Contractor’s control, Contractor is prevented from proceeding with or completing the W ork within a reasonable time. In the event that any work is terminated under the provisions hereof, all completed items or units of work will be paid for at Contract Bid Prices. Payment for partially completed items or units of work will be made in accordance with the procedure on the attached Exhibit A and as otherwise mutually agreed. Termination of the Contract or any portion thereof shall not relieve Contractor of responsibility for the completed W ork, nor shall it relieve Contractor’s Sureties of their obligations for and concerning any just claims arising out of the W ork. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, both parties hereto have caused this Contract to be signed on their respective behalves by their duly authorized offices and their corporate seals to be hereunto affixed the day and year first above written. 4-3 PROJECT NO. 19-04 THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA BY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor BY Timothy J. Cruikshank, City Manager CONTRACTOR BY ITS BY ITS 4-4 EXHIBIT A Elimination of Work Should any Contract items be eliminated from the Contract or any work be deleted or should the City order termination on a Contract item before completion of that unit, Contractor shall be reimbursed for all costs incurred prior to notification that are not the result of unauthorized work. Compensation will be made on the following basis: 1) Accepted quantities of Work completed in accordance with the Contract will be paid for at the Contract prices. 2) For materials that have been ordered but not incorporated in the Work, reimbursement will be made in accordance with the procedure set out below for Surplus Material. 3) For partially completed items, accepted W ork shall be paid for on the basis of a percentage of the Contract bid price equal to the percentage of actual accomplishment toward completion of the item. In arriving at this percentage, the value of materials incorporated in the partially completed items will be considered to be the actual purchase price of the materials, plus transportation costs, to which will be added fifteen percent (15%) of the sum thereof. 4) Contractor shall also be reimbursed for such actual expenditures for equipment, mobilization, and overhead as the City considers directly attributable to the eliminated work and that are not recovered as part of the direct payment for the W ork. Payment for completed Work at the Contract prices and for partially completed Work and materials in accordance with the above provisions, together with such other allowances as are made for fixed costs, shall constitute final and full compensation for the Work related to those Contract items that have been partially or totally eliminated from the Contract. Payment for Surplus Material Payment for materials that have been ordered in furtherance of the Work, but that are not to be used because (1) of cancellation of the Contract or a portion thereof; (2) of an order to terminate the Work before completion of the entire unit; or (3) the quantity ordered by the Engineer was in excess of the quantity needed, will be made in accordance with the following provisions, unless Contractor or one of Contractor’s suppliers elects to take possession of the surplus material without expense to the City: 1) Payment for surplus materials that have been purchased and shipped or delivered to the Project will be made at the Contract bid price when the pay item covers the furnishing and delivering of the material only. 4-5 2) When the Contract bid price covers the furnishing and placing of the material, the City will take possession of the surplus materials that have been purchased and shipped or delivered to the Project, or will order the material returned to the supplier for credit and will pay the Contractor the actual purchase price of the material plus transportation costs, to which will be added fifteen percent (15%) of the total thereof, and from which will be deducted any credits received by the Contractor for materials returned. 3) Materials that have been ordered but have not been consigned for shipment shall be paid for upon delivery the same as materials in transit or delivered only when the supplier is unwilling to cancel or modify the order such as in the case of materials requiring special manufacture, fabrication, or processing so as to be unsuitable for general use. In no case shall payment for surplus materials exceed the Contract Price for the materials complete in place. Contractor shall furnish invoices or an affidavit showing the purchase price and transportation charges on materials to be taken over by the City. Surplus materials that are taken over by the City shall be delivered to the storage sites designated by the Engineer. Except as above provided, no payment shall be made to Contractor for any materials that are not incorporated in the Work. Materials shall be ordered in the quantities needed unless a specific quantity is to be furnished by direct order of the Engineer. No payment shall be made for surplus materials that have not been inspected, tested, and accepted for use, nor will any payment be made for accepted materials that have not been properly preserved, stored, and maintained to the date on which they are delivered to the City. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. E. 2. Approve Purchase of Galaxy HRE Modules for the Water Meter Reading System Upgrade Prepared By Tim Kieffer, Public Works Maintenance Manager Joe Hansen, Utility Maintenance Supervisor Summary Staff is upgrading the water meter reading system to the new Galaxy Fixed Base Meter Reading System. The radio transmitter module upgrade is an integral part of the meter reading system. Wireless Galaxy transmitter modules will be installed on every water meter throughout the City. Purchase and installation of the Galaxy radio module is required to read the water meters in the fixed base meter reading system. The purchase of the transmitter modules is funded by the Water and Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Account (W&SS-063) as listed in the 2019 Capital Improvement Program for the amount of $600,000. Quotes were received from Metering and Technology Solutions and National Meter and Automation, Inc. The price quotes per Galaxy HRE Module and total cost for the purchase of 204 units are listed below. Staff will take additional quotes throughout the year once stock has been depleted. This order should cover the remaining change outs. Orders after this purchase will be restock only. Vendor Price per Unit Units Total Cost Metering and Technology Solutions $213 204 $ 43,452 National Meter & Automation, Inc. $279 204 $ 56,916 Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of 204 Galaxy HRE Modules from Metering and Technology Solutions in the amount of $43,452. Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. F. Acceptance of Donation for Upgrade to Isaacson Park Prepared By Rick Birno, Director of Parks & Recreation Summary As adopted in the Donation/Gift Policy, a gift of real or personal property must be accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Council. A cash donation must be acknowledged and accepted by motion with a simple majority. We have prepared the following resolution detailing the specific donor and their fiscal gift for your consideration. Attachments Resolution accepting a Donation from the Golden Valley Little League Youth Baseball Association for electrical upgrades at Isaacson Park and the replacement of the scoreboard on Isaacson field #1 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution accepting a donation from the Golden Valley Little League Youth Baseball for electrical upgrades at Isaacson Park and the replacement of the scoreboard on Isaacson field #1. RESOLUTION NO. 19-25 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR ELECTRICAL UPGRADES AT ISAACSON PARK AND REPLACEMENT OF THE SCOREBOARD ON ISAACSON FIELD #1 WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 04-20 on March 16, 2004 which established a policy for the receipt of gifts; and WHEREAS, the Resolution states that a gift of real or personal property must be accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Council. A cash donation must be acknowledged and accepted by motion with a simple majority. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council accepts the following grants and donations on behalf of its citizens: Golden Valley Little League Youth Baseball Association for electrical upgrades at Isaacson Park and the replacement of the scoreboard on Isaacson field #1 in the amount of $6,000. Adopted by the City Council of Golden Valley, Minnesota this 2nd day of April, 2019. Shepard Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. G. Approve Purchase of Utilities Inspection Televising Equipment Prepared By Tim Kieffer, Public Works Maintenance Manager Joe Hansen, Utilities Maintenance Supervisor Summary The 2019 Water and Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes $150,000 for the purchase of closed circuit televising equipment (W&SS-053). City staff utilize closed circuit television (CCTV) equipment to inspect underground utilities, such as, sanitary and storm sewer mainlines and large diameter sanitary sewer laterals. The existing televising equipment is 11 years old and the tractors that contain the cameras are increasingly in need of repairs. In addition, the computer software is no longer supported and needs to be updated. The Minnesota Materials Management Division has awarded the following contract: Contract No. Item Vendor Amount 139885 2019 Aries CCTV Pathfinder Command Center Flexible Pipe Tool Company $174,802 Total Purchase Price $174,802 The contract price is more than the amount budgeted in the CIP. Staff has reviewed other purchasing consortiums and has been unable to find components and software compatible with the existing equipment not being replaced. Funding of the overage will come from available funds for water meter transmitter upgrades. Attachments Flexible Pipe Tool Company Agreement (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of a 2019 Aries CCTV Pathfinder Command Center in the amount of 174,802. Date: To:Joe Hansen City of Golden Valley Public Works 7800 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley, MN 55427 From:Shane Smetana One (1) 2019 Aries CCTV Pathfinder Command Center mounted customer supplied Chassis Minnesota State Contract #139885 and including the following features/options: 1.0 67,029.00$ 1.2.13 4" High traction wheel (2)402.00$ 1.2.15 456.00$ 1.2.25 5" Dually wheel assembly, larger pipe dia. (4)1,304.00 1.5.3 Add rack mounted PC and UPS 5,747.00$ 1.5.10 Pipetech Scan 1 year support 1,014.00$ 1.3.6 Add PE3410 Pathfinder zoom horizontal camera 23,472.00$ 1.3.8 Add Pathfinder camera to Badger adaptor 1,454.00$ 1.6.3 Add Pathfinder reel mounting kit with stand 617.00$ 1.6.11 Substitute 1500' cable, PR1200 series (2)6,606.00$ 1.7.3 Add LE 3260 6'' Wheeled lateral inspection system to PC1170 system 56,833.00$ 1.7.5 Add PE3601 camera to LETS system 13,890.00$ 5.4.3 25' retractable reel assy.250.00$ Deduct (2) 19'' desktop monitor (2,072.00)$ Deduct Rack mount (1,000.00)$ Deduct UPS backup (1,200.00)$ Labor Labor to remove old equipment and install new equipment 5,000.00$ Subtotal 179,802.00$ MN State Sales Tax Exempt 5,000.00)$ FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY Sewer Cleaning and Inspection Equipment - Sales and Service 22606 186th Avenue, Cold Spring, MN 56320 Phone: 320-597-7552 Fax: 320-597-7882 Toll Free: 800-450-6969 February 18, 2019 We are pleased to submit the following quotation. All prices are subject to immediate acceptance. Clerical errors are subject to correction. All agreements are contingent upon fires, accidents, labor difficulties and causes beyond our reasonable control. No statement, contract or order will be binding on the Company unless made or approved on behalf of the Company by one of its officers. Base Unit Price Aries Pathfinder Mounted System 4" offset carbide hi-traction tires (2) Trade in for Camera Equipment Total:174,802.00$ By:Shane Smetana Flexible Pipe Tool Company Authorzied Signature Title City of Golden Valley Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 3. H. Authorize Contract Extension for 2019 Spring Brush Pick-Up Program Prepared By Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor Tim Teynor, Assistant City Forester Summary The 2019 Biennial Budget, Recycling (7001.6340) includes $71,400 for Spring Brush Pick-Up. The City Council awarded a contract for Spring Brush Pick-Up Services in 2018 for a one-year period. The contract provisions allow for an extension of two additional years. Tim’s Tree Service has been the single bidder for the project in the past several years. Tim’s Tree Service is agreeing to an extension with no price increase. The 2019 Spring Brush Pickup Program is a three-week program scheduled to begin on April 29, 2019. The City will be divided into three sections with one week designated for pickup in each. Section 1 Entire area north of Highway 55 and west of Douglas Drive Week of April 29 Section 2 Entire area north of Highway 55 and east of Douglas Drive Week of May 6 Section 3 Entire area south of Highway 55 Week of May 13 Golden Valley’s recycling program (which includes curbside recycling, brush pick-up and leaf drop-off) is supported through user fees. Staff provides information to residents about the 2019 Spring Brush Pick-Up Program through the CityNews, postcards mailed to their homes, and on the City’s website. Attachments Amendment to Contract 18-10 between City of Golden Valley and Tim’s Tree Service, Inc. for 2019 Spring Brush Pick-Up (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to approve Amendment to Contract 18-10 for the 2019 Spring Brush Pick-Up Program between the City of Golden Valley and Tim’s Tree Service, Inc. in the amount of $66,410. AMENDMENT Contract 18-10 between City of Golden Valley and Tim’s Tree Service, Inc. for Spring Brush Pick-up This amendment to Contract 18-10 is made this April 2, 2019, by and between the City of Golden Valley (“City”) and Tim’s Tree Service, Inc. (“Contractor”) to perform Tree Spring Brush Pick- Up services for the City of Golden Valley. The original contract was for a period of one year from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. The parties wish to extend the original contract for one additional year from January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019 at the same total contract price per year as the previous years. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Except to the extent modified by this Amendment, the contract between the City and Tim’s Tree Service, Inc. (the “Contract”) is hereby ratified in all respects. 2. The Contract is extended for an additional one-year period from January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. 3. The total payment for contract services shall be in the amount of $66,410. 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is the original contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties sign below. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By __________________________________ Shepard M. Harris Its: Mayor TIM’S TREE SERVICE, INC. By __________________________________ Its: ________________________ CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By __________________________________ Timothy J. Cruikshank Its: City Manager TIM’S TREE SERVICE, INC. By __________________________________ Its: ________________________ Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2,2019 60 Day Deadline:April 20,2019 Agenda Item 4.A.Public Hearing Approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 8043 Lewis Road Prepared By Jason Zimmerman,Planning Manager Summary American Rug Laundry,represented by Sam Navab,is requesting a Conditional Use Permit CUP) for 8043 Lewis Road in order to allow for the operation of a laundry in a Light Industrial zoning district.This property was recently purchased by American Rug Laundry and currently houses a marketing and printing business.If the CUP is approved,the interior of the existing building would be renovated.No exterior changes are anticipated. At the Planning Commission meeting on March 11,the Commission recommended approval 4 0) of Conditional Use Permit 165.A mailing was sent to the owner of the rental property located at 749 Winnetka Avenue.One resident attended the Planning Commission meeting to ask questions about tree maintenance along Bassett Creek.Two residents emailed staff questions about potential impacts of the laundry to surrounding properties. Proposed Use American Rug Laundry proposes to use the site as a location to clean and restore rugs and carpets.Some storage of handmade rugs may also take place within the warehouse.American Rug Laundry operates a facility in Minneapolis where customers may drop off and pick up rugs. The Golden Valley location will not be available for customer visits but will be utilized by employees only. It is anticipated six employees will work at the location and three company trucks or vans will be stored on site.Hours of operation are anticipated to be 7 am to 5 pm Monday thru Friday and 4 pm to 8 pm on weekends.Occasional warehouse sales may be held at this location;a Temporary Retail Sales permit would be required form the City prior to holding any event. Zoning Analysis Setbacks The siting of the building is non conforming with respect to the side yard setbacks to the northeast and to the southwest.The minimum requirement is 20’but the existing setback at the closest point to the northeast is 14.95’and to the southwest is 16.77’.The first 10’of each of the side setbacks northeast and southwest)are non conforming with respect to the landscaping required under the zoning code. Other Considerations The Planning Commission asked that staff research two additional topics prior to the City Council meeting.First,there was concern about the use of any hazardous cleaners or chemicals at the laundry so close to Bassett Creek.The Commission asked that the applicant provide a list of cleaners that are commonly used and that staff work with an outside agency to determine if they pose any risk to the water quality of Bassett Creek. The applicant has provided the following information about the cleaners/chemicals they use: Dawn dish soap Picrin spot cleaner up to 20 gallons per year but only 2 5 gallons kept on site) Household bleach approximately 5 gallons per year) 3%hydrogen peroxide approximately 2 3 gallons per year) Staff reached out to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency with this information and they have not indicated any areas of concern.None of these cleaners would be used outside of the building and the quantities stored on site would be minimal.Staff is satisfied that the operation of the laundry poses no significant risk to Bassett Creek. Second,a resident asked for information about how a scenario where a tree falls across Bassett Creek would be handled.While this is not specific to the property in question,staff did determine that as with other private disputes,the two property owners would be left to sort out the removal of the tree and the resolution of any damages.The presence of Bassett Creek introduces one wrinkle in that in the interest of keeping the waterway unobstructed and in an effort to prevent flooding,the City may need to act more quickly to clear a tree that has fallen across the creek.In that case,the City would take the minimal amount of action necessary to clear the waterway and leave the remainder of the clean up to be handled by the two property owners. CUP Evaluation The findings and recommendations for a Conditional Use Permit are based upon any or all of the following factors which need not be weighed equally).Any conditions imposed by the permit should respond to and attempt to mitigate impacts generated by the proposed use. Factor Finding 1.Demonstrated Need for Proposed Use Standard met.The applicant has operated the existing business at a location in Minneapolis for decades and is in need of additional space to manage their products. 