The URL can be used to link to this page

03-03-15 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber March 3, 2015 6:30 pm The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7 pm 1. CALL TO ORDER PAGES A. Roll Call B. Pledge of Allegiance 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes - City Council Meeting February 17, 2015 3-7 B. Approval of Check Register 1. City 8 2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority 9 C. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 2015 10-17 2. Board of Zoning Appeals - January 27, 2015 18-22 3. Environmental Commission - January 26, 2015 23 4. Human Rights Commission - January 27, 2015 24-26 5. Joint Meeting of Environmental Commission and Open Space and Recreation 27 Commission Minutes - November 24, 2014 6. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Minutes - January 15, 2015 28-33 D. Bids and Quotes: 1. Authorize Purchase of Traffic Signal Materials for TH 55 / Winnetka Avenue 34 Intersection Improvement Project E. Second Consideration - Ordinance #543 - Adoption of 2014 National Electrical Code 35-36 and 2015 State Building Code F. Authorize Temporary No Parking Zones for Run the Valley 15-18 37-40 G. Authorize Contract for Professional Services with Prairie Restorations for Restoration 41-52 & Maintenance of Native Plant Communities H. Resolution Requesting Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations for Olson 53-57 Memorial Frontage Road 15-19 I. Revisions to Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and 58-64 Councils J. Appointments to Community and Business Advisory Committees for METRO Blue 65-70 Line Extension * K. Board/Commission Appointments 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM A. Public Hearing - Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 - 1801 71-115 Noble Drive - The Lecy Group, Applicant 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Proposed Code Amendments to Section 4.31: Stormwater Management Ordinance, 116-150 First Consideration B. Announcements of Meetings C. Mayor and Council Communications 7. ADJOURNMENT * Item added at Council Meeting city aUNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING old GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA ' fle February 17, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 1A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Harris, Council Members Clausen, Schmidgall, Fonnest and Snope. 1B. Pledge of Allegiance 1C. Presentation of Minnesota Heart Safe Community Award Mr. Paul Mendoza, on behalf of North Memorial Heart Safe Communities and Heart Safe Minnesota, presented the City of Golden Valley the designation of a "Minnesota Heart Safe Community." Mr. Mendoza commended Fire Education Specialist Baker for his efforts in achieving the City's recognition. 2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Clausen to approve the agenda of February 17, 2015, as revised: moving Consent item 3G-Adopt Resolution petitioning the Surface Transportation Board to New Business item 6132 and the motion carried unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to approve the consent agenda of February 17, 2015, as revised: removal of Items 3H-Authorize Power Purchase Agreements with New Energy Equity and Sundial Solar and 3N-Adopt Resolution modifying 2015 general wages and salary to include Accounting Technician and Lead Community Service Officer positions and the motion carried unanimously. 3A1. Approve Minutes of Council/Manager Meeting - January 13, 2015 3A2. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting - February 3, 2015 3A3. Approve Minutes of Council Executive Session - February 3, 2015 313. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted. 3C1. Receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for St. Bartholomew Church. 3C2. Receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice requirement for Northwest Suburban Optimist Club. 3C3. Authorize issuance of Multi-Family Rental Property licenses as recommended by staff. 3C4. Approve solicitor's license for Clear Water Action. 3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows: 1. Planning Commission - January 26, 2015 2. Human Services Fund - November 10, 2014 3. Civil Service Commission - November 21, 2014 4. Teen Committee - October 27, 2014 5. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - December 18, 2014 Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- February 17, 2015 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA - continued E1. Award contracts for the 2015 Street Construction and Maintenance Materials to the following companies as shown: 1. C.S. McCrossan for: Type LV4 Wearing Course Mixture LVWE45030B at $48.10 per ton Type LV3 Non-Wearing Course Mixture LVNW35030B at $43.30 per ton Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEB340B at $48.50 per ton Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEB240B at $49.00 per ton Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEB330B at $56.00 per ton Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEA240B at $49.00 per ton SP 12.5 Non-Wearing Course Mixture SPNWB230B at $49.20 per ton 2. Commercial Asphalt Co. for: Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEB340C at $54.75 per ton Type SP 9.5 Wearing Course Mixture SPWEB240C at $54.45 per ton 3. Knife River for: Type 3A32 Concrete at $105.00 per cubic yard Type 4000# Concrete Mixture at $106.00 per cubic yard Type 4000# Concrete Mixture High Early Strength at $117.00 per cubic yard Extra delivery costs for concrete loads under 5 cubic yards at $100.00 per load. Environmental washout at $20.00 per load 3F. Authorize agreement for professional engineering services with Barr Engineering Company for DeCola Ponds and Medicine Lake Road Area Flood Mitigation Preliminary Design for an amount not to exceed $35,300. 3G. Adopt Resolution 15-13 for the Gity to petitien the SurfaGe TranspertatieR Bea 1 p-1-- Ve l ImnaGSStaatement for Rail read GE)RRe r Trac, OR GFy6ta4 3H. Authorize the PeWeF PUFGhase AgreeMeRtS with New F=Rergy Equity and the systern rerneval and reffiRstallatien Agreement with Sundial Solar. 31. Authorize agreement with SEH, Inc. for professional services on the Glenwood Avenue Sidewalk Extension Project in the amount not to exceed $96,800. 3J. Adopt Resolution 15-14 for approval of Plat - Paisley Lane Woods. 3K. Adopt Resolution 15-15 approval of proposed application for 2015 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Funds and to authorize execution of Subrecipient Agreement with Urban Hennepin County and Any Third Party Agreements. 31L. Adopt Resolution 15-16 approval of Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-Law changes to Article XI Increasing Service Pension, Section II-Disability Amount, Section I-Deferred Interest Payment and Service Pension Interest. 3M. Call for three Public Hearings for special assessments on the 2015 Pavement Management Area, 2016 Pavement Management Area and 2017 Pavement Management Area for March 17, 2015, at 7 pm. 3N. Adopt Resolution 15-17 medifying 2015 geReral wages and salary to AGGeURting TeGhRiGiaR and Lead CemmuRity Ser ViGe nvrfr'rceF POSFtiORS. 30. Approve requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by staff. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 3H. Authorize the Power Purchase Agreements with New Energy Equity and the system removal and reinstallation Agreement with Sundial Solar. Engineer Seaburg presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. Mr. Arthur Crowell, Sundial Solar, gave an overview of the agreements and answered questions from Council. Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- February 17, 2015 3H. Authorize Power Purchase Agreements with New Energy Equity - continued There was Council discussion regarding the solar power agreements and Council thanked staff and Mr. Crowell for pursuing grants for the projects. MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to authorize the Power Purchase Agreements with New Energy Equity and the system removal and reinstallation Agreement with Sundial Solar and the motion carried unanimously. 3N. Modify 2015 general wages and salary to include Accounting Technician and Lead Community Service Officer positions. City Manager Burt answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Resolution 15-17 modifying 2015 general wages and salary to include Accounting Technician and Lead Community Service Officer positions upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Snope, Schmidgall, Fonnest and Clausen and the following voted against: none and the motion carried. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 4A. Public Hearing - Ordinance #542 - Removing Special Restrictions - 6000 Duluth Street - King of Grace Lutheran Church and School, Applicant Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. City Manager Burt and City Attorney Barnard answered questions from Council. Pastor Erwin Ekhoff, King of Grace Church, presented a concept drawing of the church's proposed plans. He stated that the church is seeking equal treatment in the 1-1 Institutional Zoning District. He said the church would like to relocate their playground from the east side of their property, which is in a traffic area, to the north side which is not, so that it would be safer for the children. He answered questions from Council. Mayor Harris opened the public hearing.. Ms. Barbara Paterson, 2040 Adair Avenue North, said a person from their neighborhood had planned to submit a signed petition against the rezoning, but he was not in attendance. She said she has lived in the area for as long as the covenant has been in effect. She said regarding the church landscaping, they have only planted about seven trees on their property. She also said the neighborhood was concerned about high water levels in the area because when it rains the pooling water causes a small lake on the church's property. Ms. Mary Mastrian, 2101 Brunswick Avenue North, said she has lived in the area for fifty-nine years and when the church was originally built the neighbors did not know if it was a church or church/school. She said at the time the neighbors were assured it would only be a church, but a few years later a school was added. She said the expansion the church is proposing now is unreasonable and added that the church should not break the neighborhood covenant and expect the neighbors to hire a lawyer to defend it. Mr. Allen Labitzky, Principal, King of Grace Church, said his greatest concern is the safety of the children and because of this, the church would like to move their playground away from the traffic area. He said regarding the church's landscaping, they have added many trees and flowers to their property. Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- February 17, 2015 4A. Public Hearing - Ordinance #542 - Removing Special Restrictions - continued Mayor Harris closed the public hearing. There was Council discussion regarding the removal of the special restrictions for the property owned by King of Grace Lutheran Church and School located at 6000 Duluth Street. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Ordinance #542, rescinding Ordinance #328 Institutional Zoning District King of Grace Lutheran Church upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Fonnest and Snope, the following voted against: Clausen and Schmidgall and the motion carried. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6A. Adoption of 2014 National Electrical Code and 2015 State Building Code Physical Development Director Nevinski presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Snope to adopt Ordinance #543, amending the City Code, adopting the 2015 State Building Code and Incorporation of the 2014 National Electric Code on first consideration upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Fonnest, Clausen, Schmidgall and Snope, the following voted against: none and the motion carried. 6131. METRO Blue Line Extension Update Planning Manager Zimmerman presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Clausen to receive and file the METRO Blue Extension update and the motion carried unanimously. 6B2. Petition the Surface Transportation Board to require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on construction of Railroad Connector Track in Crystal Physical Development Director Nevinski presented the staff report and answered questions from Council. There was much Council discussion regarding the petition to the Surface Transportation Board to require an EIS on the construction of the railroad connector track. Mayor Harris recommended amending the purposed resolution by the addition in the 4th paragraph of "many west metro cities" and add the cities of "New Hope and Plymouth" and in the last paragraph the addition of"the White House Intergovernmental Affairs Office and United States Department of Transportation's Secretary." MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt Resolution 15-13 for the City of Golden Valley to petition the Surface Transportation Board to require an Environmental Impact Statement on construction of Railroad Connector Track in Crystal, Minnesota as amended upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Fonnest, Clausen, and Snope, the following voted against: Schmidgall and the motion carried. Unofficial City Council Minutes -5- February 17, 2015 6C. Announcements of Meetings Some Council Members may attend the Seven Dreams Education Foundation Bird Bash on February 21, 2015, starting at 5 pm at the Minneapolis Marriot Northwest in Brooklyn Park. Some Council Members may attend the West Metro Home Remodeling Fair on February 22, 2015, from 10:30 am to 3.30 pm at the Eisenhower Community Center, 1001 Highway 7. Interviews for the Bottineau Community Advisory Committee will be held on February 23, 2015, at 5 pm in the Council Conference Room. A City Council Strategic Planning Retreat will be held on February 23, 2015, at 6:30 pm. The Neighborhood Watch Block Captains Meeting will be held on February 24, 2015, at 7 pm at the Police Department. Some Council Members may attend the METRO Blue Line Extension Public Meeting on February 26, 2015, from 6 to 7:30 pm at St. Margaret Mary Church, 2323 Zenith Avenue. Some Council Members may attend the Robbinsdale Area Schools Empty Bowls Event on March 3, 2015, from 4 to 7 pm at the Sandburg Learning Center. The next City Council Meeting will be held on March 3, 2015, at 6:30 pm. 6D. Mayor and Council Communication Council Member Clausen stated the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission is seeking for a new commissioner to fill the vacancy due to the resignation of the current commissioner. Registration for the Run in the Valley event in April is now available. Many Park and Recreation events will be featured in the upcoming CityNews. Mayor Harris reminded residents that the warming houses are now closed for the season. 7. Adjournment MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall, and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:44 pm. Shepard Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk citv ()Jvk "va ICY " . Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. B. 1. Approval of City Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. i:.i v of, e valley Finance Department 763-593-8013/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Attachments • Document sent via email Recommended Action Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted. Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, February 9, 2015. Chair Kluchka called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Cera, Johnson (arrived at 7:23), Kluchka, Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes January 26, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Baker referred to the sixth paragraph on page 2 and asked that the first sentence be changed to read "Baker asked how the status of the covenant would affect the rezoning." Baker referred to fifth paragraph on page 3 and noted that the word "will" should be changed to the word "willing." MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the January 26, 2015, minutes with the above noted corrections. Kluchka abstained from voting. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Final PUD Plan — Sweeney Lake Woods — 1801 Noble Drive — PU-120 Applicant: The Lecy Group Addresses: 1801 Noble Drive Purpose: To allow for the reconfiguration of the one existing single family property into a new three-lot single family development Zimmerman stated that the Applicant is seeking approval of a PUD to create three single family lots with access via a shared driveway. He explained that the project consists of two parcels, a vacant lot 3.27 acres in size, and a 20-foot wide parcel containing a driveway. He stated that Lot 1 will be 37,494 square feet, Lot 2 will be 26,632 square feet, and Lot 3 will be 24,834 square feet, all of which are greater than the minimum required lot size of 10,000 square feet. He added that if not for the lack of adequate frontage on a public street, this proposal could be reviewed as a minor subdivision rather than a PUD. Zimmerman discussed how the Final PUD plans differ from the Preliminary PUD plans including: the expanded width of the shared private driveway from 16' to 18', the increased diameter of the cul-de-sac from 60' to 70', and relocating the stormwater filtration basin to the rear of Lot 3 which addresses concerns about co-location with the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 2 snow storage area. He discussed how this proposed PUD compares with the underlying zoning district and explained that an outlot will contain the driveway, the cul-de-sac and the snow storage area. Zimmerman referred to the utility plans and explained that typically 10 feet of separation between water and sanitary sewer is required. However, the limited width of the driveway parcel and the presence of an existing sanitary sewer line makes that impossible. He stated that the Applicant has received special exceptions regarding construction techniques which will allow the utilities to be installed legally. Zimmerman referred to a plan showing the wetland buffer area and stated that the PUD standards adopted in 2004 require a 25-foot buffer around wetlands. However, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission now recommends a more fine- grained approach based on the type and condition of wetland being buffered. In this case, a 10-foot buffer is the recommendation. Zimmerman referred to a site plan and reminded the Commission that at their review of the Preliminary PUD Plan the condition of limiting utilities and further access to the shared driveway was adopted. However, the recently subdivided properties to the east will result in a long utility line and a long driveway running roughly parallel with the existing shared driveway which is not ideal. One option, if the parties agree, is to allow access to the shared driveway in order to have a shorter and less redundant driveway system. Currently, the only way access would be allowed to the shared driveway is through a PUD Amendment. He added that allowing future access from the cul-de-sac to the parcel to the west would be prohibited because the current PUD has the restriction of not allowing any further access to the shared driveway. He stated that he is recommending that the condition regarding access to the private driveway be amended to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed without a PUD amendment. Segelbaum asked if there is a third property that also accesses the existing shared driveway. Zimmerman said yes, the property at 1807 Noble Drive accesses the shared driveway, however, it also has frontage on Noble Drive that could be used for a driveway. Segelbaum asked if the language regarding additional access to the driveway should state that what is being proposed in this PUD plan would be permitted, but anything proposed after this PUD would not. Zimmerman stated that all of the conditions will be spelled out in the PUD Permit. Cera asked if the Applicant has had any discussions with the owner of Lot 2 (the recently subdivided property to the east) regarding his driveway accessing the existing private driveway. Zimmerman said he is not sure if discussions have occurred between the property owners, but Mr. Lecy has expressed interest in exploring the possibilities. He added that the City would like to see consolidation of the driveways and utilities or additional width added to the private driveway. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 3 Baker noted that the City Council voted 4 to 1 to approve the Preliminary Plan for this proposal and asked for information on the dissenting vote. Zimmerman said there was concern about three homes being in an area where the access was somewhat restricted. Blum said he is concerned about access for the landlocked parcel to west. Zimmerman stated that the area he was referring to for future access to the west is slightly south of the landlocked parcel. He added that if access were granted for the property to the west, the snow storage area would have to be relocated. Waldhauser asked if the new landowner to the east agreed to give some of their land in order to widen the driveway, how close that would come to making the driveway a street. Zimmerman said he thinks the potential is there, if the parties want to work together. Baker asked Zimmerman to review what led to the City Engineer to propose a reduction in the wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that the City Engineer and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission are recommending a 10-foot buffer and that Planning Staff is deferring to their recommendation. He reiterated that it is the PUD ordinance that differs from the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission's standards. He added that there is some latitude in this case regarding the size of the wetland buffer. Baker asked if the buffer area shown in the Preliminary PUD plans was 25 feet. Zimmerman stated that the original plans showed a 25-foot buffer before they went to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission for review. Waldhauser said she would guess that the 25-foot buffer requirement in the PUD ordinance was probably meant for a higher density project, since that is typically when PUDs are used. Roy Lecy, Applicant, said he has never heard of requiring an additional 15 feet of wetland buffer. He said his plans have always shown a 10-foot buffer and he doesn't feel he should be held to a higher standard than any other proposal. He referred to the discussion regarding the owner of the property to the east accessing the private driveway and said he thinks it makes sense, but he would like to keep the process simple. Kluchka said this is a complicated PUD and he thinks it would be appropriate to go through the PUD amendment process. Segelbaum asked Lecy if he would build the driveway and utilities differently if he knew the property to the east might access it. Lecy said no, but he would make provisions for the trees. Blum asked Lecy what the hardship would be if the wetland buffer was 25 feet. Lecy said the soil conditions really deteriorate past where the buffer is located. He said he may need the 15 feet for the construction of the house because it is as close to the cul-de-sac as it can be. He added that it could also affect the grading of the properties. Waldhauser asked if the infiltration basin is intended to drain all three of the proposed lots. Lecy said no, it is for a portion of Lot 2 and all of Lot 3. Lot 1 will have natural filtration where it always has. He stated that the proposed 10-foot wetland buffer will increase the water quality over what is there now. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 4 Kluchka opened the public hearing. Jeff Haines, 1550 St. Croix Circle, requested that the original driveway and access easement across Lot 1 be left as an easement and not incorporated in an outlot with the driveway, cul-de-sac and snow storage area. Zimmerman said he understands Mr. Haines's concern about future access to his property, but he doesn't think anything will be allowed to be built in the proposed outlot, just like in an easement, but that he would confirm that with the City Engineer and the City Attorney. Cera asked if Mr. Haines and the Applicant have talked about allowing future access. Zimmerman stated that the future homeowner's association would need to be involved in discussions as well especially when there is potential for broader development in the future. He added that the City would not have the authority to require an access point to the west. Cera asked if the land to west is subdividable. Zimmerman said yes, there are three parcels that could be replatted a number of ways. Cera stated that the private driveway could potentially have several more homes accessing it. Zimmerman agreed and stated that the PUD Permit would need to be amended for any changes to the driveway access. Christopher Gise, 1485 Island Drive, said he is confused because it has been said that the proposed 10-foot wetland buffer is consistent with Hidden Lakes, but the shoreland buffer on his property is 50 feet. He asked if this proposed PUD plan defines the building pads or the building envelope area because Hidden Lakes properties had defined building pads. He asked if anything goes as long as they are not in the buffer area. Seeing and hearing no one else wising to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Kluchka asked if the proposal defines the building footprint or a buildable area. Zimmerman said in this case, the plans define the building envelope because the homes will custom fit to each lot. Kluchka asked if that is right for this development, and if it is consistent with what is across the lake. Zimmerman said these are generous sized lots and having a building envelope allows some flexibility in where the homes can be built. Kluchka asked the Commissioners if they have thoughts about Mr. Haines' request for the access easement. Cera said they might want to have a wider street to handle more traffic if and when development occurs to the west. He said it would be nice if discussion could occur between Mr. Lecy, Mr. Haines and the new property owner of Lot 2 to the east before this proposal goes to City Council, so that the street can be built appropriately now, rather than being made wider in the future. Kluchka suggested leaving the easement out of this recommendation. Cera said he would not put the easement in the proposal now, but wait until the PUD needs to be amended. Baker agreed. He added that there is an opportunity now with new property owners and he's hearing about the likely potential of future access to this road so he thinks the Commission needs to seriously consider requiring a public street. Blum asked if the road is being designed to handle the weight of a large fire truck. Zimmerman said yes, it is required that a street be able to handle the weight of the largest Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 5 truck needed. Blum asked if that is one of the things the City considers when differentiating between a public or private street. Zimmerman said that is one concern along with ownership and long-term maintenance. Blum asked if private streets aren't being maintained or kept safe, if the City can do the maintenance and assess the property owner. Zimmerman said he assumes the City can require maintenance to be done or assess the property owner. He added that maintenance agreements will also be required as part of the Development Agreement process. Baker asked to what extent the City is compromising the normal standards of utility construction with the proposed design. Zimmerman explained that the typical requirement is 10 feet of separation between the sewer and water lines. He stated that the Applicant is proposing an alternate design that is approved by the Department of Health. Kluchka added that the intent from the engineering perspective was to use a different construction method that would ensure the safety of the utilities. Baker said he is trying to put the entire project into context of where the City is giving and taking. Segelbaum questioned if the proposed utilities are sufficient to support potential future development because he doesn't think that will be an easy thing to change. He encouraged the neighbors to get together and discuss future development and access. He said he would support changing condition #4 to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. Baker said he is anticipating future problems with access issues. Blum asked about trends in street widths. Zimmerman said 24 to 26 feet is typical but when possible, narrower streets are built. Kluchka asked the Commissioners their thoughts about the wetland buffer issue. Segelbaum said he thinks they need clarification about the standards for wetland buffers before this proposal goes to the City Council. Baker said that the standards are changing as they speak. He said there is recognition of the importance of buffers in protecting water quality and he would argue strongly for not accepting a 10-foot, or a 25-foot buffer. Blum agreed and said there may be some flexibility on the northeast lot, but he doesn't see a reason to deviate from the 25-foot standard in the PUD requirements. Kluchka questioned if the City is getting enough out of this PUD to deviate from the standards. Segelbaum said he thinks they should stick with the standards. Baker said he would like to know why there is a 50-foot buffer across the lake and said anything they can do to help this impaired lake they should do. Cera referred to the lots recently subdivided to the north and asked what the wetland buffer was in that proposal. Zimmerman said because that was a subdivision and not a PUD, that wetland buffer is 10 feet. He added that the lots recently subdivided to the south also have a 10-foot buffer. Kluchka reiterated that PUDs are usually done for more intense development so that may be why the buffer standards differ. Baker said he wants to emphasize that standards are changing now. Cera said he doesn't disagree with having a larger buffer he just wants to remain consistent with what's been approved in past few years. Waldhauser said this application has been under consideration for a long time. The City has been favorable to having this area redevelop and it has been a Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 6 struggle to get to this point for a lot of people. She said she thinks the 10-foot buffer is the standard that is in place now. She said this project happens to be a PUD because it is complicated, not because it's on Sweeney Lake or because it has wetland considerations. She said the fact that the standards may or may not be changing shouldn't be an obstacle placed in front of this developer and she believes the standard that applies in this case is the 10-foot buffer. Segelbaum said he doesn't know which standard should be applied. Kluchka said the underlying zoning standard is 10 feet. Segelbaum said the PUD standard is 25 feet and he doesn't know if they can deviate from that. Johnson said when the proposal was submitted it was deemed acceptable. He questioned if the Commission is discussing the difference between 10 and 25 feet, or if they are discussing that the very act of building three houses is decreasing the water quality. He added that there was a house on this property previously that also impacted the water quality. Kluchka said the focus for him is if the City is getting enough value from this proposal. He reiterated that this is only a PUD because of the private street and the lack of frontage. Baker said he is dwelling on the buffer. He said it used to be okay to fill in wetlands and just because there was a standard at the time doesn't mean that standard should be kept. He said he would push for a larger wetland buffer on any project they are reviewing. Kluchka noted that a larger buffer was not discussed on the recently subdivided property to the east. Cera asked if they could recommend that the affected landowners speak to each other before this proposal goes to City Council so that the future driveway access issues could be addressed now and not have to come back for an amendment. Baker said he would also like the owner of Lot 2 to consider widening the driveway parcel. Segelbaum said he is concerned about the condition regarding additional access to the driveway through the Minor PUD Amendment process. Zimmerman stated that the Zoning Code has requirements regarding Minor versus full PUD amendments. Baker said he would like to keep the condition requiring the wetland buffer to be 25 feet wide. Waldhauser said she would not support that. Segelbaum said he would like a better understanding of the requirements for wetland buffers. Zimmerman stated that by default, a 25-foot buffer is a condition. He reiterated that the Engineering staff and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission have said that a 10-foot buffer is appropriate and that the plans have always shown a 10-foot buffer. Baker questioned if the Commission voted on a 10-foot buffer during their Preliminary Plan review. Segelbaum said he thinks there is conflicting information. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Waldhauser to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods, PUD #120 subject to the findings and conditions in the staff report. Cera noted that the staff recommendation includes the 25-foot wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that the discrepancy between the PUD ordinance and the Engineering/Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission was discovered after his staff report was written, so Staff's recommendation is to strike condition number 3 regarding the wetland buffer. Segelbaum said that it seems to him that they are voting on the 25-foot wetland buffer. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 7 Waldhauser said she would like to amend the motion to include Staff's condition with the change in the required wetland buffer to 10 feet. She added that she would also like to amend condition number 4 to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. Cera seconded the amendment. Kluchka said his intent was to require a 10-foot wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that striking condition number 3 would make the wetland buffer requirement 10 feet. Segelbaum amended Waldhauser's motion to state that the wetland buffer should be set to that which is required by City Code. Baker seconded the amendment and the motion carried 4 to 3 to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods, PUD #120 subject to the following findings and conditions. Commissioners Baker, Blum, Johnson and Segelbaum voted yes, Commissioners Cera, Kluchka and Waldhauser voted no. Findings: 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands, and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Civil Site Group, received January 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 5, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The riparian buffer strip along the delineated wetland shall be that width which is required by City Code. 4. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. 5. A park dedication fee of $13,920, or 2% of the land value with credit for one unit, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 8 --Short Recess-- 5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No reports were given. 6. Other Business • Council Liaison Report No report was given. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:17 pm. Charles D. Segelbaum, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 27, 2015 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, January 27, 2015, at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Maxwell called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members Maxwell, Nelson, Orenstein, Perich and Planning Commission Representative Baker. Also present were Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes — November 25, 2014 Regular Meeting MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried unanimously to approve the November 25, 2014, minutes as submitted. II. The Petition(s) are: 221 Westwood Drive North Curt Olson, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 4.67 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.33 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of additional living space. Goellner referred to a site plan of the property and explained the Applicant's proposal to build a 2-story addition on the north end of the existing house. Maxwell asked about the plans for the existing garage. Goellner stated that the Applicant is proposing to convert the existing garage into living space and build a new two-stall garage in front of that. Maxwell asked if it is just the northwest corner of the proposed new garage that would be in the setback area. Goellner said yes. Curt Olson, Applicant, showed the Board plans of his proposed addition. He stated that the lower level of the addition will be garage space and that the existing garage will be used for a new stairway, mechanical room, and laundry/mudroom. Maxwell asked about the depth of the proposed new garage. Bill Brugerman, representing the Applicant, said the dimensions of the garage will be 24 ft. deep x 36 ft. wide. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 27, 2015 Page 2 Olson handed out renderings of the proposed new additions and said his trying to preserve the neighborhood character. He said he doesn't want someone to tear the house down and build something else. Orenstein asked Olson if he intends to sell the house. Olson said yes. He said this is the second house in the area that he's renovated and that the neighbors call him a preservationist, not a flipper. Nelson said she has sympathy for corner lots and asked Olson if he has thought of ways to build the proposed addition without variances. Olson said he could build on the back of the house, but the backyard is already shallow and the neighbors to the west wouldn't be happy if he did that. He added that building on the back of the house would change the look of the block because the houses are linear so making an "L" shaped house wouldn't fit in, and would look bigger than the other houses. Nelson asked if the proposed addition could be smaller so the setback requirements could be met. Olson said he would still need a variance even if he made the addition smaller. Brugerman, stated that all the other properties along Loring Lane are closer to the street and that this this house would still be the furthest away from the street. Olson added that the block doesn't have a consistent line. Maxwell stated that the Board tries to give the minimum amount needed in order to build a normal sized garage. He questioned if the extra four feet is necessary or if something smaller could be built. Brugerman stated that the length of a Suburban is 21 ft. so if the garage is only 23 ft. deep, people won't be able to walk behind the cars without opening the garage door. He added that 24 ft. in depth is not excessive because space is needed for garbage cans, storage, etc. Nelson stated the Board is sensitive to front yard setback areas. She discussed the criteria that must be met when considering variances. She said she thinks the proposal is in harmony with the intent of the ordinances, it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and it's reasonable, she just wonders if the addition could be built without variances. Maxwell asked Olson to address any other unique circumstances. Olson said the shape of the property and the location of the house on the property are unique. He added that the front of the house faces the large part of the yard which he thinks is backwards. He would like to have the living spaces at the front of the house and the bedrooms at the back of the house. Nelson asked how many bedrooms and bathrooms are in the house. Olson said there are 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom and he wants to put another bedroom in the basement. He said his intent is to bring the house into the modern era. Maxwell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Maxwell closed the public hearing. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 27, 2015 Page 3 Nelson said she is sympathetic with corner lots. She noted that if this weren't a corner lot the setback would be 15 ft. and that other houses along Loring Lane are closer to the front property line than this one would be. Baker said he is sympathetic to avoiding teardowns and preserving and re-building instead. Nelson agreed and added that construction of the proposed addition on the back of the house would have a bigger impact on the neighborhood. Perich said he agrees that the corner in this case is unique, however he struggles with this request not being caused by the landowner since there are other options. Maxwell stated that the landowner didn't position the existing house where it is. Nelson said that shortening one corner of the proposed new garage by 4 ft. in order to meet setback requirements won't make much of a difference. Perich agreed that a 20 foot deep garage isn't a good idea. MOVED by Nelson seconded by Baker and motion carried 4 to 1 to approve the variance request for 4.67 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.33 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of additional living space. Perich voted no. 6461 Westchester Circle Daniel Rybeck and Kathleen Searls, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 4.8 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.2 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of additional living space. Goellner referred to a site plan and explained the Applicants' proposal to construct a screened porch addition and a deck. The proposed deck meets the setback requirements, however the screened porch would require a variance from the front yard setback requirements. Maxwell asked about the size of the proposed porch addition without the deck. Nelson noted that the plans submitted say the porch is 15 ft. x 29 ft. Goellner showed the Board a plan submitted by the Applicant showing a porch addition built within the setback area. Baker noted that those plans are really a different design, and didn't just propose a smaller porch. Maxwell asked if the existing trees would remain. Kate Searls, Applicant, said the trees would remain. Nelson asked about the setback requirements regarding stairs. Goellner stated that stairs can be located in a setback area. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 27, 2015 Page 4 Maxwell asked if the porch were re-oriented to meet the setback requirements, how close it would be to the tree shown in the photos. Goellner said the tree wasn't shown on the survey, so she is not sure. John Drucker, Architect for the proposal, stated that the screened porch would be approximately 6 ft. from the tree. Maxwell asked how close to the tree the proposed porch would be if a variance were granted for the porch addition. Drucker said approximately 12 ft. Maxwell asked what kind of tree it is. Searls said it is an oak tree. Drucker stated that rotating the proposed screened porch to meet the setback requirements would place the porch closer to the tree, however that is not the main reason for the way they are proposing the porch. He stated that the main reason they would like to build the screened porch the way they've proposed is to create a garden area, and to create a balanced gable with the other gables on the house. Nelson asked if the screened porch could be made smaller. Drucker stated that the Applicant's want an eating area with a table and a sitting area in the porch so making it smaller would compromise that. Searls added that they are a family of seven so they want a space to gather. Drucker stated that the house will look better with the porch built the way they are proposing it. He added that if they build the porch within the setback area it will be more impactful and visible to the neighboring property. Maxwell stated that the size and shape of the lot are unique, there are two front yard setback areas, and the potential alternative might endanger an existing oak tree. Drucker reiterated that a conforming structure won't fit in as well with the neighborhood and that he doesn't think the oak tree will be in danger with either configuration. He added that the property was platted in an odd shape and the buildable area is restricted because of that. Maxwell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Maxwell closed the public hearing. Orenstein stated that the orientation of the screened porch and the symmetry of the design make sense and he has no objection to the proposed screened porch. Baker said he understands the applicant's vision of a sitting area and an eating area in the porch, but questioned if that vision is what is driving the need for a variance. He said the Board is supposed to help solve a problem, not accommodate a vision. Perich agreed and referred to the previous agenda item. He said in that case, the Applicant had other options, in this case he doesn't think there are other options. Maxwell said the Board is allowed to take into account the endangering of significant trees. He said he is sympathetic because the Applicants have two front yards, but the area in question is really more of a side yard than a front yard. Baker asked if the tendency of the Board is to be more careful with front yards than with side yards. Maxwell said yes. Orenstein noted that the proposed screened porch will be consistent with the front plane of the existing garage and that it won't be intrusive. Maxwell added that there is 49 ft. from the house to the street and that this property has 14 ft. of right-of-way. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals January 27, 2015 Page 5 MOVED by Orenstein, seconded by Perich and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request for 4.8 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.2 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of screened porch. III. Other Business Nelson asked the Board if they would like Staff to make a recommendation for approval or denial in their staff reports. The Board discussed whether or not they would like recommendations made and the consensus was that they would like recommendations. MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried 4 to 1 to have staff provide a recommendation when writing a staff report for variance requests. Perich voted no. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:13 pm. George Maxwell, Chair Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes January 26, 2015 Present: Commissioners Tracy Anderson, Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill, Larry Johnson, Jim Stremel, Debra Yahle; Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist, and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant Absent: Commissioner: Tonia Galonska Call to Order Stremel called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — November 24, 2014 MOVED by Hill, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the November 24, 2014 regular meeting. New Proposals for Greener Practices The list of suggestions was reviewed by the commissioners. The two priorities for 2015 that will be presented to City Council are: • Explore composting options and availability • Evaluate transportation planning and efficiencies • Implement Natural Resource Management Plan projects These will be included in the annual report which will be reviewed at the March commission meeting. Program/Project Updates The complete program/project summary is on file. Quarterly update items will be given at the February meeting. Additionally, Gitelis reported that the final report was submitted for the Community Center. Commission Member Council Reports None. Other Business None Adjourn MOVED by Hill, seconded by Yale, and the motion carried to adjourn. Lisa Nesbitt Administrative Assistant MINUTES Human Rights Commission (HRC) City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Council Conference Room January 27, 2015 Commissioners present: Teresa Martin, Chair Jonathan Burris Payton Perkins Michael Pristash Sue Phelps Andrew Ramlet Commissioners absent: Adam Buttress Carla Johnson, Vice Chair Simon Gotlieb Staff: Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager The meeting was convened at 6:38 pm by Chair Martin. Approval of December 18 2014 Meeting Minutes Motion by Commissioner Burris, second by Chair Martin to approve the December 18, 2014 minutes. Motion carried 6-0. Addition to Agenda It was the consensus of the HRC to add an update by Commissioner Ramlet on the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Breakfast he attended. Council Updates Chair Martin and Vice Chair Johnson provided the City Council with the 2014 Annual Report and 2015 Work Plan. It was the consensus of the Council that the HRC move forward with the 2015 Work Plan as proposed. Council Members were very pleased with the work the HRC has done in its programs and events to raise awareness about human rights issues. Old Business Preventing Genocide Program Update Chair Martin reported that the co-sponsored program, Preventing Genocide, with the HRCs of Crystal, New Hope and Robbinsdale will be held on Saturday, April 18 from 10-11 :30 am at the Crystal Community Center (Meeting Rooms A and B), 4800 Douglas Drive North. The speaker is Executive Director Dr. Ellen J. Kennedy of World Without Genocide. The event will be free to the public. The planning committee requested each sponsoring HRC contribute $100 toward Dr. Kennedy's speaking honorarium and if the Golden Valley HRC would be able to provide some light refreshments. Human Rights Commission January 27, 2015 Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3 Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Burris to authorize the expenditure of $100 toward Dr. Ellen J. Kennedy's speaking honorarium and up to a maximum of$50 toward light refreshments for the Preventing Genocide event. Motion carried 6-0. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Breakfast Commissioner Ramlet reported the MLK Jr. Holiday Breakfast was a very well-attended event. He felt it was worthwhile and the program was engaging and were highly regarded. He felt it would be worth the effort for the HRC to sponsor 1-2 tables for next year's breakfast. It was the consensus for the Commission to discuss sponsoring tables for this event at the October 2015 meeting for 2016. May 2015 HRC Conversations Planning — Blank Slate Theatre Production of "bottom" Commissioners discussed how to best alert student groups and access high school email newsletters. This item will be placed on the March agenda for further discussion. October 2015 HRC Conversations Planning This item will be discussed at the March HRC meeting. HRC Traveling Meeting Dates/Times (a? Perpich Center for Arts Education (PCAE) Knauss explained the PCAE is happy to have the HRC look at the performance space and conduct a meeting there. Due to overtime and staffing issues, they would not be able to accommodate the HRC's regular meeting on March 24, but did provide alternate dates. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Commissioner Phelps to move the regular HRC meeting to Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 6:30 pm at the Perpich Center for Arts Education. Motion carried 6-0. New Business Change September 22 Meeting Date Due to City Recognized Holiday Knauss explained the NRC's regularly scheduled meeting on September 22 falls on Yom Kippur which is a recognized City Holiday and no meetings can be held in the evening. Motion by Commissioner Pristash, second by Chair Martin to move the regular HRC meeting to Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 6:30 pm in the City Hall Council Conference Room. Motion carried 6-0. Adjourn Motion by Chair Martin, second by Commissioner Ramlet to adjourn the meeting at 7:29 pm. Motion carried 6-0. Follow-up Items: • Commissioner Phelps will contact Robbinsdale and Hopkins school districts to see what their protocol is in promoting events to their students. • Commissioner Martin will check with NAMI on what if any resources they could direct the HRC on this topic. Human Rights Commission January 27, 2015 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3 • Knauss will check with the city's Crime Prevention Analyst on possible resources on this topic. • Everyone needs to research documentary-type videos (approximately 10-20 minutes in length) on the topic of human sex trafficking for the Commission's consideration to use for the October event. • Everyone needs to think of possible subject matter experts that may be able to serve as panelists for the October HRC Conversations event. Teresa Martin, Chair ATTEST: Chantell Knauss, Staff Liaison Approved by HRC: February 24, 2015 Human Rights Commission January 27, 2015 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3 Joint Meeting of the Golden Valley Environmental Commission, and Open Space and Recreation Commission November 24, 2014 A joint meeting of the Environmental Commission and Open Space and Recreation Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, November 24, 2014. Chair Jim Stremel called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm. Those present were, Environmental Commissioners Anderson, Gitelis, Hill, Stremel and Yahle; Open Space and Recreation Commissioners Bergman, Cornelius, Kuebelbeck, Mattison, Rosenquist, Sandler, Speltz and Steinberg. Also present was Director of Parks & Recreation Rick Birno, Public Works Specialist Eric Eckman, Park Maintenance Supervisor Al Lundstrom, Administrative Assistant Lisa Nesbitt, Deric Deuschle and Veronica Anderson from Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH) Natural Resource Management Plan Deric Deuschle and Veronica Anderson heard comments from the commissioners, about the draft plan that they received prior to the meeting. Comments/suggestions include: Where appropriate, include 11x17 fold out maps within each section instead of grouping them all together in the back of the plan (for printed versions). Section 1 Page 4 — Issues and Opportunities: Third sentence should say "based on results of 2003 inventory which was updated in 2013" Page 5 — Amending and Updating the Plan: Be specific about the process as it changes if the plan becomes a part of the Comp. Plan. Also, note who is to receive the application to amend the plan. Section 3 Combine some of the goals but keep the all the details listed under the goals Section 4 Page 1 — The last paragraph should be moved to either the Introduction or the Background section. Page 8 — This should be moved to the Introduction section Section 4 This section should follow Section 2 Section 5 Wherever it says "Upgrade trash receptacle" consider including recycling receptacle. Increase the font size on concept plan pictures The deer management plan should be referenced. The boundaries and signage between Golden Ridge Nature Area and General Mills JFB Nature Area should be clarified in the plan. Another joint meeting with be scheduled for January at which time the final plan will be presented to the commissions. If approved, the plan will then be presented to City Council at a work session in February and hopefully adopted at a Council meeting shortly thereafter. 3. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm. Lisa Nesbitt Administrative Assistant Sett Cry �? Item 4A BCWMC 2-19-1 Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Minutes of Regular Meeting January 15,2015 Golden Valley City Hall,8:30 a.m. Commissioners and Staff Present: Crystal Commissioner Guy Mueller, Vice Chair Robbinsdale Alternate Commissioner Michael Scanlan Golden Valley Commissioner Stacy Hoschka, Treasurer St. Louis Park Commissioner Jim de Lambert, Chair Medicine Lake Commissioner Clint Carlson Administrator Laura Jester Minneapolis Alternate Commissioner Lisa Goddard Attorney Charlie LeFevere,Kennedy& Graven Minnetonka Not represented Engineer Karen Chandler, Barr Engineering Co. New Hope Alternate Commissioner Pat Crough Recorder Amy Herbert Plymouth Alternate Commissioner David Tobelmann Technical Advisory Committee(TAC) Members/Other Attendees Present: Derek Asche, TAC, City of Plymouth Jeff Oliver,TAC, City of Golden Valley Erick Francis,TAC,City of St. Louis Park John O'Toole, Alternate Commissioner, City of Medicine Lake Gary Holter, Mayor, Medicine Lake Liz Stout,TAC, City of Minnetonka Richard McCoy, TAC, City of Robbinsdale David Stack, Master Water Stewards Jane McDonald Black, Alternate Commissioner, City Linda Loomis, Chair Plan Steering Committee of Golden Valley Chris Long,TAC, City of New Hope Marge Beard, Plymouth City Council 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL On Thursday,January 15, 2015, at 8:39 a.m. in the Council Conference room at Golden Valley City Hall,Chair de Lambert called to order the meeting of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission(BCWMC)and asked for roll call to be taken. The City of Minnetonka was absent from the roll call. 2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No items were raised. 1 BCWMC January 15, 2015, Meeting Minutes 3. AGENDA Commissioner Hoschka requested the addition of a discussion of potential conflict of interest in the Winnetka Avenue project. Alternate Commissioner Goddard moved to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Mueller seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Mueller asked for more details on the CAMP program. Administrator Jester explained that CAMP is the Citizen-Assisted Monitoring Program, and she provided brief information about the program and the Commission's participation. Alternate Commissioner Tobelmann moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Alternate Commissioner Goddard seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. [The following items were approved as part of the Consent Agenda: the December 18, 2014, Commission Meeting minutes,the monthly financial report,the payment of the invoices,the approval of Resolution 15-01 Approving Reimbursement to the BCWMC 2.5%of the Tax Levy Request to Hennepin County for Collection in 2014 for Administrative Expenses of the C1P Projects and Approving the Transfer of Those Funds to the BCWMC's FY2014-2015 Administrative Account, Approval of Resolution 15-02 Approving the Transfer of 2014 BCWMC Funds from its Administrative Account to its Erosion/Sediment Account(Channel Maintenance Fund)and Long-term Maintenance Account, Approval of the Proposal from MMKR to Perform the FY2014 Financial Audit, Set Public Hearing on Major Plan Amendment for the March 19, 2015, Commission Meeting, Approval of Amended Contract with Keystone Waters, LLC (Administrator), Approval of Annual Flood Control Project Inspection Report and Direction to Submit Report to Appropriate Entities, and Approval of Project Plans for 1-494 General Purpose Lane(SP 2785-330).] The general and construction account balances reported in the Financial Report prepared for the January 15,2015, meeting are as follows: Checking Account Balance $579,372.23 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $579,372.23 TOTAL CASH & INVESTMENTS ON- $3,429,158.61 HAND (1/7/15) CIP Projects Levied—Budget Remaining ($2,698,600.87) Closed Projects Remaining Balance $730,557.74 2013 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $14,954.83 2014 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $14,395.53 Anticipated Closed Project Balance $759,908.10 2 BCWMC January 15, 2015, Meeting Minutes 5. BUSINESS A. Receive Presentation on Master Water Stewards Program from Freshwater Society Peggy Knapp of the Freshwater Society introduced herself and described the Master Water Stewards program currently operating in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. She explained that it is funded by a grant through the Clean Water Land and Legacy Amendment. Ms. Knapp stated that the program is in its second year. She gave a presentation and provided information about the program noting it is a community leadership development program modeled after the Master Gardeners Program. She showed slides and described several projects completed by Master Water Steward participants. Ms. Knapp said that by the end of next year there will be 90 people who are certified as Master Water Stewards. Ms. Knapp described the intensive education that the program provides to the volunteers who train to become Master Water Stewards(MWS). She talked about the community projects that the MWS lead and the clean water education they provide to communities. She described the program as a program by neighbors for neighbors and neighborhoods. Ms. Knapp described partnerships that that the program has with other organizations such as the City of Edina and the Friends of Diamond Lake. She explained that the program is fundraising for its initiative to develop metro-wide online curriculum,training, and continuing education for MWS. Ms. Knapp said that the initiative will cost approximately $100,000. She reported that six watersheds have already pledged funding toward the project and said that she hopes the BCWMC will consider participating. Ms. Knapp also explained that it costs approximately$3,000 in staff time and resources to get one MWS certified. She said that the program is developing ways that watersheds can sponsor the certification of a MWS in their watershed. Ms. Knapp responded to questions. Alternate Commissioner Tobelmann asked if there is collaboration between the Master Water Stewards program and the Master Naturalists and commented that if not,there could be opportunities there. There was brief discussion about how many homeowners have access to grants for water quality improvement projects through watershed organizations. Administrator Jester noted the BCWMC Education Committee would be considering Commission involvement in the MWS at an upcoming meeting. Mr. Stack briefly commented on his good experience with the program. B. Consider Draft Request for Proposals for Website Redesign Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that it budgeted $12,000 for the website redesign in 2015. She said that to start the project process the Commission needs to send out an RFP(Request for Proposals) for the website redesign. Commissioners offered some suggestions for refining the RFP and recommendations on firms to receive the RFP. There was discussion about site maintenance required into the future. Administrator Jester asked if the Commission wants to create a new committee to work on the project or utilize an existing committee. There was discussion. The Commission agreed to designate the Education Committee to work on the project and to direct the Education Committee to bring a recommendation about the contractor to the Commission. Administrator Jester said that the Education Committee will discuss this item at its February meeting. C. Discuss Template for Final Reports on CIP Projects Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that the report provided last month by Eric Eckman was based on a template she developed. She commented that Commissioner Welch had some suggestions for modifying the template and asked if anyone had additional feedback. Alternate Commissioner Goddard requested more detail on cost overruns. Alternate Commissioner Tobelmann asked for the report to link to relevant documents, such as the 50%and 90%project plans. There was discussion about how"actual"pollutant 3 BCWMC January 15, 2015, Meeting Minutes removal can be calculated; it was noted monitoring data isn't necessarily collected immediately after the project and it may take years to see a difference in pollutant loads. The group noted it was important to determine how the project was built in relation to the project design. The Commission agreed that Administrator Jester would collect all input provided for modifying the template,revise the template, and provide the template to the cities. D. Discuss Process for Review of Letters of Interest Proposals The Commission discussed possible methods for reviewing the proposals. Attorney LeFevere talked about the Data Practices Act and the Open Meeting Law and their effect on how the Commission handles data such as the letters of interest proposals. The Commission agreed that the TAC will review the letters of interest proposals for engineering services at its February 2 meeting and the Administrator will add the files to the Dropbox for TAC and Commission review or may send to only Commissioners as the proposals cannot be included in a public meeting packet. E. Receive Update on Schaper Pond Diversion Project Administrator Jester announced that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA)recently communicated its decision that the City of Golden Valley can take credit for this project as part of the wasteload allocation for the Sweeney Lake TMDL. Engineer Chandler also noted that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decided this project falls under a maintenance category of a general permit. Mr. Oliver stated that 90% plans should come to the Commission in February and project construction should being in April or May. F. Receive Update on Draft Watershed Management Plan Administrator Jester reported that she has received comments from Commissioner Mueller, has heard that the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources is working on its comments, and has heard that the Metropolitan Council believes it will not have any significant comments on the Plan. G. Potential of Conflict of Interest in Winnetka Avenue Project Mr. Oliver described the project and its goal to reduce flooding at the DeCola ponds area. He showed a map of the area, noting that 41 properties are at risk of flooding. He reported that there is an opportunity in this project for the City of Golden Valley to construct additional flood storage. Mr. Oliver explained that Barr Engineering has done the bulk of the project's Phase 1 and Phase 2 studies. He said the City of Golden Valley is interested in having Barr Engineering do the design for the flood storage project because of its knowledge and familiarity with the project. Mr. Oliver explained that there is a potential for conflict of interest due to a possible circumstance where Barr Engineering would be reviewing its own design of the erosion and sediment control plan on behalf of the BCWMC. He proposed that City staff design that portion of the project and Barr Engineering reviews it on behalf of the BCWMC. There was discussion of this proposal and of other ways that the design and review could be handled. Alternate Commissioner Crough moved to approve that the City of Golden Valley design the erosion and sediment control plan and Barr Engineering review the plan on behalf of the Commission. Commissioner Hoschka seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 8-0 [City of Minnetonka absent from vote]. 6. COMMUNICATIONS A. Administrator: i. Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that she is collecting the annual Conflict of' BCWMC January 15, 2015, Meeting Minutes Interest forms from Commissioners. iii. Administrator Jester announced the upcoming Mississippi River Forum on chlorides. iii. Administrator Jester requested that the Commission members think about Commission officer and Committee roles since the February meeting is the annual organizational meeting and is when the appointments are made. iv. Administrator Jester announced that she plans to attend a webinar next week on the topic of communicating the value of water. B. Chair: i. Chair de Lambert reminded the Commission to think about roles as Commission officers and committee members and to be prepared at the next meeting to designate officers and committee members. ii. Chair de Lambert welcomed Mike Scanlan,the new BCWMC Alternate Commissioner for the City of Robbinsdale and Gary Holter,the incoming BCWMC Alternate Commissioner for the City of Medicine Lake. C. Commissioners: i. Commissioner Carlson announced that the City of Medicine Lake is committed to this organization,to participating in it,and to making it a better organization. He said that the City of Medicine Lake has approved a budget for engineering services. ii. Alternate Commissioner Jane McDonald Black reported on the Metro Blue Line Station Forum. Mr. Oliver added that the station project is in the plan development phase and is not an engineering effort yet. He said that the technical work and reviews will be done in the future. iii. Commissioner Hoschka talked about the open house held by the City of Golden Valley for the 2015 Bassett Creek streambank restoration project. Mr. Oliver provided more details and mentioned the open house was attended by approximately two dozen residents. Commissioner Mueller said that he attended the open house. iv. Commissioner Tobelmann reported that he will be attending the February 5`h Road Salt Symposium at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. V. Alternate Commissioner Goddard reported that construction work has begun on the Main Stem restoration project and she reported on the Theodore Wirth Park project. D. "rAC Members: i. Mr. Asche announced that the Plymouth Environmental Quality Committee recently met and will have a few comments on the Commission's draft Plan. ii. Mr. Asche announced that there will be a public open house on January 29`h at 7 p.m. at Plymouth City Hall about the Four Seasons Area Water Quality Project(now named by the city as the Northwood Lake project). E. Committees: i. Commissioner Mueller requested that commissioners and staff complete the staff evaluation surveys and said that that the Administrative Services Committee will review results at its next meeting. 5 BCWMC January 15, 2015, Meeting Minutes F. Legal Counsel:No Legal Communications G. Engineer: No Engineer Communications 7. INFORMATION ONLY (Available at http://www.bassettereekwmo.org/Meetings/2015/2015- Jan uary/2015Jan ua ryMeetingPacket.htm) A. WCA Notice, Plymouth B. Grant Tracking Summary and Spreadsheet 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair de Lambert adjourned the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Regular Meeting at 10:44 a.m. Amy Herbert, Recorder Date Secretary Date 6 W iF'6' Y 4 1� 'vvnl1 it 1, i-X:: Tj 1� r+ valleyC- fl MEMORANDUM Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. D. 1. Authorize Purchase of Traffic Signal Materials for TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue Intersection Improvement Project Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer Summary The City has partnered with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and Hennepin County to make improvements to the Winnetka Avenue (CSAH 156) and TH 55 Intersection (2015- 2019 CIP S-025, page 98). Currently, construction documents are being finalized and are going through the approval process at MnDOT and Hennepin County. The project will be advertised for bids in the coming months. As part of the intersection improvement project, the traffic signal at TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue is being fully replaced. MnDOT, Hennepin County, and the City will be sharing the costs of the traffic signal replacement. Under normal public contracting practices, the Contractor is responsible for furnishing all materials for the job. However, in this situation, the fabrication lead time for the traffic signal mast arms and poles is several months. In an effort to keep the project on schedule, staff recommends that the City purchase these materials prior to the project awarded to a contractor. Staff obtained competitive quotes from qualified suppliers for mast arms and poles for the new traffic signal system. The following quotes were received: Millerbernd Manufacturing Co. $42,272.00 Mlazgar Associates $63,633.00 Adequate funding for the materials is available within the project budget, as the cost was originally budgeted as a construction expense. Recommended Action Motion to approve purchase of traffic signal materials from Millerbernd Manufacturing Company in the amount of$42,272 for the TH 55/Winnetka Avenue Intersection Improvement Project. Y .N 0V N valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. E. Adoption of 2014 National Electrical Code and 2015 State Building Code Prepared By Jerry Frevel, Building Official Summary The State of Minnesota adopted the 2014 National Electrical Code on July 1, 2014, replacing the 2011 Code. The National Electrical Code is required to be adopted locally and is enforced through consulting services provided by Stephen Tokle Inspections, Inc. The State of Minnesota adopted the following Chapters of the 2015 State Building Code on January 24, 2015: • 1300 Minnesota Building Code Administration • 1303 Minnesota Provisions to the State Building Code • 1307 Minnesota Elevators and Related Devices Code • 1309 Minnesota Residential Code • 1311 Minnesota Conservation Code for Existing Buildings • 1322 Minnesota Residential Energy Code • 1341 Minnesota Accessibility Code • 1346 Minnesota Mechanical and Fuel Gas Codes Adoption of Chapter 1305 Minnesota Building Code will occur later this year. The City Council approved the ordinance on its first consideration on February 17, 2015. If the Council adopts the ordinance on its second consideration, it will be effective upon publication. Attachments • Ordinance No. 543, Amending the City Code, Adopting the 2015 State Building Code and Incorporation of the 2014 National Electric Code (1 page) Recommendation Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 543, amending the City Code, adopting the 2015 State Building Code and Incorporation of the 2014 National Electric Code on second consideration. ORDINANCE NO. 543, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Adopting the 2015 State Building Code and Incorporation of the 2014 National Electric Code The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1 . City Code Section 4.01 , entitled "Building Code Adopted" is amended by Deleting the following items and replacing them as follows.