2.Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Standard met.The proposed use is not inconsistent with the Light Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan,which allows for laundries and dry cleaners. 3.Effect upon Property Values Standard met.There are no anticipated modifications to the exterior of the building. 4.Effect on Traffic Flow and Congestion Standard met.Traffic flows are not anticipated to be substantially different from those that currently exist. Up to six employees would arrive and depart from work and various loads of rugs and carpets would be transported to and from the Minneapolis location in the three company vehicles during regular business hours. 5.Effect of Increases in Population and Density Standard met.Due to the nature of the proposed use, there are no anticipated increases in population or density. 6.Compliance with the City’s Mixed Income Housing Policy Not applicable. 7.Increase in Noise Levels Standard met.The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive noise. 8.Generation of Odors,Dust,Smoke, Gas,or Vibration Standard met.The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive odors,dust,smoke,gas,or vibrations. 9.Any Increase in Pests or Vermin Standard met.The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 10.Visual Appearance Standard met.Although additional landscaping would improve the visual appearance of the property,the absence of planned exterior modifications allows the current non conforming situation to be legally continued.Future improvements to the parking lot will need to incorporate minimum landscaping standards. 11.Other Effects upon the General Public Health,Safety,and Welfare Standard met.The proposed use is not anticipated to have any other impacts on the surrounding area.The amount of water used during the cleaning process will not impact the ability of the water supply system to adequately serve surrounding properties.The cleaning products used in the laundering process should have no impact Bassett Creek. Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 allowing for the operation of a laundry at 8043 Lewis Road.Consistent with State statute,a certified copy of the CUP must be recorded with Hennepin County. Attachments Location Map 1 page) Applicant’s Narrative 1 pages) Memo to the Planning Commission,dated March 11,2019 4 pages) Planning Commission Minutes dated March 11,2019 6 pages) Interior plan submitted February 19,2019 1 page) Portion of existing property survey 1 page) Ordinance 660,Approval of Conditional Use Permit 165,8043 Lewis Road,American Rug Laundry,Applicant 1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance 660,Approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 allowing for the operation of a laundry in a Light Industrial zoning district. 1049 1030 1020 1021 1020 1020 14101015 1021 1020 1043 1037 1016 1017 1016 1017 1016 1031 1012 1013 1012 1013 1012 10231015 1008 1009 1008 1009 1006 60 10071001 1004 1006 1005 7820 1001 1000 1001 8200 8104 100 8300 8325 10th Ave N Subject Property: 8043 Lewis Rd 8175 8121 945 8165 830 Le,.-,,S Rd k ,, 7720 8105 z 8145 Z Q2750 8125 4.> 7730 v Qc 4. T30 S is y c a o o 6300 y 00 3 8250 749 z 8100 8401 6301 c Creek Blvd City HaN 0 1sG Campus y j 625,620 7700 R U 7800 8200 8010 y 669 7800 8240 ti cy C 7930 550 8224 8200 7701 8010 7410 AM I H I [ A- N S I M 4 1 RUC LAUINURY 4222 E.Lake Street Minneapolis,MN 55406 612-721-3333 info a,altiericanruslaundrv.com February 14, 2019 To Whom it May Concern: American Rug Laundry has been involved in cleaning, repair and restoration of handmade as well as machine made rugs and carpeting since 1895. We have operated out of our current location in Minneapolis since 1918.We are the recipient of BBB's Century Founding Member Award. The 8043 Lewis Road,Golden Valley, MN 55427 location is to be used as a rug and carpet cleaning and restoration facility. We will be utilizing this location for the cleaning and restoration of rugs and carpets,causing no noise, vibration, odor,or traffic,that may impact the surrounding area in any negative way. We will have six employees working at this location and park three company trucks and vans and six employee vehicles at any given time. Additionally,we may use the 8043 Lewis Road building as a warehouse to store handmade rugs for Navab Brothers Rug Company. Please let me know if there is any other information needed. With kind re rds, Sam Nava American Rug Laundry 612-221-2571 1 Date: March 11, 2019 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: Informal Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit (CUP-165) to Allow for the Operation of a Laundry in a Light Industrial Zoning District Property address: 8043 Lewis Road Applicant: SAFA Holding DBA American Rug Laundry Property owner: same as applicant Zoning District: Light Industrial Lot size: 45,204 sq. ft. (1.04 acres) Current use: Printing office Proposed use: Carpet and rug cleaning Future land use: Light Industrial (2030 Comp Plan); Mixed Use (2040 Comp Plan) Adjacent uses: Industrial uses (west, south); commercial use - bank (north); Bassett Creek (east) 2015 aerial photo (Hennepin County) 2 Summary American Rug Laundry, represented by Sam Navab, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for 8043 Lewis Road in order to allow for the operation of a laundry in a Light Industrial zoning district. This property was recently purchased by American Rug Laundry and currently houses a marketing and printing business. If the CUP is approved, the interior of the existing building would be renovated. No exterior changes are anticipated. Existing Conditions The subject property contains a one story building that has parking areas both in front and behind. There are two loading docks in the front of the building facing Lewis Road as well as to entrances. Bassett Creek runs along the rear of the property and a roughly 60’ drainage and utility easement extends into the parking area at the back of the building. The property to the north houses a bank while other light industrial properties are located to the south and to the west. A multi-family building sits behind the subject property, on the other side of Bassett Creek and at the top of a steep slope. While the 2030 Comprehensive Plan guides the property for Light Industrial use, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan anticipates guiding the area for Mixed Use and rezoning those properties accordingly. The draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan has not yet been approved by the Metropolitan Council and has not been adopted by the City Council. Proposed Use American Rug Laundry proposes to use the site as a location to clean and restore rugs and carpets. Some storage of handmade rugs may also take place within the warehouse. American Rug Laundry operates a facility in Minneapolis where customers may drop-off and pick-up rugs. The Golden Valley location will not be available for customer visits but will be utilized by employees only. It is anticipated six employees will work at the location and three company trucks or vans will be stored on-site. Hours of operation are anticipated to be 7 am to 5 pm Monday thru Friday and 4 pm to 8 pm on weekends. Neighborhood Notification The owner of the rental property located at 749 Winnetka Avenue was notified by mail of the proposed use. To date, staff has not been contacted regarding any questions or concerns. Zoning Considerations Setbacks The siting of the building is non-conforming with respect to the side yard setbacks to the northeast and to the southwest. The minimum requirement is 20’ but the existing setback at the closest point to the northeast is 14.95’ and to the southwest is 16.77’. The first 10’ of each of the side setbacks (northeast and southwest) are non-conforming with respect to the landscaping required under the zoning code. 3 Evaluation The findings and recommendations for a Conditional Use Permit are based upon any or all of the following factors (which need not be weighed equally): Factor Finding 1. Demonstrated Need for Proposed Use Standard met. The applicant has operated the existing business at a location in Minneapolis for decades and is in need of additional space to manage their products. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Standard met. The proposed use is not inconsistent with the Light Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan, which allows for laundries and dry cleaners. 3. Effect upon Property Values Standard met. There are no anticipated modifications to the exterior of the building. 4. Effect on Traffic Flow and Congestion Standard met. Traffic flows are not anticipated to be substantially different from those that currently exist. Up to six employees would arrive and depart from work and various loads of rugs and carpets would be transported to and from the Minneapolis location in the three company vehicles during regular business hours. 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density Standard met. Due to the nature of the proposed use, there are no anticipated increases in population or density. 6. Compliance with the City’s Mixed-Income Housing Policy Not applicable. 7. Increase in Noise Levels Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive noise. 8. Generation of Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas, or Vibration Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibrations. 9. Any Increase in Pests or Vermin Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 4 10. Visual Appearance Standard met. Although additional landscaping would improve the visual appearance of the property, the absence of planned exterior modifications allows the current non- conforming situation to be legally continued. Future improvements to the parking lot will need to incorporate minimum landscaping standards. 11. Other Effects upon the General Public Health, Safety, and Welfare Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to have any other impacts on the surrounding area. The amount of water used during the cleaning process will not impact the ability of the water supply system to adequately serve surrounding properties. The Engineering Division has reviewed the application and has no additional concerns. The property is currently non-compliant with the City’s Inflow and Infiltration requirements but a deposit has been made to conduct the sanitary sewer corrections in the spring. Engineering staff supports approval of the CUP. Recommended Action Based on the findings above, staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 allowing for the operation of a laundry at 8043 Lewis Road. Consistent with State statute, a certified copy of the CUP must be recorded with Hennepin County. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Applicant Narrative (1 page) Interior plan submitted February 19, 2019 (1 page) Portion of existing property survey (1 page) 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 qfl, 0/ 763-593-39921 TTY 763-593-3968 763-593-8109(fax)I www.goldenvalleymn.gov Planning Commission Mar 11,2019—7 pm ersREGULARMEETINGMINUTESen Valleyncil City HallGoldenValleyCityHall 7800 Golden Valley Road I to Order T eetinIgg was called to order at 7 pm by ce Chair Johnson. Roll Call Commissione esent: Ron Blum, Ada rookins, Andy Johnson, Chuc aum Commissioners ab t: Rich Baker, Laur Pockl Staff present: Planning Manag Jason Zimmerma ministrative Assistant Lisa Wittman Council Liaison present: ve Schmidgal Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded b m to approve the agenda of March 11, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried. Approval of Minutes February 25, 2019, Regul anning Commi on Meeting Johnson referred he fourth paragraph on age seven and said he like the words "to the 1-394 redevelopm area" added to his comment egarding a north/south conn over Highway 55. MO made by Blum, seconded by Brook i s to approve the February 25, 2019, minutes with the ve noted correction and the motion carri d. Agenda Item Applicant: American Rug Laundry—CU-165 Address: 8043 Lewis Road Purpose: To allow for carpet and area rug cleaning and restoration in the Light Industrial Zoning District Zimmerman referred to a location map of 8043 Lewis Road and explained the applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a laundry which would consist of rug and carpet cleaning and restoration in a Light Industrial Zoning District. He stated that the existing building would be maintained and that only internal modifications would be made. He stated that there will be no direct service of customers and that all rugs will be brought from off-site. The hours of operation would be 7 am to 5 pm Monday-Friday and 4 pm to 8 pm on Saturdays and Sundays and that they will have six employees and three company trucks or vans stored on-site for transporting rugs. This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call 763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille,audiocassette, etc. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 2 Mar 11, 2019 a 7 pm Zimmerman stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit as it meets all of the factors of evaluation outlined in the City Code. Segelbaum asked for clarification on why the proposed use is Conditional. Zimmerman stated that laundries are one of the conditional uses listed in the Zoning Code for the Light Industrial Zoning District. He said he believes it was most likely put there because typical laundries have more customers and traffic. Segelbaum noted that Bassett Creek is directly behind this property and asked if there is anything the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) requires with this proposal. Zimmerman stated that staff has talked to the applicant about their cleaning processes and they have said they don't use anything toxic. He added that the drains from this building don't flow into the creek and that over time in the future the BCWMC might want to work with this property owner to provide more access to the creek. Segelbaum asked if the Commission doesn't want the applicant to have customers if that is something they should add as a condition or if that is already integrated into the application. Zimmerman said they could have customers. He added that the Conditional Use Permit review process is to see if conditions of approval should be added because there are some impacts caused by the proposed use that aren't currently there,that would require conditions, then conditions can be placed. Zimmerman noted that if conditions change, the Conditional Use Permit could be amended in the future. Segelbaum asked if there is anywhere on the property that would be appropriate for additional landscaping. Zimmerman stated that there is existing landscaping across the front of the building and that without having any kind of impacts from their proposed use, and the fact that they are not proposing any exterior changes, the City doesn't have the authority to require additional landscaping. Johnson asked about 1/1 compliance. Zimmerman stated that the applicant has had an 1/1 inspection and has provided a deposit for work that will be done in the spring. Johnson asked if the applicant can change their hours of operation in the future. Zimmerman stated that the applicant isn't limited to the hours they listed in their application and that if their hours of operation become a problem in the future the City can address it. Sam Navab, Applicant, said he is happy to be expanding into Golden Valley. He said his business is one of the longest ongoing establishments in the state and that they are celebrating their 116th year of being in business. He said their current location in Minneapolis is small and that they have been looking for a larger space to use primarily as their cleaning facility. He referred to the question about their cleaning process and said their main cleaning detergent is Dawn dishwashing soap. He said they don't use any harsh chemicals and are very concerned about the environment. He said he also intends to install solar City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 3 Mar 11, 2019-7pm panels on the building. He added that on occasion they may be open to the public for warehouse sales but they don't anticipate a lot of traffic. Blum asked the applicant what other things they use in their cleaning process. Navab said they use a solvent called "Picrin" that they don't put into the sewer,they just sometimes spray it on a rug and wipe it off with a towel. He added that they also use vinegar as a cleaning agent. Blum asked how the cleaning supplies would be delivered to the site. Navab said they would be delivered by UPS in boxes. Segelbaum asked the applicant if they've ever had chemicals spill in their facility that leaked outside of the facility. Navab said no, not in the 20 years he's owned the company and he doesn't think there has ever been any issues or concerns. Segelbaum asked how often they anticipate having warehouse sales. Navab said he would have sales approximately four times per year. Johnson opened the public hearing. Janet Frisch, 7930 Golden Valley Road, said she is concerned about Bassett Creek and that her condo association maintains the wall along the south side of the creek. She said she had an issue where a tree fell from the north side of the creek over to their side of the creek and there were questions about who is responsible for getting rid of that tree. She said there appears to be trees along Bassett Creek behind this property and she wonders how a situation like that, or any kind of damage might be handled with these new owners of the building. Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to comment, Johnson closed the public hearing. Segelbaum asked about the requirements regarding sales in the Light Industrial Zoning District. Zimmerman said there is a temporary retail sales permit they would have to apply for and there is a limit to how many sales they can have in a year. Segelbaum asked if people dropping off rugs is considered retail. Zimmerman said no, retail would involve more customers coming and going rather than just an occasional drop off. Blum asked how this would compare to a storage facility. Zimmerman said this would be similar to a storage facility in that there is the occasional coming and going. Blum said he is concerned about the proximity of this use to the creek. He said he has to believe there are other things being used besides Dawn dish soap. He said he was unable in his quick search to find a chemical by the name "Picrin" and he would like a list of all the chemicals being used and he wants to know if any of them are exceptionally harmful to the environment. He said that if there is something City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting 4 Mar 11, 2019 o 7 pm hazardous being used that would go to their elements of approval or disapproval and the factor of evaluation regarding other effects upon the general public health, safety, and welfare especially with its proximity to Bassett Creek. He said that it seems like it wouldn't be a gross imposition to ask for a berm or for some landscaping in accordance with the Code if there is a risk. He said that making this decision without knowing about the chemicals doesn't feel responsible to him. He added that he isn't saying he doesn't want this business at this location or in Golden Valley, but they should use reasonable caution and diligence in examining what the applicant is doing and what they are using before they make a final decision. Johnson questioned if there are any licensing or permitting processes that would help address what Commissioner Blum mentioned. Zimmerman said Golden Valley does not issue business licenses and that the Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and is comfortable with it. He said staff could reach out to the BCWSMC to make sure they don't have any concerns. He said the use of vinegar and Dawn dish soap don't raise concern from City staff. In terms of the other industrial uses in this area and elsewhere, there is probably not a high risk in this case, but is something they want to be thinking about. Johnson asked if there are disclosures required by the City for chemical holding, containment, or management on industrial properties. Zimmerman said there aren't any Zoning Code regulations, but there may be Fire regulations or processes. Blum reiterated that he thinks it is reasonable as part of their decision making to ask what chemicals are being used. Segelbaum said he thinks it's wonderful that this company wants to have a location in Golden Valley and he is in favor of posing this to the BCWSMC in order to have additional information available for the Council. Johnson said another option would be to have the applicant certify whether they have toxic or harmful chemicals as opposed to providing an inventory of what they are using. He questioned if it is unfair to request that from this applicant because the Planning Commission has never asked these types of questions to other applicants. Segelbaum said they have examined things in the past with more scrutiny when they are next to the creek. Blum said there are distinctions that are unique with this proposal. One is the use of chemicals other than water as a primary part of their business, and two is the proximity to the creek which makes the use of chemicals an important question to ask. He said he likes the idea of getting the opinion of the BCWMC. Brookins said he lives downstream cares about the creek as well. He said he is more concerned about the comments made in the public hearing about trees falling and encouraged the applicant to work with the City Forester in regard to creek bank restoration. He said he sees that as a greater value for the City than getting too caught up in what chemicals the applicant uses. He said he is very comfortable with the proposed use and he looks forward to them partnering with the City on the clean-up of the creek and taking some trees down and providing a buffer over time. Zimmerman added that the City has been working on creek restoration in various locations which also includes removing invasive species and stabilizing the banks so they will most likely be working on that with this property owner in the future. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission [regular Meeting 5 Mar 11, 2019 m 7 pm Johnson asked about the liability for any kind of damage from one part of the creek to another. Zimmerman said he is not sure if damage across the creek is different from damage across any other property line, but said he would get clarification from the City Attorney and have information available at the City Council meeting. Johnson summarized that he is hearing from the Commissioners that they would like an analysis or opinion from the BCWMC regarding the chemicals used at this facility and additional information regarding the liability that this property owner has regarding any type of damage on any neighboring properties. Brookins suggested three recommendations. One is that the applicant provide a detailed chemical list, two is obtaining comments from the BCWMC, and three is getting further information regarding potential liability of property owners for any damages. Segelbaum said he is fine with those recommendations without them being requirements or conditions of approval. Blum suggested that the submission of a detailed chemical list be required because without that the other things can't happen. Segelbaum said presumably the BCWMC will know more about the chemicals and what to look for so he would rather see that recommendation be required. Johnson said the applicant would be able to give the City an inventory list within days, whereas it may delay the applicant to have to wait for the BCWMC to provide comments. MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Blum to recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 165 allowing for carpet and area rug cleaning and restoration in the Light Industrial Zoning District at 8043 Lewis Road subject to the findings and recommendations listed below and the motion carried: Findings: 1. Demonstrated Need for Proposed Use: Standard met. The applicant has operated the existing business at a location in Minneapolis for decades and is in need of additional space to manage their products. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: Standard met. The proposed use is not inconsistent with the Light Industrial designation in the Comprehensive Plan, which allows for laundries and dry cleaners. 3. Effect upon Property Values: Standard met. There are no anticipated modifications to the exterior of the building. 4. Effect on Traffic Flow and Congestion: Standard met. Traffic flows are not anticipated to be substantially different from those that currently exist. Up to six employees would arrive and depart from work and various loads of rugs and carpets would be transported to and from the Minneapolis location in the three company vehicles during regular business hours. 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: Standard met. Due to the nature of the proposed use, there are no anticipated increases in population or density. 6. Compliance with the City's Mixed-Income Housing Policy: Not applicable. City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting B Mar 11, 2019—7 pm 7. Increase in Noise Levels: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive noise. 8. Generation of Odors, Dust, Smoke, Gas, or Vibration: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate excessive odors, dust, smoke, gas, or vibrations. 9. Any Increase in Pests or Vermin: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 10. Visual Appearance: Standard met. Although additional landscaping would improve the visual appearance of the property, the absence of planned exterior modifications allows the current non- conforming situation to be legally continued. Future improvements to the parking lot will need to incorporate minimum landscaping standards. 11. Other Effects upon the General Public Health, Safety, and Welfare: Standard met. The proposed use is not anticipated to have any other impacts on the surrounding area. The amount of water used during the cleaning process will not impact the ability of the water supply system to adequately serve surrounding properties Recommendations: 1. A list of chemicals used by the applicant in their operations shall be required and shared with the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission for their comments. 2. More information should be obtained by staff regarding the issue of liability concerning any kind of damage originating from the applicant's property. Short Recess-- ncil Liaison Report Cou ' Member Schmidgall stated that the last City Council meeting the Fire Chief presen n about the use of City faciliti in the event of an emergency. Hes ' e Council also considere endments to the massage erapy ordinance which was r en from an adult business to a health car us. Schmidgall told the Com ' ion that the is going to b iscussion regarding an HRA levy for developing affordable housi the Mar 12 C Manager meeting. Zimmerman added that a levy could be used for other HRA func as e Reports on Meetings of the Housi nd velopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals, and other meetings No reports were given. Other Business The Commiss. ers discussed the Conditi al Use Permit appro rocess and when to require condition when they can identify the s the Commission shoul ress when reviewing Condi ' al Use Permit requests. Zimmer an reminded the Commission any conditions placed on a Co itional Use Permit have to be relate o the impact caused by the propos a and based on the factors of consideration listed in the Z ing Code. p@q$g y LMS NW'A311tlA N3OlOO ZPHslM+l COOSr^ SNOLLWHUT w a 7 Sw YvJpON1O1ineA3lltlAN3O1OOLLO I I Q k 3 J 3 I III w I I 1 I 1 n I pq I i d y------ E..------- y a______ ____a A 1 I I I I I I I I 7 i yy 1 1 yyJ E I I I i i I q O u QQa-`35 X98 •"20 E LM OUnos fo' I c I Z, A N ' 16.18 - 16.77 1 OPO ,• G 1 1 II NGR ,2, f• ' N Wok N r- w I FOO 0W,00Lp N s rn Ln I i I 20 Na Y I ' ORDINANCE NO. 660 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Approval of Conditional Use Permit Number 165 8043 Lewis Road American Rug Laundry, Applicant The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Chapter 113 entitled “Zoning” is amended in Section 113-55, Subd. b, and Section 113-93, by approving a Conditional Use Permit for certain tracts of land located at 8043 Lewis Road, thereby allowing for the operation of a laundry in the Light Industrial Zoning District. This Conditional Use Permit is approved based on the application materials and plans submitted by the applicant, staff memos, public comments and information presented to the Planning Commission and City Council, and findings recommended by the Planning Commission. This Conditional Use Permit is approved pursuant to City Code Section 113- 30, Subd. g, and adopted by the City Council on April 2, 2019. Section 2. The tracts of land affected by this ordinance are legally described as follows: That part of Lot 3, lying Southwesterly of a line parallel with and 40 feet Northeasterly of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 3; and Lot 4, except the Southwesterly 20 feet front and rear, all in Block 2 Becon Addition Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled “General Provisions” and Sec. 1-8 entitled General Penalty; Continuing Violations” are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Planning Commission Consideration March 11, 2019 City Council Consideration April 2, 2019 Date of Publication April 11, 2019 Date Ordinance takes effect April 11, 2019 Adopted by the City Council this 2nd day of April, 2019. s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: s/ Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 6. A. First Consideration of Amendment to the City Code for the Addition of New Micromobility Sharing Operations Section and Amendment the Master Fee Schedule Prepared By Maria Cisneros, City Attorney Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary In 2018, the City entered into a memorandum of understanding with the micromobility company LimeBike (Lime) to deploy dockless bikes and scooters in Golden Valley. The agreement with Lime worked well; however, without an ordinance the City’s ability to regulate the operation of multiple micromobility vendors is limited. During the last several months, Lime and other micromobility companies have expressed interest in operating in Golden Valley this summer. Additionally, several neighboring communities, including Edina, St. Louis Park, Minneapolis, and St. Paul have enacted ordinances or adopted agreements relating to micromobility. Staff expects there will be spillover from micromobility operations in neighboring communities. Given the interest expressed by micromobility vendors and the likelihood for micromobility spill over from adjacent communities, staff believes it is appropriate to consider an ordinance regulating the use of micromobility vehicles in Golden Valley. Council and staff discussed the benefits of an ordinance at the February 12, 2019, Council/Manager meeting and staff has prepared the proposed ordinance in response to Council’s comments at that meeting. Additionally, staff has consulted neighboring communities and has endeavored to create an ordinance sufficiently tailored to allow Golden Valley to maintain a safe and orderly right of way, while also remaining consistent with the regulations being promulgated in the region. The proposed ordinance requires micromobility vendors to enter into a license agreement with the City and limits the total number of micromobility vehicles to 200. Vendors would apply for a license and staff would issue up to four licenses per season. Applicants would be evaluated based on their alignment with the City’s strategic priorities, Equity Plan, Comprehensive Plan and Bike and Pedestrian Plan, as well as their safety record and responsiveness to complaints and other consumer issues. The City would retain control over its right of way, would have the right to impound micromobility vehicles when required, and could revoke the licenses at any time. Licensees would pay an annual fee of $250 to the City in exchange for the license. In the event a vehicle is impounded, licensees would be subject to an impound fee of $58 per vehicle, plus an 18 per day storage fee. If the Council adopts this first consideration of the ordinance, a second consideration will be held on April 16 and the ordinance would be effective upon publication on April 25. Thereafter, staff would begin accepting applications and be ready to issue licenses by early May. Attachments Ordinance #661, Chapter 24 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of- Way Management adopting a new section 24-53 Mobility Sharing Operations and Amending the Master Fee Schedule (4pages) License Agreement for Micromobility Sharing Operations (12 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt first consideration, Ordinance #661, amending the City Code by Adopting a new Section entitled Micromobility Sharing Operations and amending the Master Fee Schedule. ORDINANCE NO. 661 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Chapter 24 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management adopting a new section 24-53 Mobility Sharing Operations and Amending the Master Fee Schedule Section 1. City Code Chapter 24 Street, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management is hereby amended by adding a new Section 24-53 to read as follows: Section 24-53 - Micromobility Sharing Operations a) Definitions 1) "Impoundment" or “Impound” as used in this chapter means removal of a micromobility vehicle to a storage facility or designated impound location by the City or a licensed City contractor in response to authorization from a police officer, traffic control agent, or other City employee who is designated by the director of public works to act under this section. 2) License agreement or license as used in this section shall mean a written contract or agreement issued by the City Manager or their designee, with approval by the City Council. 3) Micromobility vehicle as used in this section shall include bicycles, electric-assisted bicycles, motorized foot scooters, and any other transportation device identified as a micromobility vehicle pursuant to City Council action. A current list of all micromobility vehicles included in this definition shall be kept on file by the City Manager or their designee, and will be made readily available for public inspection. 4) Micromobility sharing or micromobility sharing operation as used in this section shall mean any rental or lending service that: a. Allows riders to temporarily use micromobility vehicles available from a fleet in exchange for a fee or other form of direct or indirect compensation; and b. Encourages, allows, or is susceptible to micromobility vehicle vending, renting, or lending from City-maintained right-of-way or other City property. b) License Agreement Required 1) Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, no person shall engage in the business of micromobility sharing from City-maintained right-of-way or other City property without a valid license agreement with the City. 2) Any micromobility vehicle that is part of a micromobility sharing operation not authorized by a license agreement under this section shall be deemed an unpermitted micromobility vehicle. Any person in possession of an unpermitted micromobility vehicle may ride such micromobility vehicle into and through the City, Ordinance No. 661 -2- April 2, 2019 subject to all applicable state and local laws and rules. All unpermitted micromobility vehicle must be attended by the same user at all times while on City-maintained right-of-way or other City property. As used in this article, "attended" means a readily identifiable user is located within five (5) feet of the micromobility vehicle. c) Control Of Right-Of-Way License agreements issued pursuant to this chapter shall not operate so as to transfer ownership or control of the public right-of-way to micromobility sharing operators, or to any other party. d) Compliance with Laws Micromobility sharing operators and consumers shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, as they may be amended from time to time. The operation of a micromobility vehicle upon a public street, alley, highway, sidewalk, or other public property in the City shall be governed by the corresponding provisions of Minn. Stat., Chapter 169. e) Attachment Of Micromobility Vehicles Prohibited Micromobility vehicles that are part of any micromobility sharing operation shall not, for any length of time, be secured, attached, or connected to a bicycle rack, or any other immovable object with a lock unless expressly permitted under a valid license agreement. f) Enforcement 1) Micromobility vehicles may be deemed to be part of a micromobility sharing operation based on any of the following: marketing or advertising associated with a business logo attached to the vehicle; marketing or advertising associated with the overall appearance of the vehicle; the existence of a locking mechanism that can be unlocked for a fee or other form of direct or indirect compensation; or any other indicator that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the vehicle is used for micromobility sharing as defined in this section. 2) Any micromobility vehicle deemed to be part of a micromobility sharing operation that is found illegally parked, or otherwise in violation of this section or the terms of a valid City license agreement, shall be subject to impoundment under subsection (g) herein. 3) Any micromobility vehicle deemed to be part of a micromobility sharing operation that is left unattended on private property shall be subject to impoundment under subsection (g) herein. Impoundment shall not occur unless and until a qualifying request to remove the bicycle is made by the owner or authorized representative of such property. 4) In addition to any other remedy available at equity or law, failure to comply with the provisions of this section, or with the terms of any license agreement issued pursuant hereto, may result in impoundment as provided in this section, license termination, suspension or cancellation, administrative fines, restrictions, or other penalties as provided herein. Ordinance No. 661 -3- April 2, 2019 g) Impounding Authorized 1) Micromobility vehicles may be impounded by any traffic officer or duly authorized City employee because: a. The low power vehicle was found improperly attached in violation of subsection e) herein. b. The micromobility vehicle was found unattended and blocking traffic or public infrastructure, or otherwise compromising public safety. c. The micromobility vehicle is part of an unpermitted micromobility vehicle sharing operation or is found in violation of one or more provisions of this section. d. The low power vehicle is found in violation of one or more of the terms of a contract or license issued under subsection (b) herein. 2) All micromobility vehicles found in violation of this section are subject to impoundment without warning. 3) Not more than seventy-two (72) hours after impoundment of any micromobility vehicle, the City shall provide written notice to the owner of the micromobility vehicle, as disclosed by readily identifiable owner contact information attached to the low power vehicle. The notice shall be sent by either electronic or US mail. The notice shall contain the full particulars of the impoundment and redemption process. If a micromobility vehicle is redeemed prior to the submission of notice, or if the City is unable to readily identify the owner, then notice need not be sent. Saturdays, Sundays and City holidays are to be excluded from the calculation of the seventy- two-hour period. 4) All micromobility vehicles impounded under this section shall be subject to an impounded fee that is sufficient to offset the City’s costs of enforcement and storage for each such low power vehicle. h) Sale of Impounded Low Power Vehicles. Any micromobility vehicle lawfully coming into the possession of the City and remaining unclaimed by the owner for a period of at least thirty (30) days may be sold to the highest bidder at public auction or sale following reasonable published notice. Section 2. The 2019 Master Fee Schedule is hereby amended by adding the following new Micromobility Fees: Impound Fee (per device) $ 56.00 Storage Fee (per device) $ 18.00 per day (24 hours) License Fee (each year) $ 250.00 The Master Fee Schedule is reviewed annually and fees may be revised as needed. Ordinance No. 661 -4- April 2, 2019 Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled “General Provisions” and Sec. 1-8 entitled General Penalty; Continuing Violations” are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. First Consideration April 2, 2019 Second Consideration April 16, 2019 Date of Publication April 25, 2019 Date Ordinance takes effect April 25, 2019 Adopt by the City Council this 2nd day of April, 2019. ATTEST: s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor 1 LICENSE AGREEMENT MICROMOBILITY VEHICLE SHARING OPERATIONS THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the ___ day of ____, 2019 by and between the City of Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”) and [NAME OF COMPANY], a STATE OF INCORPORTION] corporation (herein called “Licensee”) (collectively, the “Parties”). WHEREAS, the City has adopted an ordinance to facilitate and regulate Micromobility Vehicle Sharing Operations from the City’s Right-of-Way (the “Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, the City controls certain public rights of way and recreational trails located within its municipal boundaries (the “City Right-of-Way”); and WHEREAS, the City Right-of-Way contemplated by this Agreement does not cover areas that are not controlled by the City, including but not limited to, all streets, roads, trails, or parkways owned by the Three Rivers Park District, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, and private property owners; and WHEREAS, Licensee owns a fleet of commercial, Micromobility Vehicles intended or equipped for shared use by paying consumers from right-of-way locations in the City; and WHEREAS, Licensee’s vehicles are Micromobility Vehicles as defined by the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, Licensee’s operation requires use of City Right-of-Way to facilitate the stationing and parking of Licensee’s Fleet within the City, and it is considered a Micromobility Vehicle Sharing Operation under the Ordinance (“Licensee’s Operation”); and WHEREAS, Licensee has submitted a written application to the City for a license to implement Licensee’s Operation under the provisions of the Ordinance; WHEREAS, Licensee’s license application is incorporated and incorporated herein by reference (“Licensee’s Application”); and WHEREAS, allowing Micromobility Vehicle sharing operations to exist in the City Right-of- Way is likely to promote the public’s health, safety, and welfare by encouraging efficient and limited use of traditional motor vehicles, thereby reducing traffic volumes, noise, and air pollution; and WHEREAS, the City believes Micromobility Vehicle sharing has the potential to help achieve the City’s goals around transportation mode share, equitable access, physical and environmental health, and climate change; and WHEREAS, the City must balance the benefits of Micromobility Vehicle sharing operations with its duty to keep streets and sidewalks safe, orderly, and free of unregulated obstructions and encumbrances; and 2 WHEREAS, this Agreement is intended to outline the terms and conditions under which Licensee will be allowed to utilize the City Right-of-Way during the term of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the following terms and conditions, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS 1. Fleet Vehicle means a Micromobility Vehicle that is used by Licensee as part of Licensee’s Micromobility Sharing Operation. 2. Furnishing Zone means the section of the sidewalk between the curb and the sidewalk clear zone in which street furnishings and amenities, such as lighting, benches, newspaper kiosks, utility poles, tree pits, and bicycle parking are provided. 3. Licensee’s Fleet means all Micromobility Vehicles under Licensee’s control that are intended or equipped for shared use by paying consumers from the City’s Right-of-Way. 4. Micromobility Vehicle has the meaning given to it in Golden Valley City Code, section 24-53(a)(3). 5. Micromobility Sharing Operation has the meaning given to it in Golden Valley City Code, section 24-53(a)(4). 6. Sidewalk Clear Zone means the accessible, primary pedestrian thoroughfare that runs parallel to the street. The clear zone ensures that pedestrians have a safe, obstruction-free thoroughfare. ARTICLE 2. USE OF CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY 1. Authorization. In accordance with Golden Valley City Code, section 24-53, the City hereby grants a revocable, non-exclusive license to Licensee to implement Licensee’s Operation within the City Right-of-Way during the term of this Agreement, subject to all of the terms and conditions set forth herein. This authorization is not a lease or an easement, and shall not be construed to transfer any real property interest in the City Right-of-Way or other City property. 2. Additional Uses. Licensee expressly understands and agrees that this Agreement does not grant Licensee or its contactors the ability to exclude, or prohibit others from using, the City Right-of- Way. Licensee further understands and agrees that the City holds its interest in the City Right-of- Way in trust for the public, and that the City’s uses, needs, and obligations shall at all times supersede Licensee’s privileges under this Agreement. ARTICLE III. TERM The term of this Agreement shall be through January 1, 2020, unless terminated earlier as provided herein. The License set forth in this Agreement may be revoked or terminated at any time, for any reason, in the sole discretion of the City upon twenty-four (24) hours written notice by the City to Licensee. In the event of early termination or revocation, Licensee will be granted a reasonable period of time in which to collect and remove Licensee’s Micromobility Vehicles, and any other facilities 3 owned by Licensee, and to restore the City Right-of-Way in accordance with Article VI, Section 4. The provisions of Article VI, Section 9 herein shall survive revocation or termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE OF CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY Licensee agrees that it will implement Licensee’s Operation in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 1. Fleet size and type a. Licensee shall deploy and maintain in service a level of Micromobility Vehicles sufficient to satisfy the demand of the City’s residents and visitors. The City may require Licensee to decrease the number of Micromobility Vehicles in its Fleet at any time. b. A maximum total of 200 Micromobility Vehicles will be authorized by the City under the Ordinance among all licensees. If more than one license is issued by the City, then each permitted licensee shall be limited to an equal number of Micromobility Vehicles to achieve the maximum total number allowed. c. Notwithstanding Sections 1(a) and 1(b), the City reserves the right to unilaterally limit or reduce the maximum number of Micromobility Vehicles in Licensee’s Fleet allowed under the Ordinance and this Agreement. If such reduction is related to noncompliance issues governed by this Agreement, then an equivalent reduction may not be applied to separately licensed third parties. d. The City will notify Licensee of any increases or decreases applicable to Licensee’s Fleet under this section by sending written or emailed notice under Article VI, Section 15 herein. Such increases or decreases shall not require an amendment to this Agreement. e. Licensee shall distribute its Fleet throughout the City in a manner that accounts for citizen demand and is consistent with the parking requirements of Article IV, Section 3 herein. Licensee shall not deploy Micrombility Vehicles at inappropriate densities and shall monitor its Fleet density at least once every day and relocate vehicles as needed to comply with these density requirements. 2. Fleet Scooter equipment, maintenance, and safety requirements a. Licensee’s Fleet shall be equipped with equipment meeting all specifications, including but not limited to brakes, reflectors, and lighting as set forth in Minnesota State Statute 169.225. b. Licensee’s Fleet must be certified as safe to operate under any applicable standard by Underwriters Laboratories, or an equivalent safety rating. c. Licensee’s Fleet shall have a unique identifier clearly displayed on each device in the form of numbers or letters for the purposes of conveying or documenting parking or safety complaints, and for auditing the quantity and type of devices in Licensee’s Fleet. d. Licensee shall provide a comprehensive inventory of Licensee’s Fleet, including model, type, and unique identifier to the City. Such inventory shall be proactively updated by the Licensee within five (5) business days, if or when vehicles are added or removed from Licensee’s Fleet. e. All vehicles in Licensee’s Fleet shall be equipped with both: a) a locking mechanism to prevent theft; and b) an operable mechanism to provide real-time location when a device is parked. f. Licensee shall remain responsible for the maintenance of each vehicle in Licensee’s Fleet, including but not limited to technology mechanisms, and locking systems. g. Each vehicle in Licensee’s Fleet must visibly display Licensee’s logo or business name on 4 both sides of the vehicle, together with a customer service phone number staffed from at least 7am-10pm on days Licensee’s Fleet is in service on City Right-of-Way. Licensee’s customer service line shall accept voicemail at all other times to report parking or operational complaints, and safety or maintenance concerns. h. Licensee shall proactively remove any and all inoperable or unsafe vehicles from Licensee’s Fleet within 12 hours of the initial onset of such condition. i. Licensee agrees that it will maintain a multilingual website and mobile application which shall be available to the general public 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, including certain languages as specified by the City. j. Licensee’s website and mobile application must be fully accessible to persons with disabilities and accessible to screen readers, and all aspects of Licensee’s Operation must comply with Section 508 of the United States Workforce Rehabilitation Act of 1973. k. Licensee agrees that it will provide all users of Licensee’s Fleet of with a summary of instructions and laws regarding motorized foot scooter riding, parking, and operations including those set forth in Golden Valley City Code Section 26-4, Minnesota State Statute 169.225, and any other law or regulatory provision applicable to the operation or parking of Micromobility Vehicles. l. Licensee agrees that it will either require or recommend the use of helmets to all users of Licensee’s Fleet. m. Licensee will keep and maintain a comprehensive and complete record of all Micromobility Vehicle collision reports received by Licensee or its contractor(s) during the term of this Agreement. The record shall include day, time and location. A copy of such record shall be provided to the City within two (2) business days of a written or emailed request. n. If the City determines, in is sole discretion, that any of Licensee’s consumers or customers have failed to comply with applicable laws governing the safe operation or parking of Licensee’s vehicles, including but not limited to, breach of any current or future laws governing driver’s license requirements, the use of helmets, operation on sidewalks, or parking requirements, or have otherwise demonstrated a threat to public health, safety, or welfare, such determination shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement. 3. Fleet Scooter Parking. All devices in Licensee’s Fleet shall comply with the following parking rules and restrictions when located in the City Right-of-Way: a. Fleet Vehicles must be parked upright and stabilized when not in use. b. Sidewalk parking shall be limited to areas within the Furnishing Zone, outside the pedestrian path of travel. c. Fleet Vehicles must not be parked in any location or manner that will impede normal and reasonable pedestrian traffic or access to: i. Pedestrian ramps ii. Building/property entrances iii. Driveways iv. Loading zones v. Disability parking and transfer zones vi. Transit stops vii. Crosswalks viii. Parklets ix. Street/sidewalk cafes x. Other street furnishings (benches, parking meters, etc.) xi. Underground utility, sewer, or water facilities xii. Sidewalk Clear Zones 5 d. Fleet Vehicles shall not be parked in landscaped areas, traffic islands, in the street, in a manner that obstructs the sightlines of any intersection, or in any place where they could pose a safety hazard. e. The City reserves the right to mandate geofencing specifications to Licensee’s Fleet in order to prohibit parking/locking Fleet Vehicles in specified areas, or to direct users to specified designated parking areas. Licensee shall comply with any and all geofencing requirements within 5 business days of a written or emailed request made by the City. The cost of installing and maintaining geofencing equipment or facilities shall be borne by Licensee. f. Licensee will be solely responsible for informing its customers as to parking a Fleet Vehicle properly. g. Licensee will undertake proactive, reasonable measures to prevent and deter improper parking or dumping of Fleet Vehicles on private property or other public property not owned or controlled by the City. h. The City in, its sole discretion, may require Licensee to rebalance the distribution of Fleet Vehicles in specified areas of the city if deemed too dense or too sparse. Licensee will comply with all such requests within 24 hours of receiving notice from the City. 4. Fleet Vehicle Parking Complaints/Enforcement a. Licensee must provide the City with an up-to-date, direct, local contact for Licensee’s Operation, as well as an emergency, after-hours contact. b. Except where the public’s safety and welfare will be unduly compromised, Fleet Vehicle complaints received by the City shall be referred to Licensee, and Licensee or Licensee’s authorized representative shall address/respond to all complaints within 24 hours by re- parking or relocating its noncompliant Fleet Vehicles. Licensee alone will be fully responsible for re-parking or relocating Fleet Scooters where a complaint has been received by the City or Licensee, or where Fleet Scooters are otherwise found to be in violation of parking rules stated herein. c. Licensee shall be solely responsible for monitoring Fleet Vehicle parking or dumping on private property, or other public property not owned or controlled by the City, but the City may impound illegally parked Fleet Vehicles in accordance with City ordinances. When doing so will not unduly burden the complaining third party, the City will refer such complaints to Licensee, and Licensee or Licensee’s authorized representative will be provided a limited opportunity to remedy the complaint without further City involvement. d. Licensee will be solely responsible to third parties for addressing unauthorized Fleet Vehicles dumped or left unattended on private property, or on other public property not owned or controlled by the City. e. Licensee will act swiftly and exercise due diligence in responding to complaints of unauthorized Fleet Vehicles leaning against, blocking, dumped or left unattended on private property, or on other public property not owned or controlled by the City. f. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, if the City determines, in its sole discretion, that the public’s safety and welfare will be unduly compromised by the passage of time, the City may take action to respond to any complaint at Licensee’s expense. If the City incurs any costs or damages arising out of Fleet Vehicle parking complaints, violations, or other related costs that are not otherwise recovered with the City’s collection of an impoundment release charge, Licensee shall reimburse the City for such costs within 30 days of receiving written or emailed notice. g. The City may impound any Fleet Vehicle parked in the same location without movement for more than 7 consecutive days. h. A per occurrence impoundment fee will be applied to any and all devices owned or controlled by Licensee as follows: 6 i. Initial impoundment fee of $56 per device ii. If not paid for and retrieved by Licensee within 24 hours of impoundment, an $18 storage fee per device, per day shall be added to the initial impoundment fee. i. The City may limit the number of Fleet Vehicles allowed under this Agreement if it determines that the number of Fleet Vehicle parking violations, third party complaints, or Licensee’s response to such violations or complaints are unacceptable or detrimental to public safety, or otherwise create or contribute to a nuisance condition. j. Licensee expressly understands that the City may impound any and all Fleet Vehicles found by the City to be in violation of applicable laws or the terms of this License Agreement. Seizure and impoundment of Fleet Vehicles may be exercised by the City with or without prior notice to Licensee. k. Any failure by the City to act on the provisions of this section shall not relieve Licensee of any other duty or penalty at equity or law. 5. Data Privacy and Protection a. Licensee’s Operation shall employ an electronic payment system that is compliant with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS). b. Licensee has submitted a privacy policy to the City with and as part of Licensee’s Application (“Licensee’s Privacy Policy”). Licensee’s Privacy Policy shall continue to expressly limit the collection, storage, or usage of all personally identifiable information. c. Licensee may not make the personal data of customers available to any third-party advertiser or other private entity. This provision includes but is not limited to any of Licensee’s affiliates, owners, or subsidiaries. d. Licensee shall not institute retroactive changes to customer conditions, terms of use or Privacy Policy. e. Licensee’s Privacy Policy must operate to safeguard Licensee’s customers’ personal, financial, and travel information and usage including, but not limited to, trip origination and destination data. Licensee agrees to make all policies, procedures and practices regarding Licensee’s data security practices available to the City, upon request. f. Licensee must provide its customers with an opportunity to expressly assent to Licensee’s Privacy P olicy, terms of service, and user agreements when renting or transacting for use of any or all of Licensee’s Fleet. Licensee agrees to provide its customers with the ability or option to decline the sharing of any data that is not otherwise required to complete the payment transaction. Customer rights with regard to these requirements and options shall be clearly stated and easily accessed by the customer during each transaction. g. Licensee agrees that it will not collect or sort personal or individual data related to race, gender, religion, national origin, age, or sexual orientation. h. Any and all current or future customer data sharing agreements must be disclosed and provided to the City. License must further notify the City in advance of any prospective partnership, acquisition or other data sharing agreement. Licensee may not engage in or facilitate any inter-app operability or other form of private partnership that includes data acquisition or other data sharing model with any entity if the entity does not meet the standards set forth herein. 6. Data Collection/Sharing a. Licensee shall keep a record of maintenance activities, including but not limited to Fleet Vehicle identification number and maintenance performed. Licensee will provide a complete copy of the same to the City upon request. b. Licensee shall provide reports to the City containing, at a minimum, the performance, utilization and service metrics indicated in Exhibit A. Licensee shall provide such reports at 7 least quarterly and shall cooperate with the City in the collection and analysis of aggregated data concerning its operations. c. Licensee shall keep a complete record of all calls and emails received through its customer service hotline and contact email including telephone wait times, email response times, and the nature of each customer inquiry. Licensee will provide a complete copy of the same to the City upon request. d. Licensee agrees that it will provide any and all user or customer data in Licensee’s possession that is directly or indirectly related to active investigations into third party criminal behavior or claims of civil liability against the City by persons using or riding a Fleet Vehicle. Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, this section (e) shall be deemed to include personally identifiable customer data. ARTICLE V. PAYMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS Licensee shall receive no compensation from the City under this Agreement. Licensee shall pay the City an annual flat charge of $250.00 to offset the City’s administrative costs related to implementation and oversight of this License Agreement. ARTICLE VI. REPRESENTATIONS AND GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Ownership and Condition of Right-of-Way. This Agreement shall not be construed to transfer ownership or control of the City’s Right-of-Way to Licensee, or to any other party. The City makes no representations or warranties concerning the condition of the City Right-of-Way, or its suitability for use by Licensee, its contractors or customers. 2. Delegation of Police Power. This Agreement does not delegate or otherwise transfer the City’s police power to regulate Micromobility Vehicles, Licensee’s Operation, or to enforce City ordinances or other laws, to Licensee, or to any other party. Licensee understands and agrees that ultimate decisions related to City enforcement against third parties and public compliance issues, shall remain within the City’s sole discretion. 3. Compliance with Laws. Licensee agrees to comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws as they may be adopted or amended from time to time. Licensee further acknowledges that its rights hereunder are subject to the lawful exercise of the police power of the City to adopt, amend, and enforce ordinances, resolutions, and policies designed to promote the safety and welfare of the public. 4. Removal upon order. Licensee shall remove at once any or all Fleet Vehicles or other property owned or controlled by Licensee upon being ordered to do so by the City. Licensee shall be responsible for restoring the City Right-of-Way to its original condition, and the City shall not be liable for any damages resulting to Licensee by reason of such an order. Such removal and restoration of the City Right-of- Way will be at the sole expense of Licensee. Upon failure of Licensee to remove Fleet Vehicles or other property as ordered within a reasonable time period, the City may perform the removal or work at Licensee’s cost and initiate a claim against Licensee. 5. Non-Discrimination. Licensee shall not: a. In the hiring of labor or employees for the performance of any work under this Agreement, by reason of any race, creed, color, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, 8 or disability discriminate against any person who is qualified and available to perform the work; b. In any manner, discriminate against, intimidate, or prevent the employment of any person identified in clause (a) of this section, or on being hired, prevent or conspire to prevent, the person from the performance of any work under this Agreement on account of any race, creed, color, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability; or c. Intentionally refuse to do business with, refuse to contract with, or discriminate in the basic terms, conditions, or performance of any agreement related to the work to be performed under this Agreement because of a person’s race, creed, color, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability, unless the alleged refusal is because of a legitimate business purpose. 6. Insurance. Licensee shall secure and maintain insurance issued by insurance companies acceptable to the City and admitted in Minnesota. The insurance specified may be in a policy or policies of insurance, primary or excess. Such insurance shall be in force on the date of execution of the Agreement and shall remain continuously in force for the duration of this Agreement. Licensee and any sub- contractors carrying out work related to this Agreement shall secure and maintain the following insurance: a. Workers Compensation insurance that meets the statutory obligations with Coverage B- Employers Liability limits of at least $100,000 each accident, $500,000 disease - policy limit and $100,000 disease each employee. b. Commercial General Liability insurance with limits of at least $2,000,000 general aggregate, 2,000,000 products-completed operations, $2,000,000 personal and advertising injury, 100,000 each occurrence fire damage and $10,000 medical expense any one person. The policy shall be on an occurrence basis, shall include contractual liability coverage and the City shall be named an additional insured. c. Commercial Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned and hired automobiles with full automobile coverage including damages, contents and vandalism and limits of at least $1,000,000 per accident. d. Computer Security and Privacy Liability for the duration of this agreement providing coverage for, but not limited to, Technology and Internet Errors & Omissions, Security and Privacy Liability, and Media Liability. Insurance will provide coverage against claims that arise from the disclosure of private information from files including but not limited to: 1) intentional, fraudulent or criminal acts of the Contractor, its agents or employees; and 2) breach of the City’s private data, whether electronic or otherwise. The insurance policy should provide minimum coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and 2,000,000 annual aggregate. If written on a claims-made basis, the policy must remain in continuous effect for at least 3 years after the service is provided or include a 3 year extended reporting period. Acceptance of the insurance by the City shall not relieve, limit or decrease the liability of Licensee. Any policy deductibles or retention shall be the responsibility of Licensee. Licensee shall control any special or unusual hazards and be responsible for any damages that result from those hazards. The City does not represent that the insurance requirements are sufficient to protect Liensee’s interest or provide adequate coverage. Each policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, 9 or cancelled by either party, or reduced in coverage or in limits unless30 days written notice has been given to the City. Each policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City and shall be primary, non-contributory to any insurance available to the City. Any insurance available in excess of the minimum limits required herein shall be available to the City. 7. Hold Harmless. Licensee agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees, from any liabilities, claims, damages, costs, judgments, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any intentional or negligent act or omission of Licensee, its employees, its agents, or employees of subcontractors, in the performance of the operation, work, or services provided by or through this License Agreement, or by reason of the failure of Licensee to fully perform, in any respect, any of its obligations under this License Agreement. 8. Limitation of Liability. The City assumes no liability for loss or damage to Licensee’s Fleet Vehicles or other property or for damages to any third-party or the property of another arising out of or in any way relating to or resulting from Licensee’s operations. The City shall not be responsible for providing security for Licensee’s Fleet Vehicles and Licensee hereby waives any claim against the City in the event Licensee’s Fleet Vehicles or other property are lost or damaged. 9. Maintenance and Care of Property. Licensee expressly agrees to repair, replace or otherwise restore any part or item of real or personal property that is damaged, lost, or destroyed as a result of Licensee’s Operation. Should Licensee fail to repair, replace, or otherwise restore such real or personal property, Licensee shall pay the City’s reasonable costs in making such repairs, replacements or restorations. 10. Assignment or Transfer of Interest. Licensee shall not assign any obligation or interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any obligation or interest in the same either by assignment or novation without the prior written approval of the City, provided, however, that claims for money due or to income due to the Licensee may be assigned to a bank, trust company or other financial institution, or to a Trustee in Bankruptcy without such approval. Notice of any such assignment or transfer shall be furnished to the City. Except as provided herein, Licensee shall not subcontract any services under this Agreement without prior written approval of the City. 11. Independent Contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to, or shall be construed in any manner, as creating or establishing the relationship of employer/employee between the parties. License shall at all times remain an independent contractor with respect to the work and/or services to be performed under this Agreement. Any and all employees of Licensee or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Licensee under this Agreement shall be considered employees or sub-contractors of the Licensee only and not of the City; and any and all claims that might arise, including Worker's Compensation claims under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota or any other state, on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged in any of the work or services to be rendered or provided herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of Licensee. 12. Data Practices. Licensee agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all other applicable state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. Licensee must immediately report to the City any requests from third parties for information relating to this License Agreement. The City agrees to promptly respond to inquiries from Licensee concerning data 10 requests. Licensee agrees to hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any claims resulting from Licensee’s unlawful disclosure or use of data protected under state and federal laws. 13. Inspection of Records. All Licensee records with respect to Licensee’s obligations under this License Agreement shall be made available to the City or its designees, at any time during normal business hours, as often as the City deems necessary, to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts of all relevant data. 14. Ownership of Materials/Intellectual Property. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, maps, models, photographs, reports or other materials furnished by the City in connection with this Agreement shall be the property of the City. The City may use, extend, or enlarge any document produced by the City under this Agreement without the consent, permission of, or further compensation to Licensee. Each party acknowledges and agrees that each party is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title, and interest in and to its services, products, software, source and object code, specifications, designs, techniques, concepts, improvements, discoveries and inventions including all intellectual property rights thereto, including without limitations any modifications, improvements, or derivative works thereof, created prior to, or independently, during the term of this Contract. This Agreement does not affect the ownership of each party’s pre-existing, intellectual property. Each party further acknowledges that it acquires no rights under this Agreement to the other party’s pre-existing intellectual property, other than any limited right explicitly granted in this Agreement. 15. Contacts. The following are designated as official representatives for each of the Parties, and as points of contact for purposes of delivering or receiving notice, contract management, official requests, and all other communication contemplated under this License Agreement: For the City: Marc Nevinski mnevinski@goldenvalleymn.gov 763)593-8008 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 For Licensee: 16. Entire Agreement. This License Agreement and attachments and other documents named, is the entire agreement between the parties. No modification of this Agreement shall be valid or effective unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. 17. Interpretation of Agreement. In interpretation of this Agreement, the language of the Agreement shall prevail, followed by the language of Licensee’s Application. 18. Venue and Forum. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement and any actions arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be 11 brought in Hennepin County District Court in the state of Minnesota. 19. No Joint Venture. Nothing herein shall be in any way construed as expressing or implying that Licensee and the City have joined together in any joint venture or are in any manner agreeing to or contemplating the sharing of profits and losses among themselves in relation to any matter relating to this Agreement. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said parties have signed and executed this instrument the day and year first above written. LICENSEE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: ____________________________________ Its:_____________________________________ By: ___________________________________ Its:____________________________________ Exhibit A: Reporting Requirements The following performance indicators shall be reported to the City at the indicated frequency. Performance Indicator Description Measurement Tool Reporting Frequency App & customer service support portal Reservation system fully operational Uptime reporting quarterly Vehicle distribution Maps identifying trends in peak vehicle distribution Maps showing aggregate usage patterns quarterly Vehicles in service Vehicles in service Daily uptime reports quarterly Report-responsive Response time to incident reports Log showing length of time between reported incident and Licensee response quarterly Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 6. B. Second Consideration – Modifications to Right of Way Management Ordinance to address Wireless Facility Aesthetics Prepared By Maria Cisneros, City Attorney Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary This is the second consideration of modifications to the City’s right of way ordinance. The proposed modifications relate to regulation of the placement of wireless facilities in the right of way. The first consideration was held on March 19, 2019. The state of Minnesota and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently promulgated rules that the City allow wireless providers to place infrastructure, such as wireless antennae and other equipment, in its right of way. The rules limit the City’s ability to regulate the placement of this wireless equipment, which typically must be mounted above the ground on poles. Staff recommends adoption of a new section in the Right of Way Management Chapter of the City Code (Chapter 24, Article II) titled Wireless Aesthetic Standards. The proposed Section sets forth the minimum aesthetic and design standards that telecommunications providers must meet to place wireless facilities in the City’s right of way. In addition, staff recommends some minor modifications to Sections 24-22 (Definitions), 24-28 (Permit Required), 24-30 (Issuance of Permits, Conditions), and 24-43 (Location and Relocation of Equipment in Facilities) to conform to the proposed new Section. Both the new and revised Sections are attached for reference, along with a redline showing the amendments to the existing Sections. If Council adopts the ordinance, it will be effective upon publication. Attachments Redline showing proposed modifications to current City Code Section 24-22 (5 pages) Redline showing proposed modifications to current City Code Section 24-28 (1 page) Redline showing proposed modifications to current City Code Section 24-30 (2 pages) Redline showing proposed modifications to current City Code Section 24-43 (1 page) Ordinance #659 amending Sections 24-22, 24-28, 24-30 and 24-43, and adopting a new section 24-52 titled Cell Wireless Aesthetic Standards (8 pages) Summary of Ordinance #659 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt second consideration, Ordinance #659 amending Sections 24-22, 24-28, 24-30 and 24-43, and adopting a new section 24-52 Cell Wireless Aesthetic Standards. Motion to approve Summary of Ordinance #659, for Publication based on the finding that the title and summary clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. Sec. 24-22. - Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. References hereafter to "sections" are, unless otherwise specified, references to sections in this article. Defined terms carry their assigned meaning whether or not capitalized. Abandoned Facility: A facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user. Applicant: Any person requesting a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way. Aerial: A facility located or work done above any part of the right-of-way. Collocate or Collocation: To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure or utility pole that is owned privately, or by the City, or by another government unit. Commission: The State Public Utilities Commission. Congested Right-of-Way: A crowded condition in the subsurface of the public right-of-way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral facilities in conformance with Minn. Stats. § 216D.04, subd. 3, over a continuous length in excess of 500 feet. Construction Performance Bond: Any of the following forms of security provided at the permittee's option: 1)Individual project bond 2)Cash deposit, in the form of cash or a cashier's check for non-registered applicants that are non-commercial residents of the City 3)Security of a form listed or approved under Minn. Stats. § 15.73, subd. 3 4)Letter of credit, in a form acceptable to the City 5)Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the City 6)A blanket bond for projects within the City, or other form of construction bond, for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the City. Degradation: A decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by excavation in or disturbance of the right-of-way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of-way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. Degradation Cost: Subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100, the cost to achieve a level of restoration as determined by the City at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum restoration shown on the standard detail plates adopted by the City. Degradation Fee: The estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the City to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost. Department: The Physical Development Department of the City. Director: The City Manager or his/her designee. Delay Penalty: The penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration as established by permit. Emergency: A condition that: 1)Poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or 2)Requires immediate repair or replacement in order to restore essential service to a customer. Essential Service: Natural gas, municipal water, municipal sanitary sewer or water, and electrical service or any other service shown to be necessary to the health, safety or wellbeing of the customer. Equipment: Any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right-of-way, but shall not include boulevard plantings or gardens planted or maintained in the right-of-way between a person's property and the street curb. Excavate: To dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a right-of- way, except horticultural practices of penetrating the boulevard area to a depth of less than 12 inches. Excavation Permit: The permit which, pursuant to this article, must be obtained before a person may excavate in a right-of-way. An excavation permit allows the holder to excavate that part of the right- of-way described in such permit. Excavation Permit Fee: Money paid to the City by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in this article. Facility or Facilities: Any tangible asset in the right-of-way required to provide utility or telecommunication service. Five-Year Project Plan: Shows projects adopted by the City planned for construction within the next five years. High Density Corridor: A designated portion of the public right-of-way within which right-of-way users have multiple and competing facilities may be required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure. Hole: An excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less than the width of the pavement. Local Representative: A local person, or designee of such person, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters within the scope of this article. Management Costs: The actual costs the City incurs in managing its rights-of-way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants, issuing, processing, and verifying right-of-way or small wireless facility permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way or small wireless facility permits. Management costs do not include payment by a telecommunications right-of-way user for the use of the right-of-way, unreasonable fees of a third-party contractor used by the City including fees tied to or based on customer counts, access lines, or revenues generated by the right-of-way or for the City the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, Chapter 123; Minn. Stats. § 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or the City fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to this article. Obstruct: To place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the right-of-way. Obstruction Permit: The permit which, pursuant to this article, must be obtained before a person may obstruct a right-of-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that right-a-way, for the duration specified therein. Obstruction Permit Fee: Money paid to the City by a permittee to cover the costs as provided in this article. Patch or Patching: A method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists of the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and the replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of 18 inches beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the City's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Pavement: Any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, or paver bricks. Permit: Has the meaning given "right-of-way permit" in Minn. Stats. § 237.162. Permittee: Any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way has been granted by the City under this article. Person: An individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this State, however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate or political. Probation: The status of a person that has not complied with the conditions of this article. Probationary Period: One year from the date that a person has been notified in writing by the City that they have been put on probation. Registrant: Any person who: 1)Has or seeks to have its permanent facilities located in any right-of-way; or 2)In any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of-way or place its permanent facilities or equipment in the right-of-way. Restore or Restoration: The process by which a disturbed right-of-way and surrounding area, including pavement and foundation; and vegetation is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before the commencement of the work. Restoration Cost: An amount of money paid to the City by a permittee to achieve the level of restoration according to the requirements of the City. Right-of-Way or Public Right-of-Way: The area on, below, or above a public roadway, highway, street, cartway, bicycle lane, and public sidewalk any real property in which the City has an interest, including, but not limited to, a public roadway, street, cartway, highway, bicycle lane, public sidewalk, public park, or other public property place, area, or real property in which the City has an interest, including other dedicated rights-of-way for travel purposes and utility easements of the City. A rRight- of-way does not include the airwaves above a right-of-way with regard to cellular or other non-wire telecommunications or broadcast service. Right-of-Way Permit: The permit for excavation or obstruction, or both, depending on the context, required by this article, that must be obtained before work in the right-of-way may begin. A right-of- way permit allows the holder to excavate or obstruct that part of the right-of-way described in the permit. Right-of-Way Permit Fee: Money paid to the City by the applicant to cover the costs in provided in this article and as established annually by the City Council. Right-of-Way User: 1)A telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minn. Stats. § 237.162, subd. 4; or 2)A person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way; or 3)Any other person occupying the right-of-way. Service or Utility Service: Includes: 1)Those services provided by a public utility as defined in Minn. Stats. § 216B.02, subds. 4 and 6; 2)Services of a telecommunications right-of-way user, including transporting voice or data information; and 3)Services of a cable communications systems as defined in Minn. Stats. ch. 238. Service Lateral: An underground facility that is used to transmit, distribute or furnish gas, electricity, communications, or water from a common source to an end-use customer. A service lateral is also an underground facility that is used in the removal of wastewater from a customer's premises. Small Wireless Facility: A wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications: 1)Each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in volume or could fit within such an enclosure; and 2)All other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility provided such equipment is, in aggregate, no more than 28 cubic feet in volume, not including electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cable, conduit, vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services, and any equipment concealed from public view within or behind an existing structure or concealment is, in aggregate, no more than 28 cubic feet in volume,. Supplementary Application: An application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of-way than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that had already been issued. Temporary Surface: The compaction of subbase and replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the City's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for the next two years, in which it is considered full restoration. Telecommunications Rights-of-Way User: A person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way, or seeking to own or control a facility in the right-of-way, that is used or is intended to be used for providing wireless service or transporting telecommunication or other voice or data information. For purposes of this article, a cable communication system defined and regulated under Minn. Stats. ch. 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether provided by a public utility as defined in Minn. Stats. § 216B.02 a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minn. Stats. chs. 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minn. Stats. ch. 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users for purposes of this article except to the extent such entity is offering wireless service. Trench: An excavation in the right-of-way, with the excavation having a length equal to or greater than the width of the corresponding lane of traffic or boulevard for the section of the roadway corridor where the work is occurring. For the purposes of this article, the term "trench" shall include direction boring and/or plowing. Two-Year Project Plan: Shows projects adopted by the City for construction within the next two years. Utility Pole: A pole that is used in whole or in part to facilitate telecommunications or electric service. Wireless Facility: Equipment at a fixed location that enables the provision of wireless services between users equipment and a wireless service network, including equipment associated with wireless service, a radio transceiver, antenna, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and a small wireless facility, but not including wireless support structures, wireline backhaul facilities, or cables between utility poles or wireless support structures, or not otherwise immediately adjacent to and directly associated with a specific antenna. Wireless Service: Any service using licensed or unlicensed wireless spectrum, including the use of wi-fi, whether at a fixed location or by means of a mobile device, that is provided using wireless facilities. Wireless service does not include services regulated under Title VI of the Communications Act of 1994, as amended, including cable service. Wireless Support Structure: A new or existing structure in a right-of-way designed to support or capable of supporting small wireless facilities, including small wireless facilities, as reasonably determined by the City. Code 1988, § 7.02) Sec. 24-28. - Permit Requirement. a)Permit Required. 1)Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no person may obstruct, construct retaining walls or landscaping, pave driveways or parking stalls, plant trees or shrubs; place courtesy benches, install irrigation, conduits, wires or other objects, or excavate any right-of-way, or install or place facilities in the right-of-way, without first having obtained a right-of-way permit from the City Manager or his/her designee to do so. The right-of-way permit is valid only for the work, excavation or obstruction and specific duration included in the permit. 2)A small wireless facility requires a permit by a registrant toNo person may erect or install a wireless support structure, to collocate a small wireless facility, or to otherwise install a small wireless facility in the specified portion of the right-of-way, without having first obtained a right-of- way permit from the City Manager or his/her designee to do so. to the extent specified therein, provided that such permit shall remain in effect for the length of time the facility is in use, unless lawfully revoked. 3)However, Nnothing in this article releases persons placing obstructions in the right-of-way that do not require permits from retaining maintenance responsibility for those obstructions. Persons placing non-permitted obstructions in the right-of-way accept full responsibility shall be fully responsible for damage to the obstructions due to maintenance or construction performed by the City or its representatives, and any damage caused by other parties. b)Permit Extensions. No person may excavate or obstruct the right-of-way beyond the date or dates specified in the permit unless such person: 1)Makes a supplementary application for another right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit; and 2)A new permit or permit extension is granted. c)Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.1000, subd. 3 and notwithstanding Subsection (b) of this section, the City shall establish and impose a delay penalty for unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction, repair, or restoration. The delay penalty shall be established on an annual basis by City Council resolution. In addition to the delay penalty, the City reserves the right to perform repair and patching when delays pose a potential threat to public safety. d)Permit Display. Permits issued under this article shall be in the possession of the person performing the work at all times and shall be available for inspection by the City Manager or his/her designee. e)Approved Plans. Permittees must have a copy of the approved right-of-way plans available on the work site at all times, these plans must be available for inspection by the City Manager or his/her designee. Code 1988, § 7.08; Ord. No. 239, 2nd Series, 3-15-2001; Ord. No. 286, 2nd Series, 11-14-2003) Sec. 24-30. - Issuance of Permit; Conditions. a)Permit Issuance. If an applicant has satisfied the requirements of this article, the City Manager or his/her designee may issue a permit. b)Conditions. The City may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. In addition, a permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, State and federal laws, including, but not limited to, Minn. Stats. §§ 216D.01 through 216D.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System) and Minnesota Rules Chapter 7560. c)On-Site Meeting. If a project involves an excavation that extends more than 300 feet in length, the applicant must coordinate with City staff for an on-site utility meeting with Gopher State One Call. d)Small Wireless Facility Conditions. In addition to Subsection (b) of this section, the erection or installation of a wireless support structure, the collocation of a small wireless facility, or other installation of a small wireless facility in the right-of-way, shall be subject to the following conditions contained in Section 24-52 of this Code. : 1)A small wireless facility shall only be colocated on the particular wireless support structure, under those attachment specifications, and at the height indicated in the applicable permit application. 2)No new wireless support structure installed within the right-of-way shall exceed 50 feet in height without the City's written authorization, provided that the City may impose a lower height limit in the applicable permit to protect the public health, safety and welfare or to protect the right-of-way and its current use, and further provided that a registrant may replace an existing wireless support structure exceeding 50 feet in height with a structure of the same height subject to such conditions or requirements as may be imposed in the applicable permit. 3)No wireless facility may extend more than 10 feet above its wireless support structure. 4)W here an applicant proposes to install a new wireless support structure in the right-of-way, the City may impose separation requirements between such structure and any existing wireless support structure or other facilities in and around the right-of-way. 5)W here an applicant proposes collocation on a decorative wireless support structure, sign or other structure not intended to support small wireless facilities, the City may impose reasonable requirements to accommodate the particular design, appearance or intended purpose of such structure. 6)W here an applicant proposes to replace a wireless support structure, the City may impose reasonable restocking, replacement, or relocation requirements on the replacement of such structure. e)Small Wireless Facility Agreement. A small wireless facility shall only be collocated on a small wireless support structure owned or controlled by the City, or any other City asset in the right-of-way, after the applicant has executed a standard small wireless facility collocation agreement with the City. The standard collocation agreement may require payment of the following: 1)Up to $150.00 per year for rent to collocate on the City structure 2)$25.00 per year for maintenance associated with the collocation 3)A monthly fee for electrical service as follows: a.