- A. ollows:A. 1300 — Minnesota Building Code Administration D. 1303 — Minnesota Provisions to the State Building Code G. 1307 — Minnesota Elevators and Related Devices Code H. 1309 — Minnesota Residential Code I. 1311 — Minnesota Conservation Code for Existing Buildings J. 1315 — Adoption of 2014 National Electrical Code U. 1322 — Minnesota Residential Energy Code N. 1341 — Minnesota Accessibility Code O. 1346 — Minnesota Mechanical and Fuel Gas Codes Section 8. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council this 3rd day of March, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST; /s/ Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk R A Nr," %;. U M Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988 (fax) Sol WX Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. F. Establish Temporary No Parking Zones for Run the Valley Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Mark Ray, PE, Street Maintenance Supervisor/Recycling Coordinator Summary On April 11, 2015, the Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF), a non-profit community foundation organized by City residents, will be hosting Run the Valley that will be starting and ending at Brookview Golf Course/Community Center. Since the event is expected to draw a large crowd of people and the parking lots in Brookview Golf Course may be used for golfers and race staging, all attendees may need to park on local streets and in the lots at Brookview Park. The streets in the area around Brookview Park are primarily 26 and 28 feet in width with parking permitted on both sides of the roadway. If vehicles are allowed to park on both sides of the street, larger Public Safety vehicles may not be able to safely pass between the parked cars. In order to maintain adequate Public Safety vehicle access, parking will be permitted on one side of the street only. The proposed parking restrictions are: 1. Western Avenue between Brookview Parkway and Winnetka Avenue; parking prohibited on the south side of the street. 2. Gregory Road between Winnetka Avenue and Utah Avenue; parking prohibited on the south side of the street. 3. Utah Avenue between Wayzata Boulevard and Ridgeway Road; parking prohibited on the west side of the street. 4. Hanley Road between Wayzata Boulevard and Western Avenue; parking prohibited on the west side of the street. 5. Field Drive between Wayzata Boulevard and Hanley Road; parking prohibited on the east/south side of the street. 6. Western Terrace, parking prohibited on both sides of the entire street. 7. Wayzata Boulevard between Winnetka Avenue South and Brookview Parkway; parking prohibited on the north side of the street. Parking restrictions will only be in effect on Saturday, April 11, 2015, for Run the Valley. Public Works crews will put out temporary no parking signs the day before and remove them no later than the Monday after the event. The proposed restrictions have been reviewed by Police and Fire staff who concur with the recommendation. Attachments • Location map (1 page) • Resolution Temporarily Restricting Vehicle Parking for Run the Valley (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Temporarily Restricting Vehicle Parking for Run the Valley. Temporary No Parking during Run the Valley CiPermanent No Parking on both sides (past resolution) Western Ave N P d L r r, a _... 4' Tel 0 .4) to IGre __._ _ - to at a aye Q c IVF --J _ as o r Print Date:2/5/13 RUN THE VALLEY Sources: got c fi Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines(2013). !rPZ Parking Restrictions City of Golden Valley for all other layers. Not to Scale Resolution 15-18 March 3, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY RESTRICTING VEHICLE PARKING FOR RUN THE VALLEY WHEREAS, the City Council has the power and authority, pursuant to Chapter 9.06, Subd. 2 of the City Code, to designate no parking zones and areas, and it appears that no parking zones should be temporarily created on Saturday, April 11, 2015. The following parking prohibitions will be in effect: 1. Western Avenue between Brookview Parkway and Winnetka Avenue; parking prohibited on the south side of the street 2. Gregory Road between Winnetka Avenue and Utah Avenue; parking prohibited on the south side of the street 3. Utah Avenue between Wayzata Boulevard and Ridgeway Road; parking prohibited on the west side of the street 4. Hanley Road between Wayzata Boulevard and Western Avenue; parking prohibited on the west side of the street 5. Field Drive between Wayzata Boulevard and Hanley Road; parking prohibited on the east/south side of the street 6. Western Terrace, parking prohibited on both sides of the entire street 7. Wayzata Boulevard between Winnetka Avenue South and Brookview Parkway; parking prohibited on the north side of the street; and WHEREAS, maintaining access for Public Safety vehicles on all streets during the event is critical for the safety and security of all residents and participants; and WHEREAS, Run the Valley is planned for Saturday, April 11, 2015, and will start and finish in the Brookview Golf Course/Community Center parking lot. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden Valley to temporarily restrict parking on Saturday, April 11, 2015, on one side of all the streets in the area bounded by Brookview Parkway on the west, Western Avenue to the north, Winnetka Avenue to the east, and Wayzata Boulevard to the south. Additionally, parking will be prohibited on both sides of Western Terrace, Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. b,a Idell , ._ Public Works Department .1 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. G. Authorize Contract for Professional Services with Prairie Restorations, Inc. for Restoration and Maintenance of Native Plant Communities Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Summary Staff has requested a proposal from Prairie Restorations, Inc. for professional services related to Restoration and Maintenance of Native Plant Communities adjacent to Golden Valley's water quality ponds, wetlands, and portions of Bassett Creek. Twenty-three buffers are maintained under this contract. The proposal from Prairie Restorations, Inc. includes performing controlled burning, integrated plant management, and dormant mowing. The company visits each native plant buffer in the City monthly during the growing season and performs maintenance on an as-needed basis. The City has been working with Prairie Restoration, Inc. on the majority of its managed native buffer areas since 2000. There is $45,000 budgeted for this program in the 2015-2016 Biennial Budget, Storm Sewer Utility, Native Buffer Zone Maintenance for Ponds (7303.6340). The actual amount of the proposal from Prairie Restorations, Inc. is $30,165 and is shown in Exhibit B of contract. Attachments • Location map (1 page) • Contract for the 2015 Golden Valley Restoration and Maintenance of Native Plant Communities (10 pages) Recommended Action Motion to authorize the Contract for Professional Services with Prairie Restorations, Inc. for the 2015 Golden Valley Restoration and Maintenance of Native Plant Communities in the amount of $30,165. L � _ L � W '� Q CO v ^', a ° -° v o v o v y o s r m -O dm c 3 O 'O cv Y N 6 d o !S�► `1 v m Z c Z o o a c v o o c o o c v h\ ca v v a Z a a ovn a p o > o a H Q v Q ~ Q N c m r c n Y Y v a N v c a s '�... M -0 M M p 'f0 ° a� 0 0 o m v s s o v w u ou o 3 v "n Z Q m m m m m cD (D cD x z o n n n n x o o .-1 N M VV1 LD r, 00 m O c-1 Nm mlD I, W mO c-I Nm N c-I c-1 c-I a-i N ri r-1 c-I .-1 N N r, N ?R U —...__.—........—_-- .. ___—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—__—_.—__—__—__—__—__—._—._—__—__—_.—__—__—__—__—__—__—__ I I .,,e.vi7lXt'�uaZ j x paIt ar,-t L ------------------------- r �z4a�fflsy�'�a Jc i!! w j � r � .-'w0 u�.xapeay�T N I ---------------— ------- —••L — 1 �. °` j j pJ aay aF�do'•I � M'' ,� j j C M r Gap I N T- Lf) I �---------•--------------- ---- t+i ngibZ N peous�o 1 a ssauxny ervx I M co 1 c. "ar � r j j c s, j T $aal f I ( y� �pszar,T j CN • it ESS'[3'r... • I a j I � i3 � x' ecuragQsu,: any poets apo I N j �I any j ul o—TIA �I pa[g siTw trsaera,.i aI a+ r any auoog j j aay n14e.Dau I I M p i I r r} • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contract No. 15-14 CONTRACT FOR THE 2015 GOLDEN VALLEY RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into the 3rd day of March, 2015, between the City of Golden Valley, a municipal corporation, existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, party of the First Part, and Prairie Restorations, Inc., a C-Corporation, under the laws of the State of Minnesota hereinafter, called the Consultant, party of the Second Part. ARTICLE 1. The Consultant, for and in consideration of one dollar and other good and valuable consideration received including the payment, or payments herein specified, and by the City to be made, hereby covenants and agrees to furnish all materials, all necessary tools and equipment, and to do and perform all the work and labor necessary for the 2015 Golden Valley Restoration and Maintenance of Native Plant Communities in accordance with the proposal included in Exhibit A. A schedule of work is found in Exhibit B. Should additional work be necessary, the City and Prairie Restorations, Inc. agree to the rates found in Exhibit C. The Proposal of the Consultant, together with this Contract, shall together constitute the Contract Documents, and herein are referred to as the Contract Documents. ARTICLE 2. The Consultant agrees to commence said work and conclude the same in accordance with the Proposal heretofore filed with the City and in accordance with the time schedule for commencement and completion of the work set forth in the Contract Documents, time being of the essence of this agreement, and to complete said work in every respect to the satisfaction and approval of the City. ARTICLE 3. In consideration of the covenants and agreements stated above, the City agrees to pay the Consultant the sum stated in the Proposal of said Consultant. Installment payments, if any, on account of work done and materials furnished by said Consultant under this Contract and actually in place shall be due and payable on or before ten (10) days after receipt by the Council of the City of: (a) a certificate by the Water Resources Engineer that the work has been fully completed and this Contract fully performed by the Consultant and (b) an opinion of the City's attorney that the City is then obligated to pay the sum contracted for herein. ARTICLE 4. The Consultant agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the City, their elected officials, officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, losses, or damages, including attorneys' fees, arising from, allegedly arising from, or related to, the provision of services under this agreement by the Consultant, its employees, agents or officers. 1 Contract No. 15-14 CONTRACT FOR THE 2015 GOLDEN VALLEY RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES ARTICLE 5. The Consultant further agrees to make and maintain insurance coverage for the duration of the project in accordance with the following requirements: Workers Compensation Insurance: A. Statutory Compensation Coverage B. Coverage B — Employers Liability with limits of not less than: $100,000 Bodily Injury per Disease per Employee $500,000 Bodily Injury per Disease Aggregate $100,000 Bodily Injury by Accident Automobile Liability Insurance A. Minimum Limits of Liability: $1,500,000 — Per Occurrence — Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined Single Limit B. Coverages: X Owned Automobile, if any X Non-Owned Automobile X Hired Automobile X City of Golden Valley named as Additional Insured General Liability Insurance A. Minimum Limits of Liability: $1 ,500,000 — Per Occurrence $3,000,000 — Annual Aggregate B. Coverages: X Bodily Injury X Property Damage X Personal Injury X Blanket Contractual X City of Golden Valley named as Additional Insured The Consultant further agrees to furnish certificates of the above insurance to the City naming City as an additional insured, not later than ten (10) days after execution of this Contract, and will provide City with written notice ten (10) days prior to cancellation of the policy or any material change in the coverage provided, or in lieu thereof, the Consultant shall keep such policies in full force and effect throughout the term of the Contract. 2 Contract No. 15-14 CONTRACT FOR THE 2015 GOLDEN VALLEY RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES ARTICLE 6. It is understood and agreed by the Consultant that 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 the Consultant hereunder until the work shall have been found acceptable by the City through its authorized agents. ARTICLE 7. It is understood and agreed by the Consultant that, with respect to all work, the Consultant will keep as complete, exact and accurate an account of the labor and materials used as is possible, and in submitting the final statement will itemize and allocate the costs of said work. ARTICLE 8. All payments to the Consultant shall be made payable to the order of Prairie Restoration, Inc. and the City does not assume and shall not have any responsibility for the allocation of payments or obligations of the Consultant to third parties. ARTICLE 9. The City reserves the right to cancel the award of any contract at any time before the execution of the contract by all parties without any liability against the City. ARTICLE 11. The City may by written notice terminate the Contract or any portion thereof when it is deemed in the City's best interest to do so or the City is unable to adequately fund payment for the Contract because of changes in state fiscal policy, regulations or law; or after finding that for reasons beyond the Consultant's control the Consultant is prevented from proceeding with or completing the Contract work within a reasonable period of time. Termination of the Contract or any portion thereof shall not relieve the Consultant of responsibility for the completed work, nor shall it relieve the Consultant's Sureties of their obligations for and concerning any just claims arising out of the work performed. 3 Contract No. 15-14 CONTRACT FOR THE 2015 GOLDEN VALLEY RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIES IN WITNESS HEREOF, both parties hereto have caused this Contract to be signed by their duly authorized officers. THE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BY Shepard M. Harris, Mayor BY Thomas D. Burt, City Manager PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS, INC, BY ITS 4 Exhibit A Prairie Restoration Management Strategies Native landscape management techniques can be divided into five different categories; monitoring, controlled burning, dormant mows, Integrated Plant Management (IPM), and woody vegetation control. Each of these techniques plays a key role in the development and success of a native landscape. Below is a description of each tool and the reasons they are used. Effective management of a restored area is achieved through a variety of management practices. A complete understanding of the various plants' life cycles and growth characteristics is necessary for the proper management decisions to be made. Prairie Restoration's land managers use their experience and knowledge to make these decisions for the betterment and health of the landscapes they care for. Monitoring Monitoring is checking the progress of the planting regularly. The goal is to see what weeds may be coming in that need to be addressed, but also to see how the native plants are growing. Monitoring is perhaps the most important technique land managers use. It allows the manager to make the determination of what other techniques will best benefit the planting. Native plantings change, not only from year to year, but from week to week and month to month. Therefore, it is important to make regular trips through the planting. It is also important to monitor the entire planting, as microenvironments found throughout will grow different species of native plants and weeds. Monitoring is something that can, and should, be done by the City, as well as by the land manager. Prairie Restoration will provide information in the form of a basic field guide, if needed. Controlled Burns Prairies are fire-dependent communities, making controlled burning a very important management tool. Historically, prairie fires would burn periodically. Today, Prairie Restoration's experienced burn crews seek to replicate the process using proper tools and techniques. Burning is typically done every three to four years, beginning once adequate fuel is present. Each site is unique, and the land manager will discuss with you when and why a burn would be a good option. Timing and intensity of burns are very important for controlling various weedy species and promoting the native ones. Spring burns tend to favor the grass species, while fall burns may enhance the flower component. The majority of burns are conducted in the spring, usually during the months of April and May, though some may occur later, depending on the needs of the site. Benefits of A-1 spring burns include: the alleviation of the accumulation of biomass, a reduction in exotic cool season species, control of woody plants, and the stimulation of earlier growth of native warm season species. Fall burns are also very effective in accomplishing many of these goals. They normally occur in October and November. One negative to fall burning is the loss of winter cover for wildlife species. Fall burns may also be harder to schedule due to wet Minnesota fall weather conditions. Burns should only be conducted by trained crews. Many of the controlled burns conducted today are on a much smaller scale, and in a suburban setting. This creates many challenges for the crews. Smoke is typically the biggest concern. Burns must be conducted with proper wind conditions so smoke does not blow onto busy roadways, or towards buildings. The presence of trees and shrubs in or near the planting must also be taken into account. Before conducting a controlled burn, proper permits must be obtained from the Department of Natural Resources and local authorities. Neighboring residents and businesses will also be notified. Dormant Mows Dormant mows are an alternative to fire, and are frequently done in years when a controlled burn is not scheduled. Dormant mows are conducted when the prairie plants are dormant (not actively growing), as the name suggests. They occur in early spring or late fall, and benefit the prairie by dispersing grass and flower seed and speeding up the breakdown of biomass. Dormant mows also give the prairie a clean look to start or end the season. One consideration when scheduling a dormant mow is soil moisture. Any soil disturbance will promote the growth of weeds, so mows should only be done when the ground is firm enough for the equipment being used. Larger sites are mowed with a tractor and flail mower. Smaller sites may be mowed using weed-whips. Integrated Plant Management (IPM) Integrated Plant Management (IPM) is a combination of many hands-on management techniques used during the growing season. The goal of IPM is to remove unwanted species from the prairie. The method of control varies by species and density of the weeds. If desired, Prairie Restorations' trained land management crews will visit the site periodically during the growing season to conduct various IPM tasks, as needed on a site-by-site basis. A-2 Chemical Control • Spot Spraying For perennial weedy species, spot spraying is the primary method of control. Selective spot spraying targets individual plants using backpack sprayers. Because of the accuracy, it is possible to kill weeds intermixed with prairie plants without harming the native forbs and grasses. Chemicals used for spot spraying are "species specific," meaning different chemicals are used for the control of different weedy species. In order to minimize negative impact on a site, the minimum effective rate of the chemicals is used. Weather conditions are always taken into account before applying chemicals to a site. It is not only rain that causes concern. Heat may cause some chemicals to become less effective as the plants shut down to preserve energy. Prairie Restorations Inc.'s crew members are certified pesticide applicators and have been taught the proper techniques for handling and applying the chemicals used. It is not recommended that the homeowner apply chemicals to the site. • Wicking Wicking is another way to apply chemical. Using sponge-like devices, crew members are able to wipe chemicals onto individual or small colonies of weeds. This may be done using small hand-wicks, or larger "hockey-stick-wicks." Wicking is very precise, but may take more time than spot spraying. • Timed Oversprays Timed oversprays are necessary when a large area of the planting contains unwanted perennial plants. The timing is critical. Typically, oversprays are conducted in the early spring or late fall, when native, warm-season plants are dormant. Luckily, many weedy species, such as reed canary grass, are cool- season plants. This means they become active earlier in the spring and remain active later in the fall. Most often, the timed oversprays are conducted using a truck or a tractor with a mounted boom sprayer. If the area is small enough, or there is not adequate vehicle access, it may be done with backpack sprayers. Glyphosate is the preferred chemical, as it is non-selective and good at controlling most broadleaf and grass species. In the spring following an overspray, areas that were sprayed become obvious until the native species start filling them in. Mechanical Control • Spot Mowing Spot mowing is typically done with weed-whips. Crew members cut down individual plants, or smaller colonies. While chemicals will kill annual and biennial A-3 weeds, spot mowing is often the preferred tool. Unlike perennial weeds, in which each plant will grow and flower year after year, annuals and biennials only have a one or two year growing cycle. They flower, produce seed, and die. The weeds persist by producing large amounts of seed that germinate and flower quickly, thereby producing more seed. Due to this growth pattern, mowing at, or just prior to, the flowering stage is an effective method of control by stopping the seed production. Spot mowing may also be used to stop perennials from spreading seed. However, spot mowing is not enough to kill perennial weedy species. It will delay the spread, but eventually another control method, such as spot spraying or controlled burning, will be required. Complete Site Mows Complete site mows are most often done on newly seeded projects. In the first growing season, three to four complete mows may be necessary. The main purpose of a complete site mowing is to prevent weeds from producing a closed canopy and blocking out the light from the native seedlings. Plants are usually allowed to grow to 12-18" in height before being mowed. Flail mowers are used because they can be easily adjusted to different mowing heights. Typically, a height of 6-8" is desired. If the vegetation is cut too short, it exposes the young prairie plants to extreme heat and drying conditions and may inhibit growth. • Hand weeding and chopping Hand weeding and chopping will be completed by Prairie Restorations when needed. A-4 Exhibit B Golden Valley Parks Maintenance 2015 Spring Dormant Park Spring Burn Mow IPM Total Adeline Nature Area $ 350.00 $ 350.00 Bassett Creek Nature Area Pond $ 1,250.00 $ 1,250.00 Bassett Creek and Winnetka $ 500.00 $ 500.00 Boone Ave. Pond & Berm $ 350.00 $ 1,050.00 $ 1,400.00 Briarwood Nature Area $ 235.00 $ 1,250.00 $ 1,485.00 Brookview Park Ponds $ 1,375.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 3,275.00 General Mills Nature Preserve $ 575.00 $ 3,150.00 $ 3,725.00 Golden Meadows Pond $ 350.00 $ 350.00 Golden Ridge Pond $ 350.00 $ 350.00 Golden Hills Pond $ 425.00 $ 850.00 $ 1,275.00 Hampshire Pond $ 400.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,200.00 Madison Pond $ 300.00 $ 750.00 $ 1,050.00 Medley Park $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 Minna ua Pond $ 165.00 $ 750.00 $ 915.00 Minna ua Wetland $ 375.00 $ 950.00 $ 1,325.00 North Tyrol Park $ 275.00 $ 950.00 $ 1,225.00 Perry Ave. Pond $ 950.00 $ 950.00 Regent and Westbend $ 300.00 $ 1,250.00 $ 1,550.00 Scott Ave. Pond $ 325.00 $ 850.00 $ 1,175.00 Schaper Park $ 1,150.00 $ 1,250.00 $ 2,400.00 South Tyrol Pond $ 265.00 $ 450.00 $ 715.00 Sweeny Branch Stabilization $ 950.00 $ 950.00 Xenia Ave. Pond $ 600.00 $ 950.00 $ 1,550.00 Total $ 2,525.00 $ 4,590.00 $ 23,050.00 $ 30,165.00 Exhibit C 2015 PRAIRIE MANAGEMENT BILLING RATES Labor Costs: $68/hr. (including pro-rated travel time) Travel Mileage: (Travel mileage one way only) $0.60/mile - light duty trucks $0.85/mile - trucks/trailer/w/equip. Equipment Costs: $15/hr. Small power equipment use $40/hr. Large tractor/mower use $40/hr. ATV use Material Costs: Herbicides: Garlon 3A0 - $1.10/oz Garlon 40 - $1.25/oz Rodeo@ - $0.55/oz Roundup@ - $0.55/oz TranslineO - $2.75/oz VanquishO - $1.05/oz tit '� o goldle'ri Valle Public Warks Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. H. Resolution Requesting Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations for Olson Memorial Frontage Road. Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer Summary Douglas Drive (CSAH 102) is scheduled for reconstruction by the City and Hennepin County in 2016 and 2017 (2015-2019 Capital Improvement, DD-001, page 102). As part of the reconstruction project, Olson Memorial Frontage Road, which lies just north of TH 55, will need to be partially reconstructed at its intersection with Douglas Drive, This portion of Olson Memorial Frontage Road was originally built by MnDOT to act as a frontage road to TH 55 and was subsequently turned back to the City. It now serves as a Municipal State Aid Street (referenced on the attached location maps). There is a horizontal curve located on Olson Memorial Frontage Road, just east of Douglas Drive that does not meet the 30 mph State Aid standards. Instead, the roadway meets 25 mph design standards. Because a portion of Olson Memorial Frontage Road is being partially reconstructed with the Douglas Drive project, it must be constructed to current State Aid design standards. In this case, a change in the horizontal curvature would significantly impact adjacent property owners and would also lead to a significant change in project scope. Due to the challenges and infeasibility associated with meeting the State Aid design standard, staff recommends applying for a variance from Standards for State Aid Operations 8820.9936. Approval of this variance will allow the City to proceed with reconstruction of the Olson Memorial Frontage Road in its current alignment. Attachments • Figure 1: Project Location Map (1 page) • Figure 2: Impact of 30 MPH Curve (1 page) • Resolution Requesting Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations, Olson Memorial Frontage Road, State Aid Project 128-420-001 (1 page) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Resolution Requesting Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations, Olson Memorial Frontage Road, State Aid Project 128-420-001. S.A.P.128-420-001(Douglas Drive) FROM: TH 55 TO:Medicine Lake Road VARIANCE ZONE: HORIZONTAL CURVE on MSAS 420(Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road) a ) i f t N Awk OVERALL PROJECT LOCATION VARIANCE LOCATION DOUGLAS DRIVE(CSAR 102)-CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY,MN FIGURE 1 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM STATE AID STANDARDS MINNESOTA RULE 8820.9936 PROJECT LOCATION MAP S.A.P. 128-420-001 S.A.P.128-420-001(Douglas Drive) FROM: TH 55 TO:Medicine Lake Road VARIANCE ZONE: HORIZONTAL CURVE on WAS 420(Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road) . t > S K W T C� F C ,1 1 ON .." flffft tiFfFdtt M( F ca tM id st tiff t tft ("Iftoo." t oAwn 30 MPH �* rfrff f;gt" , AN �. DOUGLAS DRIVE(CSAR 102)—CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, MN FIGURE 2 REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM STATE AID STANDARDS MINNESOTA RULE 8820.9936 IMPACT OF 30 MPH CURVE S.A.P.128-420-001 Resolution 15-19 March 3, 2015 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE FROM STANDARDS FOR STATE AID OPERATIONSOLSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY FRONTAGE ROAD STATE AID PROJECT 128-420-001 WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley Engineer is hereby authorized to request a variance from the Minnesota Department of State Aid Operations, pursuant to Minnesota Rules for State Aid Operations 8820.3300 and 8820.9936, as they apply to the proposed horizontal curve associated with the reconstruction of Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road from Douglas Drive to 0.1 miles east, State Aid Project 128-420-001, located in Golden Valley, Minnesota and Hennepin County, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules for State Aid Operation 8820.9936 require a minimum 30 miles per hour design speed for horizontal curvature; and WHEREAS, the City Council of Golden Valley believes that the minimum design standards set forth by the Minnesota Rules for State Aid Operation 8820.9936 as applicable to the proposed horizontal curve on Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road to meet 30 miles per hour design speed create undue burden; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby request a variance from the Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid Operations Rules Chapter 8820.9936 (Minimum Design Standards: Urban; New Ore Reconstruction Projects) to allow for a horizontal curve that meets a 25 miles per hour design speed in lieu of a 30 miles per hour design speed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota, hereby indemnifies, saves and holds harmless the State of Minnesota and its agents and employees of and from claims, demands, actions, or causes of action arising out of, or by reason the use of a 25 mile per hour design speed horizontal curve on Olson Memorial Highway Frontage Road at Douglas Drive in accordance with Minnesota Rules 8820.9936. The Council further agrees to defend at its sole cost and expense, any action of proceeding commended for the purpose of asserting any claim arising as a result of the granting of this variance. Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. cit of µ 1, ' , valley City Administration/Council 763-593-3989/763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. I. Revisions to Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manager Summary At the February 10, 2015, Council/Manager meeting, the Council directed staff to bring forth revisions to the Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils. The following revisions are proposed in the attached: Terms of office for Chair and Vice Chair may be two years, this is a change from the previous one year term Update Current Golden Valley Standing Commissions and Boards to include the Teen Committee and remove Envision Connection Project Executive Board Attachments • Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils - Amended March 3, 2015 (6 pages) Recommended Action Motion to approve the Revisions to Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils. CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils INTRODUCTION: The City Council wishes to express its appreciation to the many citizens who take time away from their personal and professional lives to serve the community through their membership on the Council's advisory groups. Golden Valley has had a history of extensive citizen involvement. At present approximately 60 advisory commission, board, and committee members participate in providing specialized expertise so that Council decisions can be made with more complete background and knowledge than would otherwise be possible. The Council and the entire community benefit from this invaluable service. Golden Valley is a statutory city. The legislature established it as a city in the early 1970's. The State Statutes provide: "In any such city, there shall be...no administrative board or commission...the Council shall itself perform the duties and exercise the powers and shall govern and administer the functions for which no independent boards are authorized by statute. The Council, may, however, create boards or commissions to advise the Council with respect to any municipal function or activity or to investigate any subject of interest in the City." This Council, and others before it, recognizes the many advantages to be gained from this approach. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to the Council's advisory commissions. The Council is directly responsible for the actions of its advisory commissions. It is hoped that through these guidelines the expectations of the Council, with respect to its advisory commissions will be clearly understood and followed. The Mayor and Council Members welcome any request for discussion or clarification of information that is contained or thought appropriate to be contained in these guidelines. The goals of the Council are better communication with its advisory commissions and better service to the citizens of Golden Valley. CURRENT GOLDEN VALLEY STANDING COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS: The Golden Valley City Council currently has five standing advisory commissions. They are: Environmental Commission Human Rights Commission Open Space and Recreation Commission Planning Commission Teen Committee There is one advisory foundation: Golden Valley Human Services Fund. Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Page 2 The Civil Service Commission is an independent commission that has absolute control and supervision over the employment, promotion, discharge, and suspension of police officers of the Police Department, as stipulated under State Statutes. The Board of Zoning Appeals hears requests for variances from the City Zoning Code and makes final determination on all requests unless such requests are denied and appealed to the City Council as stipulated under State Statutes. Short term advisory committees are appointed as needed. These Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils apply to each of these groups as appropriate and as permitted by the laws and ordinances which establish them. I. LEGAL BASIS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS As stated above the State Statutes govern the creation of Council advisory groups. These groups are authorized to exercise all duties which the Council has legally assigned to them. They are frequently authorized to conduct research and make recommendations. It should be remembered, however, that advisory commissions may not make decisions on behalf of the Council. In many cities, it is routine practice for the Council to accept an advisory commission recommendation if the commission has done a thorough and competent job. It must be emphasized, however, that it is the Council's final decision on the matter and not simply the commission recommendation which is effective to bind the municipality. No recommendation of any advisory commission takes effect unless it has been adopted by formal action of the Council. These advisory commissions may be organized in any manner deemed appropriate by the Council. The City Council may create and dissolve them, appoint persons to serve on them, and exercise powers of general supervision over them. A Planning Commission, however, must be established by ordinance and, once established may be dissolved only by an ordinance, which passes, by 2/3 majority vote of the Council. II. OPEN MEETING LAW All meetings of all public bodies in Golden Valley must be open to the public. There can be no such thing as a "closed", "private", or "executive" meeting or session. The only exceptions that have been recognized in the past are certain disciplinary actions conducted by the Police Civil Service Commission and some personnel and legal matters before the Council. The Minnesota Statute requiring City Council meetings to be open to the public has been in existence for many years. A 1973 amendment and court decisions and rulings by the Minnesota Attorney General have made commissions, subcommittees, and other public bodies subject to the statute. Any person violating the open meeting requirement is subject to civil penalty. Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Page 3 Commissions and committees should be careful to observe the requirements of holding all meetings in public places and posting notices of meeting dates and times at the City Hall. Scheduling of meetings with the Manager's Office will help prevent conflict with other groups over meeting times when public participation is particularly desired. Commission, board, and committee meetings will not be held on designated legal holidays or recognized religious holidays. Any questions regarding the meaning or application of the Open Meeting Law should be directed to the City Council. The Council will seek such advice from the City Attorney as may be necessary. III. COMMISSION ORGANIZATION AND PROCEDURES A. Term of Office: Appointments to commissions are made effective May 1 of each year. The length of each appointment is provided in the governing ordinance or resolution and is designated by the Council at the time of the appointment. Each permanent advisory commission should elect officers not later than its second meeting after May 1 in each year. The term of office should be one year, unless otherwise specified by the Council, prior to each election. (Chairpersons of special committees may be appointed by the Council.) Voluntary resignations from a commission should be communicated by letter or email from the person resigning to the Mayor. Chair and Vice-Chair. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall be elected from the Commission membership by its members at its regular Annual Meeting. Terms of office may be for two years and shall rotate. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall not serve consecutive terms. B. Attendance: Absences in one year should not exceed three consecutive meetings or more than 25 percent of the total meetings for the year. (25 percent of meetings would be three meetings for groups meeting once a month and six meetings for groups meeting twice a month.) If a member is unable to attend a meeting, that member should contact the staff liaison, who will inform the chair if a quorum cannot be attained and the meeting will be cancelled. A standardized letter of warning will be sent from the respective chair to any member after two consecutive and two total for groups meeting once a month. For those meeting twice a month the letter would be sent from the chair after two consecutive or five total absences. If a member exceeds the allowable number of absences the Mayor will send a standardized letter stating the member must step down because of the importance of regular attendance and the number of citizens interested in serving. If a Commission feels there are extenuating circumstances in a case of a member who has not met the attendance requirements, the Commission may send a letter to the Council explaining the situation and request an exception. Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Page 4 C. By-Laws or Rules of Procedure: Each commission shall propose By-Laws or Rules of Procedure governing its work. Such proposed By-Laws or Rules of Procedure should be submitted to the Council for review and approval prior to implementation. D. Orientation: It shall be the responsibility of the staff liaison to provide to each new member as soon as possible after that member's appointment, copies of the enabling ordinance for the board or commission and its current By-Laws or Rules of Procedure, minutes of meetings of the last one year, these Guidelines, and any other information necessary to orient of new members. (Note: Council Members who are liaison to a Commission will meet with the Chairperson and new members as part of the orientation.) E. Acting as a private citizen: A commission member testifying before the Council as a private citizen should clearly note before testimony that he/she is testifying as a private citizen. F Expenditures: Each Commission is authorized to incur those specific expenditures included in its final budget, as adopted by the Council. Any other expenditures require specific Council approval prior to the time the obligation is incurred. Council approval is necessary prior to solicitation of funding from outside sources for any purpose. G Minutes: A person will be provided by the City to take minutes for the advisory boards and commissions. All such minutes are matters of public record and shall be kept at the City Hall. The unapproved minutes will be circulated to the City Council in a timely manner to allow the Council to be informed on recent actions. The Council will receive and file approved minutes at the next regular Council Meeting following the approval of the minutes by the respective board or commission. Minutes serve the dual function of making an historical record of commission proceedings and of informing the Council regarding the commission's activities. The minutes should, therefore, contain an accurate report of the sequence of events and names of citizens who appear and are heard. In addition to the formal action of the commission, a summary of the reasoning underlying such action should be included in the minutes. H. Staff Liaison: The Council has adopted a policy of providing a staff liaison for each commission. The purpose of this policy is to provide direct information to each commission regarding City policy and practices within its area of interest. The City operates under the "Plan B City Manager" form of government, in which all employees are hired and supervised by the City Manager, who in turn is responsible to the Council. Neither the Council nor any commission member has the authority to direct staff personnel. Any commission recommendations for modification of City policy and practices should be directed to the Council. The liaison will periodically inform the Chair on the members' attendance, particularly when warnings must be sent as provided in Section 111.6, and copy to the City Manager to forward to the City Council. Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Page 5 I. Council Liaison(s): Each year, at its organizational meeting, the Council shall assign one or more liaison to each Board or Commission. The Council Liaison(s) will meet at least annually with the Board or Commission to which he or she is assigned. These meetings can serve as an informal means for the exchange of information between the Council and the Board or Commission, but all formal communication shall follow procedures as outlined in Section IV, J. Subcommittees: From time to time, the Council may appoint subcommittees of certain commissions in order that special attention be concentrated in specified areas. At the same time, the Council also wants the opinion of the commission regarding each subcommittee's recommendations. Each subcommittee should submit any report or recommendations intended for the Council, first to the Commission for review and comment. Such review and comment should take place at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission. If it does not, the report or recommendation of the subcommittee shall be forwarded to the Council without Commission consent. The subcommittee report or recommendation, together with the commission's comments, should be submitted to the Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting. As in the case of commission presentations, a spokesperson for the subcommittee should attend the Council meeting and be prepared to make a presentation and answer questions. The Commission is free to appoint subcommittees of their membership as the commission sees a need. IV. COMMUNICATIONS TO AND FROM COMMISSIONS A. Council Requests to Commissions: From time to time, the Council will refer items to commissions for recommendation. The purpose of such a referral is to assist the Council in gathering all pertinent facts and sharpening the issues. The request will be referred to the commission in writing by the Mayor. The Council would request a written report from each commission with regard to each such referral. The report should set forth all the pertinent facts and detailed recommendations from the commission. The report should be submitted to the Council Administrative Assistant the Wednesday before the Council meeting so that it may be included in the agenda. Any time a commission report comes before the Council, one representative of the commission should be present to make a presentation and answer questions. In the event there is a difference of opinion on the commission, a minority report may be presented in the same manner. Guidelines for Advisory Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils Page 6 B. Commission Requests to Council: Any commission request or recommendation for Council action or legal opinion should be communicated by letter from the chairperson to the Mayor, giving a full explanation of the background of the matter. Along with the letter, the commission should submit or refer to the pertinent portion of its minutes on the subject. The letter to the Mayor should be delivered to the Council Administrative Assistant on the Wednesday before the Council meeting. A presentation for the commission should be made by a representative from the commission. A minority report may also be presented. C. Communications with those other than the City Council: Based upon past experience, the Council believes that there is some potential for misunderstanding regarding communications with persons and governmental units or agencies other than the City Council of Golden Valley. It is essential that members of commissions understand and observe appropriate policies and practices in this regard. The essential principle involved is that the Council alone has the responsibility and authority to adopt the decisions, policies, and recommendations of the City of Golden Valley. The Council values the opinions and advice of its commissions and invites the communication of the same to the Council. The Council will take such opinions and advice into account in formulating the City's official position. This method of proceeding does not preclude a commission from gathering such information as may be pertinent to its activities. Commissions are free, without prior Council approval, to make inquiries and to give necessary background for such inquiries, but careful consideration must be given that these communications cannot be reasonably construed as statements of official City policy and opinion. The matter of distribution of information to the public is one that is not capable of specific rules of practice. In general, any such communication which purports to, or has the effect of communicating an official City position or decision, should be submitted to the Council for prior approval. Other types of communications, which are purely informational and do not involve unresolved questions of City policy, may be disseminated without prior Council approval. Adopted by the City Council - August 6, 2001 Amended - September 20, 2005 Amended - September 3, 2013 Amended — March 3, 2015 city of cai e Planning Department 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. J. Appointments to Community and Business Advisory Committees for METRO Blue Line Extension Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary As part of the ongoing work for the METRO Blue Line Extension project, two committees will be established-a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and a Business Advisory Committee (BAC)-to provide guidance to the Corridor Management Committee (CMC) on community issues. In addition, these committees will advise the Hennepin County Community Work Steering Committee for elements regarding station area planning, other infrastructure investments, and elements that may be implemented post revenue service. The City has been allotted two spots per committee. Appointments will serve though December 31, 2016. Attachments • Community Advisory Committee Charter (2 pages) • Business Advisory Committee Charter (3 pages) Recommended Action Motion to appoint two representatives each to the Community Advisory and Business Advisory Committees. Charter of the METRO Blue Line Extension Community Advisory Committee (CAC) DRAFT OVERVIEW The METRO Blue Line Extension (BLRT) Community Advisory Committee (CAC) is established to provide guidance to the BLRT Corridor Management Committee (CMC) on community issues during the engineering and environmental phases of Southwest LRT project development. In addition, the CAC advises the Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee for elements regarding station area planning, other infrastructure investments and elements that may be implemented post revenue service. Appointments to the CAC will serve commencing early 2015 and concluding December 31, 2016, PURPOSE The purpose of the CAC is to serve as a voice for the community and advise the BLRT Corridor Management and Community Works Steering Committees: 1. Provide input on light rail design and engineering topics including but not limited to station design, parking, multi-modal access to station and public art. 2. Advise on communications and outreach strategies related to BLRT. 3. Provide input on station area vision and character for development from a community perspective. 4. Review and comment on major initiatives and actions of the Community Works program. 5. Identify potential issues and review strategies to mitigate the impacts of construction on residences and businesses. 6. Serve as an information resource and liaison to the greater corridor community and their appointing organization. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS One CAC member will serve as a member of the CMC and provide updates of CAC activities at CMC. Another CAC member will also serve as a member to the Community Works Steering Committee and provide updates on CAC activities. RESPONSIBILITIES Each member of the BLRT CAC agrees to: 1. Attend a majority of CAC meetings and actively participate in discussions by sharing ideas and expertise. 2. Actively participate in discussions; be a voice to advance the broader interests of community. 3. Routinely report back to their organization on the activities and discussions of the CAC as well as serve as a conduit of information to the broader community and to their appointing organization. 4. Identify issues affecting communities impacted by both the LRT project development and Community Works initiatives and assist in developing strategies for minimizing those impacts. 5. Provide feedback on communication and public involvement efforts. 6. Listen to and respect the viewpoints of others. Draft Dec 12, 2014 1I 7. Accept outcomes of Metropolitan Council decisions. MEMBERSHIP Members will be appointed in early 2015 and concluding December 31, 2016. Membership is intended to represent the diverse interests and stakeholders along Southwest LRT line and will include stakeholders that are represented along the corridor. Specifically, membership be will appointed as follows: Community appointed members: • Minneapolis: 3 members • Golden Valley: 2 members • Robbinsdale: 2 members • Crystal: 2 members • Brooklyn Park: 2 members Corridors of Opportunity Engagement Grantees: 10 At-large representation appointed by the Chair of Metropolitan Council and Chair of Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee: 2 If an appointed member is no longer able to participate actively in the CAC, the organization that appointed that person will be allowed to name a replacement. COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS The Chair of Metropolitan Council and Chair of Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee will appoint two Co-Chairs for the CAC. The Co-Chairs are charged with ensuring corridor-wide perspectives are present when offering guidance to steering committees; lead committees through their tasks and ensure charter compliance; identify topics/issues of committee concern; and develop meeting agendas with Blue Line Project Office and Hennepin County staff. MEETINGS The CAC will schedule monthly meetings on the XXX of every month, from XXX-X:XX PM. Agendas and meeting summaries will be distributed to all members at least five business days before the meeting and posted on the project's website at swlrt.org. Post meeting, meeting materials/presentations and approved meeting summaries will be posted on the project's website: BlueLineExt.org. Due to the timeliness of topics, additional meetings, subcommittees meetings and focus groups may be scheduled as needed. To facilitate communication and a sharing of ideas and information, the CAC with meet jointly at least twice each year with the Business Advisory Committee (BAC). This meeting will replace a regularly scheduled CAC meeting. Draft Dec 12, 2014 2 1 P a g e Charter of the METRO Blue Line Extension Business Advisory Committee (BAC) DRAFT OVERVIEW The METRO Blue Line Extension (BLRT) Business Advisory Committee (BAC) is established to provide guidance to the BLRT Corridor Management Committee (CMC) on community issues during the engineering and environmental phases of Blue Line project development. In addition, the BAC advises the Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee for elements regarding station area planning, other infrastructure investments and elements that may be implemented post revenue service. Appointments to the BAC will serve commencing early 2015 and concluding December 31, 2016. PURPOSE The purpose of the BAC is to serve as a voice for the community and advise the BLRT Corridor Management and Community Works Steering Committees: 1. Provide input on light rail design and engineering topics including but not limited to station design, parking, multi-modal access to station and public art. 2. Advise on communications and outreach strategies related to BLRT. 3. Provide input on station area vision and character for development from a community perspective. 4. Review and comment on major initiatives and actions of the Community Works program. 5. Identify potential issues and review strategies to mitigate the impacts of construction on residences and businesses. 6. Serve as an information resource and liaison to the greater corridor community and their appointing organization. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS One BAC member will serve as a member of the CMC and provide updates of BAC activities at CMC. Another BAC member will also serve as a member to the Community Works Steering Committee and provide updates on BAC activities. RESPONSIBILITIES Each member of the BLRT BAC agrees to: 1. Attend a majority of BAC meetings and actively participate in discussions by sharing ideas and expertise. 2. Actively participate in discussions; be a voice to advance the broader interests of community. 3. Routinely report back to their organization on the activities and discussions of the BAC as well as serve as a conduit of information to the broader community and to their appointing organization. 4. Identify issues affecting communities impacted by both the LRT project development and Community Works initiatives and assist in developing strategies for minimizing those impacts. 5. Provide feedback on communication and public involvement efforts. Draft Dec 12, 2014 1I , 6. Listen to and respect the viewpoints of others. 7. Accept outcomes of Metropolitan Council decisions. MEMBERSHIP Members will be appointed in early 2015 and conclude their term by December 31, 2016. Membership is intended to represent the diverse interests and stakeholders along LRT line and will include stakeholders that are represented along the corridor. Specifically, membership will be appointed as follows: Community appointed members: 2 members from each community • Minneapolis • Golden Valley • Robbinsdale • Crystal • Blooklyn Park Chambers of Commerce: 1 member from each chamber organization • Minneapolis Regional • TwinWest • Robbinsdale • North Hennepin Area At-large representation appointed by the Chair of Metropolitan Council and Chair of Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee: 3 If an appointed member is no longer able to participate actively in the BAC, the organization that appointed that person will be allowed to name a replacement. COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS The Chair of Metropolitan Council and Chair of Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee will appoint two Co-Chairs for the BAC. The Co-Chairs are charged with ensuring corridor-wide perspectives are present when offering guidance to steering committees; lead committees through their tasks and ensure charter compliance; identify topics/issues of committee concern; and develop meeting agendas with Blue Line Extension Project Office and Hennepin County staff. MEETINGS The BAC will schedule monthly meetings on the XX of every month, from X:XX-X.XX AM. Agendas and meeting summaries will be distributed to all members at least five business days before the meeting and posted on the project's website at BlueLineExt.org. Post meeting, meeting materials/presentations and approved meeting summaries will be posted on the project's website. Due to the timeliness of topics, additional meetings, subcommittees meetings and focus groups may be scheduled as needed. Draft Dec 12, 2014 2Page To facilitate communication and a sharing of ideas and information, the BAC with meet jointly at least twice each year with the Community Advisory Committee (CAC). This meeting will replace a regularly scheduled CAC meeting. Draft Dec 12, 2014 3l Page ih r 1111 11111 lllllllllllllf 0 l dd II 1q� ^` I °� 0100 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 4 �� IIIo IIII0 �9ioou 4 I A . w. City Administration/Council 763-593-8003/763-593-8109(fax) 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 3. K. Board/Commission Appointments Prepared By Shep Harris, Mayor Summary Each year the City Council conducts interviews with persons who have applied to serve on a board and/or commission. After the interviews are conducted the Council makes their appointments. Recommended Action Motion to make the following appointments: Human Services Fund Andrea Mac Arthur 1 year term term expires - May, 2016 Denise LaMere-Anderson 1 year term term expires - May, 2016 h MEMORg r z. v alley Planning Department 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109(fax) Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 60 day deadline: February 20, 2015 60 day extension: April 21, 2015 Agenda Item 4. A. Public Hearing- Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 - 1801 Noble Drive - The Lecy Group, Applicant Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary The Lecy Group is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit to create three single family lots at 1801 Noble Drive with access via a shared private driveway. The proposal consists of two lots-a vacant lot of 3.27 acres and a 0.2 acre lot, 20 feet wide, which contains a driveway. A single family home previously stood on the larger lot but was demolished in August of 2014. Three luxury homes are proposed to be constructed in its place. The site has roughly 510 feet of lakeshore on Sweeney Lake, to the southeast, and is surrounded by mostly undeveloped properties zoned for Single Family Residential (R-1). The driveway accesses Noble Drive to the north and also provides access to the single family home at 1807 Noble. The property immediately to the north (no existing address) was recently approved for subdivision into two lots. A 30 foot strip of land that could have provided the right-of-way necessary to construct a public street was proposed as a part of that subdivision but was not approved. As the only lot frontage is the 20 foot wide parcel that currently provides access to the site, the Applicant is without the adequate amount of frontage on an improved public street needed to qualify this proposal as a typical minor subdivision. The Applicant has proposed a cul-de-sac at the south end of the driveway which would provide the typical 80 feet of width at the front yard setback for each of the new lots being created. A PUD is necessary to allow the use of a shared driveway to provide access to these lots from Noble Drive. The City Council approved the Preliminary PUD Plan (4-1) at their meeting on December 2, 2014. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD Plan (7-0) at their meeting on February 9, 2015. Modifications from Preliminary PUD Plans A few minor changes were made between the Preliminary and the Final PUD Plans: 1. In response to concerns from the Fire Department, the width of the shared private driveway was increased from 16 to 18 feet. 2. Also in response to comments from the Fire Department, the diameter of the cul-de-sac was increased to 70 feet. 3. Based on the preliminary wetland delineation, the proposed location for the home on Lot 3 was shifted slightly to the west. In response, the cul-de-sac was also shifted slightly to west and the infiltration basin relocated to the back of Lot 3. This change also addresses an expressed concern regarding the co-location of the infiltration basin with the snow storage area. At the Planning Commission meeting on February 9, there was debate over the recommended width of the wetland buffer to be established on the property. The PUD requirements call for a width of 25 feet. The City's Stormwater Management Ordinance currently recommends 10 feet but allows for modifications based on site conditions. Engineering staff recommended a 10 foot buffer based on the distance of the wetland edge from Sweeney Lake and for consistency with the buffers recently approved as part of subdivisions to the north and south of the subject property. Findings and Conditions City Code establishes standards for PUDs, which are laid out in the Staff report to the Planning Commission. In addition, City Code establishes findings that must be made by the City when creating a PUD. The Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 6(Q): 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Staff recommends approval of the Final PUD Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Civil Site Group, received January 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 2, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 5, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 4. The riparian buffer strip along the delineated wetland shall be that width which is required by City Code. 5. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. 6. A park dedication fee of$13,920, or 2% of the land value with credit for one unit, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 7. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 8. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Attachments • Location Map (1 page) • Applicant's Narrative (3 pages) • Memo to the Planning Commission dated February 9, 2015 (6 pages) • Planning Commission Minutes dated February 9, 2015 (7 pages) • Memo from the Fire Department dated February 2, 2015 (1 page) • Memo from the Engineering Division dated February 5, 2015 (7 pages) • Letter from Carol Bemis, et al. dated February 26, 2015 (3 pages) • Site Plans dated January 9, 2015 (12 pages) • Ordinance #544 (2 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance #544, Approval of Final PUD Plan, Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120, The Lecy Group, Applicant. // Cy a ry �,�bream ►N�`Ave c Z • Subject Property: �--�-' 1801 Noble Drive ? 1 st Croix Ave N O, t• 1 _ Winsdale Sr � � T� \..•�--._ z, 1 "eney L Twin Lake Alfred Rv ! I1 ry j Theodore Wirth Regional Park m' r W� Narrative of the Lecy Group's proposed PUD: This is the proposal to develop the property at 1801 Noble Drive into three single-family lots. (See attached legal description for the property at 1801 Noble Drive N. Golden Valley, MN.) The PUD will use the 3.2 acres of land to create three home sites; each will be larger than .57 acres. The PUD will create two home sites, in addition to the one already established, on the lake. The original older home has been removed. Ruth Lecy and Roy Lecy personally own 1801 Noble Drive N. They own the Lecy Group, which researches and purchases property to be used by Lecy Bros Homes and Remodeling for new home building sites. Roy Lecy owns 50% of Lecy Bros Homes. Lecy Bros Homes has been in business for 32 years and has built over 800 houses in the metro area. More than 90 of the houses have been built on iakeshore property. Ruth has been a realtor since 1983. Several months ago, The Lecy Group submitted a three lot subdivision plan that met all the city codes and requirements. We could not proceed with our conforming subdivision until the city received a 30' easement from the Wessin's to build a public street. City staff wanted a new public street built that would provide access and services for 11 potential lots. They, the city, wanted the city sewer lying west of our private drive to be upgraded. A subdivision larger than 3 lots requires the construction of a very expensive storm water management system. We were never given the option to build a city street that provided access and services for only our proposed three lots. A smaller city street designed to access only our three lots would have cut the cost of building the street by 50%. We were only presented with the option of a city street to accommodate 11 lots. Our proposed PUD will utilize our existing private driveway to provide access to the three lot subdivision. The 3 proposed lots meet all city codes; except they will not have 80' of frontage on a public street at the 35' setback. All three of the lots in the proposed PUD will have over 80' of frontage at the 35' setback from the proposed cul-de-sac. The city recently granted the property owners directly west of 1801 Noble Drive a similar variance. The Fellman / Haines subdivision on St. Croix Circle does not have 80' of street frontage at the 35' setback. Access to our proposed three lots by a private driveway is very similar to accessing our property by a smaller city street built to access only our 3 lots. The private driveway will be built to handle the weight of emergency vehicles, and it will have posted signage that states "No Parking- Fire Lane." We are proposing to build a 60' diameter cul-de-sac; which is equal to a public street; for emergency vehicle turnaround. We will install public water to the 3 lots and install a fire hydrant at the cul-de-sac. The lots will be connected to city sewer. Hardcover and its impact on the water quality of Sweeney Lake is a concern. The addition of hardcover, described as any impervious surface, such as roofs, sidewalks, driveways, and patios; prevents the soil from absorbing and natural filtering storm water run off before it enters the lake. Adding hardcover has a negative impact on any lake. The installation of water filtration ponds provides a place to catch storm water run off and allows it to be filtered before it enters the lake. Adding storm water filtration ponds improves the water quality of the lake. We have included a storm water filtration pond in our proposal. We are very concerned about maintaining and improving the water quality of Sweeney Lake. The recently approved Wessin subdivision will add hardcover from two homes and two very long driveways. The Fellman / Haines subdivision created one new home on the lake and adds hardcover equal to the square footage of the home, patios, and driveway. Neither of these two subdivisions has made an attempt to mitigate the negative affect of added hardcover on the water quality of Sweeney Lake. The Lecy Group removed significant hardcover when the old existing house was removed. The hardcover was extensive because of the size of that home and its very large footprint; the large veranda; the brick patio; the large circular driveway and the extra parking area. The hardcover that was removed will be close to the amount of hardcover created by the building of two new houses. The present 300' of groomed Lakeshore will be reduced to 60'. The remaining 240' will be replanted in to a riparian buffer, to assist in improving the water quality of the lake. Lot 3, of the subdivision, will install a private storm water filtration pond, to filter storm water before it enters the lake. Our three lot subdivision will not have a negative impact on the water quality of Sweeney Lake. The proposed home location and driveway for lot 1, on the Wessin approved plat, are located in a densely wooded area. Half of the home proposed for lot 2, on that plat, is also located in a very wooded area. Many mature trees will have to be removed to accommodate their driveways and houses. Our proposed three lot PUD has minimum tree removal and thus less impact on existing trees than the Wessin's two lot subdivision. We always do our best to preserve the mature trees. Approval, by the city, of our three lot subdivision will not establish a precedent for using private driveways as access to a development. The configuration of the land and the circumstances are unusual. We can't image other developable land, within the City of Golden Valley, that will come close to having the problems involved with the Wessin's and Lecy Group's subdivisions. The Lecy Group will establish a homeowners association for the PUD. Its purpose will be to manage and maintain the private driveway. It will be responsible for snow removal, maintenance, and replacement when required. There is an easement on lot 1 for snow storage. In summary, the Lecy Group's PUD will: 1 ) Allow three new families to live in Golden Valley and enjoy Sweeney Lake. It will add dollars to the tax rolls, and active citizens to the city. 2 ) Contrary to most lakeshore development, the Lecy Group's 3 lot PUD does not have a negative impact to the water quality of the lake. If the city were to require all future new houses built on Sweeney Lake to install storm water filtration ponds, it would be the easiest, and most cost effective, way for the Lake Association to help improved the water quality of Sweeney Lake. 3 ) Lecy Bros Homes custom designs each home to maximize the natural beauty and features of the site. Each home is unique. Lecy Bros Homes has built over 90 homes on area lakes since 1983. 4 ) The 60' cul-de-sac on the private drive, the addition of a fire hydrant and a private driveway that can handle emergency vehicles will help resolve the city's safety concerns for the houses to be built in this PUD and the approved Wessin subdivision. 5) The proposed home on lot 1 will be located 200' from the neighbor to the west. The proposed home on lot 3 will be 80' from the proposed home on Wessin's lot 2 to the north east. According to Jacqueline Day and the Wessin's, there will not be a neighbor to the north west. The Lecy Group's PUD does not affect the privacy of adjoining property owners. 6) The three lots proposed by the Lecy Group will average 170' of lakeshore. Roy Lecy Rut Lecy City Ola"e"n a. Planning Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: February 9, 2015 To: Golden Valley Planning Commission From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: Informal Public Hearing– Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120 1801 Noble Drive The Lecy Group, Applicant Background The Lecy Group is seeking approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit to create three single family lots at 1801 Noble Drive with access via a shared private driveway. The proposal consists of two lots—a vacant lot of 3.27 acres and a 0.2 acre lot, 20 feet wide, which contains a driveway. A single family home previously stood on the larger lot but was demolished in August of 2014. Three luxury homes are proposed to be constructed in its place. The site has roughly 510 feet of lakeshore on Sweeney Lake, to the southeast, and is surrounded by mostly undeveloped properties zoned for Single Family Residential (R-1). The driveway accesses Noble Drive to the north and also provides access to the single family home at 1807 Noble. The City Council approved the Preliminary PUD Plan at their meeting on December 2, 2014. Summary of Proposal The proposed PUD would allow the Applicant to subdivide the larger lot into three single family lots, each with more than half an acre of land above the ordinary high water line (OHWL). As the only lot frontage is the 20 foot wide parcel that currently provides access to the site, the Applicant is without the adequate amount of frontage on an improved public street needed to qualify this proposal as a typical minor subdivision. The Applicant has proposed a cul-de-sac at the south end of the driveway which would provide the typical 80 feet of width at the front yard setback for each of the new lots being created. A PUD is necessary to allow the use of a shared driveway to provide access to these lots from Noble Drive. 1 fT 1807 1800 1640 Noble 1644 L. 1634 i�f! a 1649 x 1624 1629 . ' 1614 1605 1604 1801 1535 Noble 1550 O ►.�'O 1546 1538 1 8 PUD 120 - Site Map Were it not for the unique circumstance of the 20 foot wide parcel that precludes the ability of the Applicant to meet the minimum lot width requirements at the front setback line, this proposal could be processed as a minor subdivision and would meet all the requirements of the zoning district. Similarly, the length of the narrow driveway creates some challenges in providing adequate sewer and water connections and emergency vehicle access to the proposed lots. In order to address this situation, the Applicant has chosen to pursue the subdivision of the larger lot through a PUD and has proposed a number of approaches to deal with the shared access. Utilities (sewer and water) are proposed to be located underneath the driveway and constructed to standards reserved for situations in which the typical 10 feet of separation between sanitary sewer and watermain is not possible. The Engineering Division has reviewed these plans and has found them to be acceptable as shown. After the installation of utilities, a new private 18 foot wide shared driveway would be constructed within the 20 foot width to standards that allow for the weight of emergency vehicles. "No Parking— Fire Lane" signs would be posted along the length of the driveway and a 70 foot diameter cul-de-sac would be constructed at the southern terminus, providing the ability for emergency vehicles to turn around. Snow removed from the shared driveway would be plowed into a snow storage area located just north of Lot 1, adjacent to the cul-de-sac. The shared driveway, the cul-de-sac, and the snow storage area would be designated Outlot A and would be owned collectively by the Homeowner's Association. 2 Based on projected building footprints and driveway locations for the three proposed homes, the Applicant has calculated that the amount of impervious surface will be slightly greater than the amount that existed under the previous single lot configuration with a large home and circular driveway (0.62 acres vs. 0.44 acres). A stormwater filtration pond is proposed for Lot 3 to manage runoff from the new development. A significant amount of lakeshore will be returned to a natural state and serve as a buffer for the lake which will assist in improving water quality. In addition, existing wetlands on the site will be protected through a required buffer and dedicated as part of a conservation easement. The Applicant is proposing a 10 foot wide buffer along Sweeney Lake and the delineated wetland. The City's PUD requirements call for a buffer strip of at least 25 feet in width along wetlands and ponds, composed of natural vegetation. Staff recommends an increase in the wetland buffer width to meet the zoning requirements. As a result of the Preliminary PUD process, the City is prohibiting any additional driveway or utility access without a future PUD amendment. Modifications from Preliminary PUD Plans A few minor changes were made between the Preliminary and the Final PUD Plans: 1. In response to concerns from the Fire Department, the width of the shared private driveway was increased from 16 to 18 feet. 2. Also in response to comments from the Fire Department,the diameter of the cul-de-sac was increased to 70 feet. 3. Based on the preliminary wetland delineation, the proposed location for the home on Lot 3 was shifted slightly to the west. In response, the cul-de-sac was also shifted slightly to west and the infiltration basin relocated to the back of Lot 3. This change also addresses an expressed concern regarding the co-location of the infiltration basin with the snow storage area. Land Use and Zoning Considerations As a PUD, the City can offer flexibility from the regular zoning requirements in order to achieve a better development. The following table summarizes how closely the requirements of the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District are met under the current proposal: R-1 Single Family Residential Sweeney Lake Woods Use Single family homes Single family homes Dimensional Standards Minimum lot area 10,000 square feet 24,834 to 37,494 square feet above the OHWL Minimum lot width at front 80' 20' at driveway; 80'+ at front setback line setback line from cul-de-sac Structure coverage 30% maximum Sufficient lot area to allow to meet standards Impervious coverage 50% maximum Sufficient lot area to allow to meet standards 3 Front setback 35' 35'+from cul-de-sac Side setback 12.5' to 15' plus 0.5' for every Sufficient lot area to allow to foot in height over 15' meet standards Rear setback 20% of lot depth Sufficient lot area to allow to meet standards Height 28' for pitched roof houses; Undetermined at this time 25' for flat roof houses As part of the Preliminary PUD Plan approval, the City determined that an 18' wide private drive was sufficient to provide access to the three proposed single family homes. PUD Standards and Guidelines There are a handful of standards and guidelines set within Section 11.55 of the City Code that regulate PUDs. The following table summarizes how closely the requirements of this section are met under the current proposal: Planned Unit Developments Sweeney Lake Woods Lot size No minimum NA Frontage 100' or adequate to serve the 20' development Principal building setbacks No closer than its height to Sufficient lot area to allow to the rear or side property line meet standards of a single-family district Preservation —wetlands and Minimum 25' riparian buffer 10' along the wetland ponds strip of natural vegetation Private streets Not allowed without waiver Waiver approved as part of granted by City the Preliminary PUD Plan Maximum hard cover percent 38% 17.7% estimated —single family use Engineering and Fire Safety Considerations As is standard practice for development proposals, plans for this proposal were reviewed by the City's Engineering Division to ensure the site can be adequately served by public utilities. A memorandum from the Engineering Division that addresses access, easements, sanitary sewer and water services, grading, stormwater management, and tree preservation is attached. The Fire Department reviewed this proposal to ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access is achieved on the site. A memorandum from the Fire Department that addresses driveway construction is attached. Justification for Consideration as a PUD The PUD process is an optional method of regulating land use in order to permit flexibility in uses allowed, setbacks, height, parking requirements, and number of buildings on a lot. Applications for PUDs must be consistent with the Intent and Purpose provisions and the PUD requirements and principles and standards adhered to in the City. 4 In order to be approved as a PUD, the City must be able to make the following findings: 1. Quality Site Planning. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. The Applicant has worked to accommodate the unique characteristics of the site, including the lack of adequate frontage on an improved public street for the three single family lots and the reliance on a narrow shared driveway for access. While this situation is less than ideal, the efforts of the Applicant have resulted in a Final PUD Plan that sufficiently addresses the many challenging aspects present. Staff believes this standard has been met. 2. Preservation. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands, and open waters. Much of the site's wooded areas are left undisturbed and a conservation easement will be established along the shoreline of Sweeney Lake to protect the slope, trees, vegetation, and natural habitat. Staff believes this standard has been met. 3. Efficient—Effective. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. The size of each of the three proposed single family lots—well over the minimum area required—is consistent with the surrounding residential uses and the amount of impervious (hard cover) surface is well below the maximum allowed. Staff believes this standard has been met. 4. Compatibility. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. The use of this property for single family homes is compatible with the neighboring properties and the density being proposed is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes this standard has been met. 5. General Health. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. Staff believes this standard has been met. 6. Meets Requirements. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Under the current proposal, the amount of frontage on Noble Drive has been determined to be adequate to serve the development. In addition, the proposed private street has been evaluated and found to be acceptable in place of the public street typically required. Staff believes this standard has been met. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods PUD No. 120, subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Civil Site Group, received January 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 5, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The riparian buffer strip along the delineated wetland shall be expanded to a minimum width of 25 feet. 4. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway. 5 5. A park dedication fee of$13,920, or 2%of the land value with credit for one unit, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Attachments Location Map (1 page) Applicant's Narrative (3 pages) Memo from the Fire Department dated February 2, 2015 (1 page) Memo from the Engineering Division dated February 5, 2015 (7 pages) Site Plans dated January 9, 2015 (12 pages) 6 Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 A regular meeting of the Planning Co ission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, ouncil Chambers, 7800 Golden Valle Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, Fe uary 9, 2015. Chair Kluchka calle the meeting to order at 7 pm. 00 Those p ent were Planning Commis loners Baker, Blum, Cer nson (arrived at 7:23), Kluc Segelbaum, and Wald auser. Also prese s Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman an dministrative Assist nt Lisa Wittm 1. Approval of Min s January 26, 2015, Regula ing Commission Meeting Baker referred to the sixth agraph o paw and asked that the first sentence be changed to read "Bake ked how the tatus of r,�ovenant would affect the rezoning." Baker referred t h paragraph on pa 3 and noted that ord "will" should be changed tot word "willing." MOV y Cera, seconded by Waldha ser and motion carried unanimously approve th5o nuary 26, 2015, minutes with the bove noted corrections. Kluchka abstained from ing. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Final PUD Plan — Sweeney Lake Woods — 1801 Noble Drive — PU-120 Applicant: The Lecy Group Addresses: 1801 Noble Drive Purpose: To allow for the reconfiguration of the one existing single family property into a new three-lot single family development Zimmerman stated that the Applicant is seeking approval of a PUD to create three single family lots with access via a shared driveway. He explained that the project consists of two parcels, a vacant lot 3.27 acres in size, and a 20-foot wide parcel containing a driveway. He stated that Lot 1 will be 37,494 square feet, Lot 2 will be 26,632 square feet, and Lot 3 will be 24,834 square feet, all of which are greater than the minimum required lot size of 10,000 square feet. He added that if not for the lack of adequate frontage on a public street, this proposal could be reviewed as a minor subdivision rather than a PUD. Zimmerman discussed how the Final PUD plans differ from the Preliminary PUD plans including: the expanded width of the shared private driveway from 16' to 18', the increased diameter of the cul-de-sac from 60' to 70', and relocating the stormwater filtration basin to the rear of Lot 3 which addresses concerns about co-location with the Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 2 snow storage area. He discussed how this proposed PUD compares with the underlying zoning district and explained that an outlot will contain the driveway, the cul-de-sac and the snow storage area. Zimmerman referred to the utility plans and explained that typically 10 feet of separation between water and sanitary sewer is required. However, the limited width of the driveway parcel and the presence of an existing sanitary sewer line makes that impossible. He stated that the Applicant has received special exceptions regarding construction techniques which will allow the utilities to be installed legally. Zimmerman referred to a plan showing the wetland buffer area and stated that the PUD standards adopted in 2004 require a 25-foot buffer around wetlands. However, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission now recommends a more fine- grained approach based on the type and condition of wetland being buffered. In this case, a 10-foot buffer is the recommendation. Zimmerman referred to a site plan and reminded the Commission that at their review of the Preliminary PUD Plan the condition of limiting utilities and further access to the shared driveway was adopted. However, the recently subdivided properties to the east will result in a long utility line and a long driveway running roughly parallel with the existing shared driveway which is not ideal. One option, if the parties agree, is to allow access to the shared driveway in order to have a shorter and less redundant driveway system. Currently, the only way access would be allowed to the shared driveway is through a PUD Amendment. He added that allowing future access from the cul-de-sac to the parcel to the west would be prohibited because the current PUD has the restriction of not allowing any further access to the shared driveway. He stated that he is recommending that the condition regarding access to the private driveway be amended to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed without a PUD amendment. Segelbaum asked if there is a third property that also accesses the existing shared driveway. Zimmerman said yes, the property at 1807 Noble Drive accesses the shared driveway, however, it also has frontage on Noble Drive that could be used for a driveway. Segelbaum asked if the language regarding additional access to the driveway should state that what is being proposed in this PUD plan would be permitted, but anything proposed after this PUD would not. Zimmerman stated that all of the conditions will be spelled out in the PUD Permit. Cera asked if the Applicant has had any discussions with the owner of Lot 2 (the recently subdivided property to the east) regarding his driveway accessing the existing private driveway. Zimmerman said he is not sure if discussions have occurred between the property owners, but Mr. Lecy has expressed interest in exploring the possibilities. He added that the City would like to see consolidation of the driveways and utilities or additional width added to the private driveway. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 3 Baker noted that the City Council voted 4 to 1 to approve the Preliminary Plan for this proposal and asked for information on the dissenting vote. Zimmerman said there was concern about three homes being in an area where the access was somewhat restricted. Blum said he is concerned about access for the landlocked parcel to west. Zimmerman stated that the area he was referring to for future access to the west is slightly south of the landlocked parcel. He added that if access were granted for the property to the west, the snow storage area would have to be relocated. Waldhauser asked if the new landowner to the east agreed to give some of their land in order to widen the driveway, how close that would come to making the driveway a street. Zimmerman said he thinks the potential is there, if the parties want to work together. Baker asked Zimmerman to review what led to the City Engineer to propose a reduction in the wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that the City Engineer and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission are recommending a 10-foot buffer and that Planning Staff is deferring to their recommendation. He reiterated that it is the PUD ordinance that differs from the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission's standards. He added that there is some latitude in this case regarding the size of the wetland buffer. Baker asked if the buffer area shown in the Preliminary PUD plans was 25 feet. Zimmerman stated that the original plans showed a 25-foot buffer before they went to the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission for review. Waldhauser said she would guess that the 25-foot buffer requirement in the PUD ordinance was probably meant for a higher density project, since that is typically when PUDs are used. Roy Lecy, Applicant, said he has never heard of requiring an additional 15 feet of wetland buffer. He said his plans have always shown a 10-foot buffer and he doesn't feel he should be held to a higher standard than any other proposal. He referred to the discussion regarding the owner of the property to the east accessing the private driveway and said he thinks it makes sense, but he would like to keep the process simple. Kluchka said this is a complicated PUD and he thinks it would be appropriate to go through the PUD amendment process. Segelbaum asked Lecy if he would build the driveway and utilities differently if he knew the property to the east might access it. Lecy said no, but he would make provisions for the trees. Blum asked Lecy what the hardship would be if the wetland buffer was 25 feet. Lecy said the soil conditions really deteriorate past where the buffer is located. He said he may need the 15 feet for the construction of the house because it is as close to the cul-de-sac as it can be. He added that it could also affect the grading of the properties. Waldhauser asked if the infiltration basin is intended to drain all three of the proposed lots. Lecy said no, it is for a portion of Lot 2 and all of Lot 3. Lot 1 will have natural filtration where it always has. He stated that the proposed 10-foot wetland buffer will increase the water quality over what is there now. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 4 Kluchka opened the public hearing. Jeff Haines, 1550 St. Croix Circle, requested that the original driveway and access easement across Lot 1 be left as an easement and not incorporated in an outlot with the driveway, cul-de-sac and snow storage area. Zimmerman said he understands Mr. Haines's concern about future access to his property, but he doesn't think anything will be allowed to be built in the proposed outlot, just like in an easement, but that he would confirm that with the City Engineer and the City Attorney. Cera asked if Mr. Haines and the Applicant have talked about allowing future access. Zimmerman stated that the future homeowner's association would need to be involved in discussions as well especially when there is potential for broader development in the future. He added that the City would not have the authority to require an access point to the west. Cera asked if the land to west is subdividable. Zimmerman said yes, there are three parcels that could be replatted a number of ways. Cera stated that the private driveway could potentially have several more homes accessing it. Zimmerman agreed and stated that the PUD Permit would need to be amended for any changes to the driveway access. Christopher Gise, 1485 Island Drive, said he is confused because it has been said that the proposed 10-foot wetland buffer is consistent with Hidden Lakes, but the shoreland buffer on his property is 50 feet. He asked if this proposed PUD plan defines the building pads or the building envelope area because Hidden Lakes properties had defined building pads. He asked if anything goes as long as they are not in the buffer area. Seeing and hearing no one else wising to comment, Kluchka closed the public hearing. Kluchka asked if the proposal defines the building footprint or a buildable area. Zimmerman said in this case, the plans define the building envelope because the homes will custom fit to each lot. Kluchka asked if that is right for this development, and if it is consistent with what is across the lake. Zimmerman said these are generous sized lots and having a building envelope allows some flexibility in where the homes can be built. Kluchka asked the Commissioners if they have thoughts about Mr. Haines' request for the access easement. Cera said they might want to have a wider street to handle more traffic if and when development occurs to the west. He said it would be nice if discussion could occur between Mr. Lecy, Mr. Haines and the new property owner of Lot 2 to the east before this proposal goes to City Council, so that the street can be built appropriately now, rather than being made wider in the future. Kluchka suggested leaving the easement out of this recommendation. Cera said he would not put the easement in the proposal now, but wait until the PUD needs to be amended. Baker agreed. He added that there is an opportunity now with new property owners and he's hearing about the likely potential of future access to this road so he thinks the Commission needs to seriously consider requiring a public street. Blum asked if the road is being designed to handle the weight of a large fire truck. Zimmerman said yes, it is required that a street be able to handle the weight of the largest Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 5 truck needed. Blum asked if that is one of the things the City considers when differentiating between a public or private street. Zimmerman said that is one concern along with ownership and long-term maintenance. Blum asked if private streets aren't being maintained or kept safe, if the City can do the maintenance and assess the property owner. Zimmerman said he assumes the City can require maintenance to be done or assess the property owner. He added that maintenance agreements will also be required as part of the Development Agreement process. Baker asked to what extent the City is compromising the normal standards of utility construction with the proposed design. Zimmerman explained that the typical requirement is 10 feet of separation between the sewer and water lines. He stated that the Applicant is proposing an alternate design that is approved by the Department of Health. Kluchka added that the intent from the engineering perspective was to use a different construction method that would ensure the safety of the utilities. Baker said he is trying to put the entire project into context of where the City is giving and taking. Segelbaum questioned if the proposed utilities are sufficient to support potential future development because he doesn't think that will be an easy thing to change. He encouraged the neighbors to get together and discuss future development and access. He said he would support changing condition #4 to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. Baker said he is anticipating future problems with access issues. Blum asked about trends in street widths. Zimmerman said 24 to 26 feet is typical but when possible, narrower streets are built. Kluchka asked the Commissioners their thoughts about the wetland buffer issue. Segelbaum said he thinks they need clarification about the standards for wetland buffers before this proposal goes to the City Council. Baker said that the standards are changing as they speak. He said there is recognition of the importance of buffers in protecting water quality and he would argue strongly for not accepting a 10-foot, or a 25-foot buffer. Blum agreed and said there may be some flexibility on the northeast lot, but he doesn't see a reason to deviate from the 25-foot standard in the PUD requirements. Kluchka questioned if the City is getting enough out of this PUD to deviate from the standards. Segelbaum said he thinks they should stick with the standards. Baker said he would like to know why there is a 50-foot buffer across the lake and said anything they can do to help this impaired lake they should do. Cera referred to the lots recently subdivided to the north and asked what the wetland buffer was in that proposal. Zimmerman said because that was a subdivision and not a PUD, that wetland buffer is 10 feet. He added that the lots recently subdivided to the south also have a 10-foot buffer. Kluchka reiterated that PUDs are usually done for more intense development so that may be why the buffer standards differ. Baker said he wants to emphasize that standards are changing now. Cera said he doesn't disagree with having a larger buffer he just wants to remain consistent with what's been approved in past few years. Waldhauser said this application has been under consideration for a long time. The City has been favorable to having this area redevelop and it has been a Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 6 struggle to get to this point for a lot of people. She said she thinks the 10-foot buffer is the standard that is in place now. She said this project happens to be a PUD because it is complicated, not because it's on Sweeney Lake or because it has wetland considerations. She said the fact that the standards may or may not be changing shouldn't be an obstacle placed in front of this developer and she believes the standard that applies in this case is the 10-foot buffer. Segelbaum said he doesn't know which standard should be applied. Kluchka said the underlying zoning standard is 10 feet. Segelbaum said the PUD standard is 25 feet and he doesn't know if they can deviate from that. Johnson said when the proposal was submitted it was deemed acceptable. He questioned if the Commission is discussing the difference between 10 and 25 feet, or if they are discussing that the very act of building three houses is decreasing the water quality. He added that there was a house on this property previously that also impacted the water quality. Kluchka said the focus for him is if the City is getting enough value from this proposal. He reiterated that this is only a PUD because of the private street and the lack of frontage. Baker said he is dwelling on the buffer. He said it used to be okay to fill in wetlands and just because there was a standard at the time doesn't mean that standard should be kept. He said he would push for a larger wetland buffer on any project they are reviewing. Kluchka noted that a larger buffer was not discussed on the recently subdivided property to the east. Cera asked if they could recommend that the affected landowners speak to each other before this proposal goes to City Council so that the future driveway access issues could be addressed now and not have to come back for an amendment. Baker said he would also like the owner of Lot 2 to consider widening the driveway parcel. Segelbaum said he is concerned about the condition regarding additional access to the driveway through the Minor PUD Amendment process. Zimmerman stated that the Zoning Code has requirements regarding Minor versus full PUD amendments. Baker said he would like to keep the condition requiring the wetland buffer to be 25 feet wide. Waldhauser said she would not support that. Segelbaum said he would like a better understanding of the requirements for wetland buffers. Zimmerman stated that by default, a 25-foot buffer is a condition. He reiterated that the Engineering staff and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission have said that a 10-foot buffer is appropriate and that the plans have always shown a 10-foot buffer. Baker questioned if the Commission voted on a 10-foot buffer during their Preliminary Plan review. Segelbaum said he thinks there is conflicting information. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Waldhauser to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods, PUD #120 subject to the findings and conditions in the staff report. Cera noted that the staff recommendation includes the 25-foot wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that the discrepancy between the PUD ordinance and the Engineering/Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission was discovered after his staff report was written, so Staff's recommendation is to strike condition number 3 regarding the wetland buffer. Segelbaum said that it seems to him that they are voting on the 25-foot wetland buffer. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 9, 2015 Page 7 Waldhauser said she would like to amend the motion to include Staff's condition with the change in the required wetland buffer to 10 feet. She added that she would also like to amend condition number 4 to state that no additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. Cera seconded the amendment. Kluchka said his intent was to require a 10-foot wetland buffer. Zimmerman stated that striking condition number 3 would make the wetland buffer requirement 10 feet. Segelbaum amended Waldhauser's motion to state that the wetland buffer should be set to that which is required by City Code. Baker seconded the amendment and the motion carried 4 to 3 to recommend approval of the Final PUD Plan for Sweeney Lake Woods, PUD #120 subject to the following findings and conditions. Commissioners Baker, Blum, Johnson and Segelbaum voted yes, Commissioners Cera, Kluchka and Waldhauser voted no. Findings: 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands, and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD Plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6, The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Civil Site Group, received January 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 5, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The riparian buffer strip along the delineated wetland shall be that width which is required by City Code. 4. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. 5. A park dedication fee of $13,920, or 2% of the land value with credit for one unit, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 7. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. XA val. _P Fire Department 763-.593-8079 / 763-593-8098 (fax) Date: February 2, 2015 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: John Crelly, Fire Chief Subject: Preliminary PUD#120— 1801 Noble Drive—Sweeney Lake Woods The Golden Valley Fire Department has reviewed the Final PUD plans dated January 9, 2015 for 1801 Noble Drive—Sweeney Lake Woods. This plan shows an 18 foot wide access driveway with signage on both sides of the driveway indicating "No Parking". At the end of the approximately 450 foot private driveway there is a 70 foot diameter cul-de-sac with a drivable grass paver system in the center of the circle. Also shown is a private fire hydrant in the cul-de-sac fed by a 6 inch water line connected at Noble Drive / Major Drive. These features address the points of concern noted in the preliminary PUD review. The one item that is not address in the Final PUD submittal is the construction of the driveway. In the preliminary PUD review, it was noted that the plans do not give specifics on what standard the driveway will be constructed to. Minnesota State Fire Code (MSFQ section 503.2.3 states: "Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities". In general the fire department will NOT drive a fire engine or a ladder truck on private driveway for the purpose of providing emergency services unless the surfaces have been designed to carry the imposed load of a commercial vehicle. If the driveway is not designed to support the weight of a large fire truck, I will not support this project. This issue is detailed in my preliminary PUD memo dated November 3, 2014. If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065 or by e-mail, jcrelly@goldenvalleymn.gov cityof £: croldcn MEMORANDUM valley Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) Date: February 5, 2015 To: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager From: Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Subject: Sweeney Lake Woods PUD #120 (1801 Noble Drive) Final PUD Review Engineering staff has reviewed the Final PUD Plans for the proposed residential development located at 1801 Noble Drive on Sweeney Lake. This property is located on the west side of Sweeney Lake, south of Noble and Major Drives. The Developer has removed the existing home and proposes subdividing the property into three single-family parcels that will have access to Noble Drive via a shared private driveway. Since the preliminary PUD submittal, staff has met with the Developer to discuss the items listed in the preliminary review. It appears the final PUD plans address most of the items identified previously. This memorandum discusses the remaining issues that must be addressed prior to approval of the final plat and Development Agreement. The comments contained in this review are based upon plans submitted to the City on January 9, 2015. Proposed Final Plat and Site Plan: This development includes the construction of 3 single-family homes, public watermain and sanitary sewer mains, and common area elements that include a shared driveway with cul-de- sac, a snow storage area west of the cul-de-sac, and a stormwater basin located in rear yard of Lot 3. The common area elements, including the shared driveway, snow storage area, stormwater basin, and storm sewer facilities, will be owned and maintained by the Developer or future homeowners association. The details of the maintenance obligations and responsibilities will be included in the Development and Maintenance Agreements drafted prior to consideration of final plat approval. G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Pinal PUD Review 020315.docx The property being considered for subdivision does not have frontage on a public street as required by Golden Valley City Code. The existing parcel has access onto Noble Drive via a 20-foot wide parcel that extends southward from Noble Drive. The Developer has proposed platting this parcel as an Outlot containing the private driveway and public water and sewer facilities. At the recommendation of the City, the Developer has modified the plans to show a driveway width of 18 feet and a cul-de-sac diameter of 70 feet. Engineering staff recommends that the private driveway and cul-de-sac be designed and constructed to a minimum seven (7) ton per axle capacity with appropriate subgrade corrections in order to accommodate construction vehicles, fire vehicles, garbage trucks and utility maintenance vehicles with a lower risk of premature pavement failure. The Developer will be required to submit design calculations and typical street sections as part of the final construction plan submittal. The shared driveway will be owned and maintained by the Developer and/or future homeowners association. Maintenance of the shared driveway must include pavement preservation and replacement, as well as street sweeping and snow removal. There are existing undeveloped properties immediately adjacent to the proposed PUD on its western boundary. In its previous review, the City required that the Developer dedicate a 25-foot wide driveway/access easement over Lot 1, west of the cul-de-sac, to allow for future access to the shared driveway, should such an arrangement be brought forth by the property owners in the future. It appears that the modified plans address this concern as Outlot A extends west of the cul-de-sac at a width of 30 feet. The Developer has submitted a proposed final plat that includes the dedication of drainage and utility easements on each of the three parcels. However, the following items are found to be missing or incomplete on the plat: 1. Drainage and Utility easements over the entire Outlot A, in order to accommodate the City water and sanitary sewer for the PUD. 2. Drainage and Utility easements over Sweeney Lake that extend up to encompass the regulatory flood protection elevation of 833.5 feet above sea level. 3. Show and label the 100-year flood elevation contour on the plat. This contour must also be shown and labeled on a revised final grading plan for the PUD and on each stormwater management plan submitted by the builders. 4. The plat is called Sweeney Shores and the final PUD plans are called Sweeney Lake Woods. The Developer must clarify the names of each and then include "P.U.D. No. 120" in the title of the plat. The Developer will be required to dedicate permanent conservation easements over the wetlands and portions of the shoreline adjacent to Sweeney Lake. These easements must begin at the lake and extend to a minimum of ten (10) feet upland of the ordinary high water level of the lake or delineated wetland limits, whichever is greater. The terms of the conservation easements will be consistent with recent subdivisions on Sweeney Lake, including the Hidden Lakes PUD, and will require a buffer consisting of the preservation of natural vegetation or G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Pinal PUD Review 020315.docx 2 establishment of native vegetation. Each homeowner will have limited access to the lake through a 20-foot access corridor. The property owner will be responsible for ongoing maintenance of the buffer. The maintenance requirements will be included in the text of the conservation easements. Because each homeowner will determine the location of their access corridor, the conservation easements must be based upon customized legal descriptions. The legal descriptions and surveys illustrating the easements must be submitted by the Developer to the City for review and approval. Signs or posts designed to City standards must be placed in the field to clearly mark the boundary of the conservation easement areas. No permanent structures will be allowed in the conservation easements or the access corridors, and no outside storage will be allowed within the conservation easement areas. Stairways, docks, and sand beaches may be allowed within the access corridors, provided they are consistent with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) guidelines and permit requirements, and the provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act. Work below the OHWL may not occur without a permit from the MnDNR. The conservation easements must be drafted by the City, signed by all parties, and recorded with Hennepin County, before Stormwater Management Permits are issued for new construction. The fee for drafting and recording the easements is$1,500 ($500 per parcel). The PUD Development Agreement will specify that an escrow must be posted by the Developer in an amount sufficient to cover the establishment of the buffer areas per the approved plans and the maintenance required for two additional growing seasons. The City reconstructed Noble and Major Drives as part of its 2006 Pavement Management Project. The special assessment roll for the project included deferred special assessments based upon the development potential of the parcel, estimated at that time to be $31,500. The deferred special assessments will be re-evaluated based upon this proposed PUD at the time of final approval and the PUD Agreement. Utility Plan: The Developer has proposed extending sanitary sewer and water into this development from existing facilities located to the north as shown on the Utility Plan. The pipe materials and locations shown on the plan are generally acceptable. However, the City reserves the right to require modifications of these plans based upon further review of final construction plans and conditions in the field at the time of construction. The plans are also subject to the review of the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. There is adequate capacity in the City sanitary sewer and water systems to provide service to the proposed PUD. The watermain connection within Noble Drive will require open-cutting the street. A City Right- of-Way Management Permit is required for all excavations and obstructions within public right- of-way or easements. G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Final PUD Review 020315.docx 3 The sanitary sewer and water mains within this PUD will be owned and maintained by the City, but will be constructed by the Developer. Therefore, the Developer will be required to design the utilities according to City standards and specifications and submit the final construction plans for review and comment. The plans must include drawings showing plan and profile views. The Developer will also be required to submit a financial security for up to 150%of the estimated construction costs of the sanitary sewer and water systems. This security will be further detailed in the PUD Development Agreement at the time of final plat approval. The security will include costs for a City representative to provide construction observation during utility installation. This proposed development is subject to the City's Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Reduction Ordinance. At the time of building demolition, the Developer removed a portion of the sanitary sewer service that served the single-family home that formerly sat on this property. However, the portion of the service that was left in place must be disconnected from the sanitary sewer system or be brought into compliance with the ordinance. A portion of the service is located on an adjacent owner's property, and permission will need to be obtained to complete the work. The three proposed homes must undergo 1/1 inspections and be deemed compliant with the code, prior to occupancy of the homes. All private utilities (gas, electric, and communications) serving the development must be placed underground, consistent with City Code. There is limited space within the 20-foot-wide corridor of Outlot A and most of that space will be devoted to water and sewer facilities. In order to provide the required clearance from the City's water and sewer mains, the Developer and private utility companies will need to explore the installation of private utilities through joint trench construction. This has been done in many other developments within the City. Along with its final construction plans, the Developer must submit a revised Utility Plan showing the proposed location of the private underground facilities. Grading and Stormwater Management: This proposed PUD is located within the Sweeney Lake sub-watershed of the Bassett Creek Watershed and is subject to the review and approval of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC). Based upon the size of the development and the number of units proposed, the BCWMC trigger for requiring water quality improvements is not met. However, for projects with over 10,000 square feet of land disturbance, the BCWMC requires the implementation of construction Best Management Practices for erosion and sediment control. Therefore, the BCWMC will review the plans for conformance with its erosion and sediment control policies. Sweeney Lake is listed as an Impaired Water for nutrients by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study was completed and approved for the lake. The proposed development must be in compliance with the approved TMDL Study. The TMDL implementation program identifies several Best Management Practices that may help to improve the water quality of Sweeney Lake. There are two Best Management Practices that apply to this development and the Developer has committed to providing these in the PUD: 6:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Pinal PUD Review 020315.docx 4 1. The construction of filtration or infiltration basins is recommended to reduce the volume of stormwater and its accompanying sediment and nutrient loads. The Developer has submitted plans which include a filtration basin. The BCWMC may also review and comment on the design of the basin. The Developer or future homeowners association will be responsible for maintenance and therefore must enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City outlining the recommended maintenance requirements for the basin. 2. The establishment of vegetative buffers along the shore is recommended. As part of the approval of this development, a 10-foot native or natural vegetation buffer is required to be established along the lake and wetland areas. The buffer should be designed in a manner consistent with the City's Stormwater Management Ordinance, which allows a corridor for property owners to access the lake. The buffer must be a minimum of ten (10) feet in width and should be shown and described on the final construction plans. The dedication of a permanent conservation easement, as discussed earlier in this review, will ensure that the buffer is preserved and maintained into the future. The Developer has submitted a Wetland Delineation Report for the site. However, since the report was submitted to the City outside of the growing season, the field review and final determinations will need to be made in the spring as conditions allow. Therefore, any recommendation or approval of this PUD must be contingent upon the successful completion of the Wetland Conservation Act process. Until such notice of decision has been made, no permits will be issued for site work on the three parcels. Based on the Grading Plan submitted and discussions with the Developer, this development will be completed in two phases. Phase one involves construction of the public utilities and shared driveway. Staff strongly recommends that the stormwater basin and associated pipe work also be constructed in the first phase of construction (at a minimum to serve as a temporary sediment basin until final grading occurs). Phase two involves custom-grading the three proposed parcels at the time of home construction. A City Stormwater Management Permit will be required for phase one construction. Separate Stormwater Management permits will be required for each home prior to the start of construction. The Stormwater Management Permit applications must include Stormwater Management Plans that are prepared in accordance with City standards, and must demonstrate that existing drainage patterns can be maintained with stormwater runoff accommodated within the property being developed to the extent practical. Based on recent construction experience near Sweeney Lake, staff also recommends that the developer or individual builders have a plan for construction site dewatering as part of their stormwater plans. This development is subject to the City's Floodplain Management Ordinance, due to its proximity to Sweeney Lake. The lowest floor and lowest openings of new principal and accessory structures must be a minimum of two (2) feet above the base flood elevation to ensure adequate flood protection. In addition, City and BCWMC requirements prohibit the placement of fill within a designated floodplain. According to the Grading Plan submitted, there are no proposed impacts to the floodplain of Sweeney Lake. The individual Stormwater Management Plans submitted for each lot must also ensure that these provisions are met. G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Final PUD Review 020315.docx 5 This PUD may also be subject to the MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit. A copy of the permit and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan is required before work can begin. Tree Preservation: This development is subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Developer has submitted a preliminary Tree Preservation Plan, but did not include the tabulations for significant tree removal and replacement. Because each lot will be custom-graded, a separate Tree Preservation Permit will be required for each lot prior to the start of home construction. The City Forester will review the tree inventory, tabulations, and plans in more detail at the time of permitting. Summary and Recommendation: Engineering staff supports the approval of the proposed Preliminary PUD located at 1801 Noble Drive, called Sweeney Lake Woods, subject to the comments contained in this review. Major points are summarized as follows: 1. The private driveway and cul-de-sac must be designed and constructed to a minimum seven (7) ton per axle capacity, as discussed in this review. 2. The shared driveway will be owned and maintained by the Developer and/or future homeowners association. Maintenance of the shared driveway must include pavement preservation and replacement, as well as street sweeping and snow removal. 3. The Developer must dedicate drainage and utility easements on the final plat, as described in this review. 4. The Developer must dedicate permanent conservation easements over the wetlands and portions of the shoreline adjacent to Sweeney Lake, and establish vegetation buffers, as discussed in this review. 5. The Developer must design the public utilities according to City standards and specifications and submit the final construction plans for review and comment. The plans must include drawings showing plan and profile views. The Developer must also submit a financial security for up to 150% of the estimated construction costs of the sanitary sewer and water systems. 6. The final utility plans must be modified to show the location of proposed underground private utilities (joint trench construction). 7. The three proposed homes must undergo 1/1 inspections and be deemed compliant with the 1/1 ordinance, prior to occupancy of the homes, the sewer service for the home that was previously demolished must be removed to the main. 8. Any recommendation or approval of this PUD must be contingent upon the successful completion of the Wetland Conservation Act process, including the field review. Until a formal notice of decision has been made by the City, no permits will be issued for site work on the three parcels. 9. Separate City Stormwater Management permits and Tree Preservation permits are required for the initial phase of construction and for construction of each home, as discussed in this review. G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Final PUD Review 020315.docx 6 Approval is also subject to the comments of other City staff, the City Attorney, and other organizations with review authority. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. C: Tom