$73.00 per radio node less than or equal to 100 maximum watts b.$182.00 per radio node over 100 maximum watts; or c.The actual costs of electricity, if the actual cost exceed the foregoing. The standard collocation agreement shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the required small wireless facility permit, provided, however, that the applicant shall not be additionally required to obtain a license or franchise in order to collocate. Issuance of a small wireless facility permit does not supersede, alter or affect any then-existing agreement between the City and applicant. f)Action on Small Wireless Facility Permit Application. 1)Deadline for Action. The City shall approve or deny a small wireless facility permit application for collocation of a small wireless facility on an existing structure within 6090 days after filing of such application. The City shall approve or deny a small wireless facility permit application for attachment of a small wireless facility on a new structure within 90 days after the filing of such application. The small wireless facility permit, and any associated building permit application, shall be deemed approved if the City fails to approve or deny the application within the review periods established in this section. 2)Consolidated Applications. An applicant may file a consolidated small wireless facility permit application addressing the proposed collocation of up to 15 small wireless facilities, or a greater number if agreed to by a local government unit, provided that all small wireless facilities in the application: a.Are located within a two-mile radius b.Consist of substantially similar equipment; and c.Are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures. In rendering a decision on a consolidated permit application, the City may approve some small wireless facilities and deny others, but may not use denial of one or more permits as a basis to deny all small wireless facilities in the application. 3)Tolling of Deadline. The 90-day deadline for action on a small wireless facility permit applications may be tolled if: a.The City receives applications from one or more applicants seeking approval of permits for more than 30 small wireless facilities within a seven-day period. In such case, the City may extend the deadline for all such applications by 30 days by informing the affected applicants in writing of such extension. ba. The applicant fails to submit all required documents or information and the City provides written notice of incompleteness to the applicant within 30 10 days of receipt the application. Upon submission of additional documents or information, the City shall have 10 days to notify the applicant in writing of any still-missing information. cb. The City and a small wireless facility applicant agree in writing to toll the review period. g)Record Drawings Required. As a condition of a right-of-way permit, a permittee automatically agrees to provide construction record drawings for the facilities installed under the permit. The construction record drawings shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City and as outlined in the mapping requirements portion of this article. Code 1988, § 7.10) Sec. 24-43. - Location and Relocation of Equipment or Facilities. a)Undergrounding. Unless otherwise stated in this Code, or agreed in a franchise or other agreement between the applicable right-of-way user and the City, facilities in the right-of-way must be located or relocated and maintained underground in accordance with this article. b)Corridors. 1)The City may assign specific areas within the right-of-way, or any particular segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of facilities or equipment that is or, pursuant to current technology, the City expects will someday be located within the right-of-way. All excavation, obstruction, or other permits issued by the City involving the installation or replacement of equipment shall designate the proper corridor for the equipment at issue. 2)Any registrant who has facilities in the right-of-way in a position at variance with the corridors established by the City shall, no later than at the time of the next reconstruction or excavation of the area where its facilities are located, move those facilities to their assigned position within the right-of-way, unless this requirement is waived by the City for good cause shown, upon consideration of such factors as the remaining economic life of the facilities, public safety, customer service needs and hardship to the registrant. c)Nuisance. One year after the passage of the ordinance from which this article is derived, any facilities found in a right-of-way that have not been registered shall be deemed to be a nuisance. The City may exercise any remedies or rights it has at law or in equity, including, but not limited to, abating the nuisance or taking possession of the equipment and restoring the right-of-way to a useable condition. d)Limitation of Space. To protect health and safety and welfare of the public or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use, the City Manager or his/her designee shall have the power to prohibit or limit the placement of new or additional facilities within the right-of-way. In making such decisions, the City shall strive to the extent possible to accommodate all existing and potential users of the right-of-way, but shall be guided primarily by considerations of the public interest, the public's needs for the particular utility service, the condition of the right-of-way, the time of year with respect to essential utilities, the protection of existing facilities in the right-of-way, and future City plans for public improvements and development projects which have been determined to be in the public interest. Code 1988, § 7.22) Section 24-52- Wireless Aesthetic Standards a) Findings. The City of Golden Valley desires the most advanced and highest quality wireless services available. The City also wishes to minimize the negative impacts associated with wireless facility deployments including small wireless facilities. Such negative impacts may include interference with right-of-way sight lines, aesthetic impacts that are inconsistent with the surrounding area, fall zone and clear zone risks, navigation obstacles, interference with future transportation improvement plans, interference with the installation or maintenance of public utilities, and increased visual or noise pollution. The following aesthetic standards and requirements are intended to maintain the City’s aesthetic environment while also allowing for the availability of wireless services, including broadband and “5G” services, using small wireless facilities. These standards are intended to establish clear and consistent aesthetic standards for wireless facility placements in the City right-of-way and to establish a streamlined review and approval process. In addition, these standards seek to minimize unnecessary placement of new wireless support structures in the City’s right-of-way by encouraging co-location of wireless facilities with other wireless facilities and utilities. b) Permit Required. To address the foregoing impacts, any person desiring to locate or collocate wireless facilities or place new wireless support structures in the City’s right-of-way must first obtain a right-of-way permit pursuant to this Code. c) Collocation Agreement Required. Any person seeking to collocate wireless facilities on a wireless support structure owned or controlled by the City must first enter a standard collocation agreement. The standard collocation agreement may require payment of the following: a. Up to $150.00 per year for rent to collocate on the City structure; b. $25.00 per year for maintenance associated with the collocation; and c. A monthly fee for electrical service as follows: i. $73.00 per radio node less than or equal to 100 maximum watts ii. $182.00 per radio node over 100 maximum watts; or iii. The actual costs of electricity, if the actual cost exceed the foregoing. The standard collocation agreement shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the required right-of-way permit, provided, however, that the applicant shall not be additionally required to obtain a license or franchise in order to collocate. Issuance of a right-of-way permit does not supersede, alter or affect any then-existing agreement between the City and applicant. d) Applicability of Aesthetic Standards. These standards apply to all right-of-way permit applications for placement or collocation of wireless facilities on City-owned and non-City- owned wireless support structures or utility poles, and the placement or replacement of wireless support structures in the public right-of-way. Compliance with these standards is a requirement for, and condition of, issuance of a right-of-way permit for a wireless facility. Any installation that does not conform to these standards will be in violation of the associated permit and the City’s right-of-way ordinance. e) Additional Requirements. In addition to the following standards, the placement of new support structures for wireless facilities shall be subject to any conditions specified in the right-of-way permit. Applications to install wireless facilities or place new support structures in districts zoned for residential uses, within areas or corridors designated as special street lighting areas, within a historic district established by federal or state law or City ordinance, shall further be subject to any conditions contained in Section 113-154 of this Code and, when applicable, any required conditional use permit authorizing such installation. f) Aesthetic Design Standards. The City desires to promote aesthetically acceptable and area conforming wireless facilities using the smallest and least intrusive means available to provide wireless services to the community. All wireless facilities and wireless support structures in the public right-of-way must comply with all applicable provisions in this section. a. Wireless Support Structures: All City or privately owned wireless support structures placed within the City shall be of a fully enclosed design such that the maximum amount of facilities, including any wiring, are concealed inside the structure or below ground. The City standard wireless support structure shall be the Valmont Pole Drawing Number TK01260 or an approved equal. All wireless support structures, whether existing, new or replacement wireless support structures, must: i. be constructed of aluminum or steel; ii. be the same color as neighboring, similar support structures and of the same design characteristics; iii. where constructed as a light pole, luminaire(s) and luminaire arm(s) must match adjacent city lighting standard and must contain an LED fixture in accordance with City specifications; and iv. be the City standard support structure, or an alternative support structure that is consistent with the aesthetics of the City standard support structure. Alternatives to the City Standard structure may be approved on a case by case basis by the City Manager or his/her designee. b. Antennas: Antennas must be top-mounted and concealed within a radome (a structural, weatherproof enclosure that protects an antenna and is constructed of material that minimally attenuates the signal transmitted/received by such antenna) or otherwise concealed to the extent feasible. Cable connections, antenna mounts and other hardware must also be concealed. The radome or other concealment must be non-reflective and painted or otherwise colored to match the wireless support structure. c. Collocation: Collocations between wireless service providers and with other utilities on the same support structure is required wherever feasible. If an applicant proposes to not collocate in areas where collocation options are or appear to be available, the applicant must document that collocation is infeasible. d. Concealment: Concealment elements must be incorporated into the proposed design of the small wireless facility installation, and must include approved camouflaging or shrouding techniques. e. Ground-Mounted Equipment: Ground-mounted equipment must be installed below grade or, if technically necessary, concealed in a ground-mounted cabinet. In addition to any applicable requirements in this Code, ground mounted cabinets must: i. be installed flush to the ground; ii. be the same color as neighboring, similar support cabinets or other ground- mounted structures; iii. not interfere in any way with the flow of pedestrian, bicycle or vehicular traffic when adjoining sidewalks, trails, or other similar passageways, iv. conform to the American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA) including with respect to appropriate sidewalk spacing; and v. not create a safety hazard. f. Lights: Unless otherwise required for compliance with FAA or FCC regulations, wireless facilities shall not include any lights or lighting. This subsection does not prohibit installations on streetlights or the installation of luminaires or additional street lighting on new support structures if and where required by the City. All wireless support structures must be capable of accommodating street lighting at 12, 18 or 30 feet above the ground to facilitate future street lighting as may be determined by the City. g) Location Criteria for New or Replacement Wireless Support Structures a. New Support Structures: Any new wireless support structures shall be placed: i. a minimum of two lot lines, or approximately 200 feet, whichever is greater, from any existing wireless support structure or utility pole on the same side of the street or right-of-way, and one lot line or approximately 100 feet, whichever is greater when on the opposite sides of the street or right-of-way. ii. at a distance which is the same as the prevailing separation distance among existing wireless support structures and poles in the surrounding vicinity as agreed upon by the applicant and City, or determined by the City where agreement cannot be reached; iii. as functional streetlights as the City may require, in its reasonable discretion; iv. in alignment with existing trees, wireless support structures, utility poles, and streetlights; v. an equal distance between trees when possible, with a minimum of 15 feet separation such that no proposed disturbance shall occur within the critical root zone of any tree; vi. with appropriate clearance from existing utilities; vii. outside of a 20-foot equipment clear zone (for base cabinets less than 18- inches in diameter) or 30-foot clear sight triangle (for base cabinets equal to or greater than 18-inches in diameter) at intersection corners; viii. so as not to be located along the frontage of a Historic building, deemed historic on a federal, state, or local level; ix. so as not to significantly create a new obstruction to property sight lines; x. at shared property lines if feasible; xi. not within 50 feet of the apron of a fire station or other emergency service responder facility. b. Replacement of City-Owned Support Structures: Any replaced wireless support structures shall remain in their existing location unless otherwise permitted by the City. Replacement pole height shall not exceed 50 feet, or the height of the existing utility pole or wireless support structure, whichever is greater. c. Obstructions: Any new wireless support structure or other facilities associated with a new or existing wireless support structure must not obstruct access to: i. any existing above-ground or underground right-of-way user facilities, or public facilities; ii. any public infrastructure for traffic control, streetlight or public transportation purposes, including without limitation any curb control sign, parking meter, vehicular traffic sign or signal, pedestrian traffic sign or signal, barricade reflectors; iii. any public transportation vehicles, shelters, street furniture or other improvements at any public transportation stop (including, without limitation, bus stops, streetcar stops, and bike share stations); iv. fire hydrants; v. any doors, gates, sidewalk doors, passage doors, stoops or other ingress and egress points to any building appurtenant to the right-of-way; or vi. any fire escapes. ORDINANCE NO. 659 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Chapter 24 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management Sections 24-22: Definitions, 24-28: Permit Required, 24-30: Issuance of Permit; Conditions; 24-43: Location and Relocation of Equipment or Facilities, and adopting a new section 24-52 Wireless Aesthetic Standards Section 1. City Code Section 24-22, Definitions hereby is amended by replacing the definitions of the Collocate or Collocation, Facility or Facilities, Right-of-Way or Public Right-of-Way, Right-of-Way User; Service or Utility Service; Small Wireless Facility and Wireless Support Structure to read as follows: Collocate or Collocation: To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure or utility pole that is owned privately, by the City, or by another government unit. Facility or Facilities: Any tangible asset in the right-of-way required to provide utility or telecommunication service. Right-of-Way or Public Right-of-Way: The area on, below, or above a public roadway, highway, street, cartway, bicycle lane, and public sidewalk in which the City has an interest, including other dedicated rights-of-way for travel purposes and utility easements of the City. Right-of-way does not include the airwaves above a right-of- way with regard to cellular or other non-wire telecommunications or broadcast service. Right-of-Way User: 1) A telecommunications right-of-way user; or 2) A person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way; or 3) Any other person occupying the right-of-way. Service or Utility Service: Includes: 1) Those services provided by a public utility as defined in Minn. Stats. § 216B.02, subds. 4 and 6; 2) Services of a telecommunications right-of-way user, including transporting voice or data information; and 3) Services of a cable communications systems as defined in Minn. Stats. ch. 238. Small Wireless Facility: A wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications: 1) Each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in volume or could fit within such an enclosure; and 2) All other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility not including electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, Ordinance No. 659 -2- April 2, 2019 power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cable, conduit, vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services, and any equipment concealed from public view within or behind an existing structure or concealment is, in aggregate, no more than 28 cubic feet in volume. Wireless Support Structure: A new or existing structure in a right-of-way designed to support or capable of supporting wireless facilities, including small wireless facilities, as reasonably determined by the City. Section 2. City Code Section 24-24, Permit Required subd. (a) is hereby amended to read as follows: a) Permit Required. 1) Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no person may obstruct, construct retaining walls or landscaping, pave driveways or parking stalls, plant trees or shrubs; place courtesy benches, install irrigation, conduits, wires or other objects, or excavate any right-of-way, or install or place facilities in the right-of-way, without first having obtained a right-of-way permit from the City Manager or his/her designee to do so. The right-of-way permit is valid only for the work, excavation or obstruction and specific duration included in the permit. 2) No person may erect or install a wireless support structure, collocate a wireless facility, or otherwise install a wireless facility in the specified portion of the right- of-way, without having first obtained a right-of-way permit from the City Manager or his/her designee to do so. 3) Nothing in this article releases persons placing obstructions in the right-of-way that do not require permits from retaining maintenance responsibility for those obstructions. Persons placing non-permitted obstructions in the right-of-way shall be fully responsible for damage to the obstructions due to maintenance or construction performed by the City or its representatives, and any damage caused by other parties. Section 3. City Code Section 24-30, Issuance of Permit; Conditions is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-30. - Issuance of Permit; Conditions. a) Permit Issuance. If an applicant has satisfied the requirements of this article, the City Manager or his/her designee may issue a permit. b) Conditions. The City may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. In addition, a permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, State and federal laws, including, but not limited to, Minn. Stats. §§ 216D.01 through 216D.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System) and Minnesota Rules Chapter 7560. Ordinance No. 659 -3- April 2, 2019 c) On-Site Meeting. If a project involves an excavation that extends more than 300 feet in length, the applicant must coordinate with City staff for an on-site utility meeting with Gopher State One Call. d) Small Wireless Facility Conditions. In addition to Subsection (b) of this section, the erection or installation of a wireless support structure, the collocation of a wireless facility, or other installation of a wireless facility in the right-of-way, shall be subject to the conditions contained in Section 24.52 of this Code. : f) Action on Small Wireless Facility Permit Application. 1) Deadline for Action. The City shall approve or deny a small wireless facility permit application for collocation of a small wireless facility on an existing structure within 60 days after filing of such application. The City shall approve or deny a small wireless facility permit application for attachment of a small wireless facility on a new structure within 90 days after the filing of such application. The small wireless facility permit, and any associated building permit application, shall be deemed approved if the City fails to approve or deny the application within the review periods established in this section. 2) Consolidated Applications. An applicant may file a consolidated small wireless facility permit application addressing the proposed collocation of up to 15 small wireless facilities, or a greater number if agreed to by a local government unit, provided that all small wireless facilities in the application: a. Are located within a two-mile radius b. Consist of substantially similar equipment; and c. Are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures. In rendering a decision on a consolidated permit application, the City may approve some small wireless facilities and deny others, but may not use denial of one or more permits as a basis to deny all small wireless facilities in the application. 3) Tolling of Deadline. The deadline for action on a small wireless facility permit applications may be tolled if: a. The applicant fails to submit all required documents or information and the City provides written notice of incompleteness to the applicant within 10 days of receipt the application. Upon submission of additional documents or information, the City shall have 10 days to notify the applicant in writing of any still-missing information. b. The City and a small wireless facility applicant agree in writing to toll the review period. g) Record Drawings Required. As a condition of a right-of-way permit, a permittee automatically agrees to provide construction record drawings for the facilities installed under the permit. The construction record drawings shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City and as outlined in the mapping requirements portion of this article. Ordinance No. 659 -4- April 2, 2019 Section 4. City Code Section 24-43, Location and Relocation of Equipment or Facilities subd. (a) is hereby amended to read as follows: a) Undergrounding. Unless otherwise stated in this Code, or agreed in a franchise or other agreement between the applicable right-of-way user and the City, facilities in the right-of-way must be located or relocated and maintained underground in accordance with this article. Section 5. City Code Chapter 24 Street, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management is hereby amended by adding new Section 24-52 to read as follows: Section 24-52- Wireless Aesthetic Standards a) Findings. The City of Golden Valley desires the most advanced and highest quality wireless services available. The City also wishes to minimize the negative impacts associated with wireless facility deployments including small wireless facilities. Such negative impacts may include interference with right-of-way sight lines, aesthetic impacts that are inconsistent with the surrounding area, fall zone and clear zone risks, navigation obstacles, interference with future transportation improvement plans, interference with the installation or maintenance of public utilities, and increased visual or noise pollution. The following aesthetic standards and requirements are intended to maintain the City’s aesthetic environment while also allowing for the availability of wireless services, including broadband and “5G” services, using small wireless facilities. These standards are intended to establish clear and consistent aesthetic standards for wireless facility placements in the City right-of-way and to establish a streamlined review and approval process. In addition, these standards seek to minimize unnecessary placement of new wireless support structures in the City’s right-of-way by encouraging co-location of wireless facilities with other wireless facilities and utilities. b) Permit Required. To address the foregoing impacts, any person desiring to locate or collocate wireless facilities or place new wireless support structures in the City’s right- of-way must first obtain a right-of-way permit pursuant to this Code. c) Collocation Agreement Required. Any person seeking to collocate wireless facilities on a wireless support structure owned or controlled by the City must first enter a standard collocation agreement. The standard collocation agreement may require payment of the following: 1. Up to $150.00 per year for rent to collocate on the City structure; 2. $25.00 per year for maintenance associated with the collocation; and 3. A monthly fee for electrical service as follows: a. $73.00 per radio node less than or equal to 100 maximum watts Ordinance No. 659 -5- April 2, 2019 b. $182.00 per radio node over 100 maximum watts; or c. The actual costs of electricity, if the actual cost exceed the foregoing. The standard collocation agreement shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the required right-of-way permit, provided, however, that the applicant shall not be additionally required to obtain a license or franchise in order to collocate. Issuance of a right-of-way permit does not supersede, alter or affect any then-existing agreement between the City and applicant. d) Applicability of Aesthetic Standards. These standards apply to all right-of-way permit applications for placement or collocation of wireless facilities on City-owned and non- City-owned wireless support structures or utility poles, and the placement or replacement of wireless support structures in the public right-of-way. Compliance with these standards is a requirement for, and condition of, issuance of a right-of-way permit for a wireless facility. Any installation that does not conform to these standards will be in violation of the associated permit and the City’s right-of-way ordinance. e) Additional Requirements. In addition to the following standards, the placement of new support structures for wireless facilities shall be subject to any conditions specified in the right-of-way permit. Applications to install wireless facilities or place new support structures in districts zoned for residential uses, within areas or corridors designated as special street lighting areas, within a historic district established by federal or state law or City ordinance, shall further be subject to any conditions contained in Section 113-154 of this Code and, when applicable, any required conditional use permit authorizing such installation. f) Aesthetic Design Standards. The City desires to promote aesthetically acceptable and area conforming wireless facilities using the smallest and least intrusive means available to provide wireless services to the community. All wireless facilities and wireless support structures in the public right-of-way must comply with all applicable provisions in this section. 1. Wireless Support Structures: All City or privately owned wireless support structures placed within the City shall be of a fully enclosed design such that the maximum amount of facilities, including any wiring, are concealed inside the structure or below ground. The City standard wireless support structure shall be the Valmont Pole Drawing Number TK01260 or an approved equal. All wireless support structures, whether existing, new or replacement wireless support structures, must: a. be constructed of aluminum or steel; b. be the same color as neighboring, similar support structures and of the same design characteristics; c. where constructed as a light pole, luminaire(s) and luminaire arm(s) must match adjacent city lighting standard and must contain an LED fixture in accordance with City specifications; and Ordinance No. 659 -6- April 2, 2019 d. be the City standard support structure, or an alternative support structure that is consistent with the aesthetics of the City standard support structure. Alternatives to the City Standard structure may be approved on a case by case basis by the City Manager or his/her designee. 2. Antennas: Antennas must be top-mounted and concealed within a radome (a structural, weatherproof enclosure that protects an antenna and is constructed of material that minimally attenuates the signal transmitted/received by such antenna) or otherwise concealed to the extent feasible. Cable connections, antenna mounts and other hardware must also be concealed. The radome or other concealment must be non-reflective and painted or otherwise colored to match the wireless support structure. 3. Collocation: Collocations between wireless service providers and with other utilities on the same support structure is required wherever feasible. If an applicant proposes to not collocate in areas where collocation options are or appear to be available, the applicant must document that collocation is infeasible. 4. Concealment: Concealment elements must be incorporated into the proposed design of the small wireless facility installation, and must include approved camouflaging or shrouding techniques. 5. Ground-Mounted Equipment: Ground-mounted equipment must be installed below grade or, if technically necessary, concealed in a ground-mounted cabinet. In addition to any applicable requirements in this Code, ground mounted cabinets must: a. be installed flush to the ground; b. be the same color as neighboring, similar support cabinets or other ground- mounted structures; c. not interfere in any way with the flow of pedestrian, bicycle or vehicular traffic when adjoining sidewalks, trails, or other similar passageways, d. conform to the American’s with Disabilities Act (ADA) including with respect to appropriate sidewalk spacing; and e. not create a safety hazard. 6. Lights: Unless otherwise required for compliance with FAA or FCC regulations, wireless facilities shall not include any lights or lighting. This subsection does not prohibit installations on streetlights or the installation of luminaires or additional street lighting on new support structures if and where required by the City. All wireless support structures must be capable of accommodating street lighting at 12, 18, 30 feet above the ground to facilitate future street lighting as may be determined by the City. g) Location Criteria for New or Replacement Wireless Support Structures 1. New Support Structures: Any new wireless support structures shall be placed: a. a minimum of two lot lines, or approximately 200 feet, whichever is greater, from any existing wireless support structure or utility pole on the same side of Ordinance No. 659 -7- April 2, 2019 the street or right-of-way, and one lot line or approximately 100 feet, whichever is greater when on the opposite sides of the street or right-of-way. b. at a distance which is the same as the prevailing separation distance among existing wireless support structures and poles in the surrounding vicinity as agreed upon by the applicant and City, or determined by the City where agreement cannot be reached; c. as functional streetlights as the City may require, in its reasonable discretion; d. in alignment with existing trees, wireless support structures, utility poles, and streetlights; e. an equal distance between trees when possible, with a minimum of 15 feet separation such that no proposed disturbance shall occur within the critical root zone of any tree; f. with appropriate clearance from existing utilities; g. outside of a 20-foot equipment clear zone (for base cabinets less than 18- inches in diameter) or 30-foot clear sight triangle (for base cabinets equal to or greater than 18-inches in diameter) at intersection corners; h. so as not to be located along the frontage of a Historic building, deemed historic on a federal, state, or local level; i. so as not to significantly create a new obstruction to property sight lines; j. at shared property lines if feasible; k. not within 50 feet of the apron of a fire station or other emergency service responder facility. 2. Replacement of City-Owned Support Structures: Any replaced wireless support structures shall remain in their existing location unless otherwise permitted by the City. Replacement pole height shall not exceed 50 feet, or the height of the existing utility pole or wireless support structure, whichever is greater. 3. Obstructions: Any new wireless support structure or other facilities associated with a new or existing wireless support structure must not obstruct access to: a. any existing above-ground or underground right-of-way user facilities, or public facilities; b. any public infrastructure for traffic control, streetlight or public transportation purposes, including without limitation any curb control sign, parking meter, vehicular traffic sign or signal, pedestrian traffic sign or signal, barricade reflectors; c. any public transportation vehicles, shelters, street furniture or other improvements at any public transportation stop (including, without limitation, bus stops, streetcar stops, and bike share stations); d. fire hydrants; Ordinance No. 659 -8- April 2, 2019 e. any doors, gates, sidewalk doors, passage doors, stoops or other ingress and egress points to any building appurtenant to the right-of- way; or f. any fire escapes. Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled “General Provisions” and Sec. 1-8 entitled General Penalty; Continuing Violations” are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 7. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. First Consideration March 19, 2019 Second Consideration April 2, 2019 Date of Publication April 11, 2019 Date Ordinance takes effect April 11, 2019 Adopt by the City Council this 2nd day of April, 2019. ATTEST: s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 659 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Chapter 24 Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Places, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management Sections 24-22: Definitions, 24-28: Permit Required, 24-30: Issuance of Permit; Conditions; 24-43: Location and Relocation of Equipment or Facilities, and adopting a new section 24-52 Wireless Aesthetic Standards This is a summary of the provisions of the above ordinance which has been approved for publication by the City Council. This ordinance amends Chapter 24: Streets, Sidewalks and Other Public Place, Article II. Right-Of-Way Management Chapter to add a new Section 24-52 entitled “Wireless Aesthetic Standards” to set forth minimum aesthetic and design standards that telecommunication providers must meet to place wireless facilities in the City’s right of way. Also included are amendments to Sections 24-22: Definitions, 24-28: Permit Required, 24- 30: Issuance of Permit; Conditions; 24-43: Location and Relocation of Equipment or Facilities to confirm with the new Section 24-52. This ordinance shall take effect upon publication. NOTICE: the foregoing is only a summary of the ordinance. A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk. Adopted by the City Council this 2nd day of April, 2019. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting April 2, 2019 Agenda Item 6. C. Second Consideration Amending 2019 Master Fee Schedule for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary This is the second consideration of Ordinance #658 amending the 2019 Master Fee Schedule to add a permit fee for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care. The first consideration of the Ordinance was held on March 19, 2019 City Council meeting. Proposed Fee Temporary Massage Therapist Permit For Hospice Care (City Code Section 16-235) Valid for six months from issuance date and may be renewed consecutive without additional payment 40.00 Attachments Ordinance #658, Amending the 2019 Master Fee Schedule for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt second consideration, Ordinance #658, amending the 2019 Master Fee Schedule for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care fee. ORDINANCE NO. 658 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending 2019 Master Fee Schedule for Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. The 2019 Master Fee Schedule of the City Code is hereby amended by adding the following new Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care fees: Temporary Massage Therapist Permit for Hospice Care $40.00 Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled “General Provisions” and Sec. 1-8 entitled General Penalty; Continuing Violations” are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. First Consideration March 19, 2019 Second Consideration April 2, 2019 Date of Publication April 11, 2019 Date Ordinance takes effect April 11, 2019 Adopted by the City Council this 2nd day of April, 2019. s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk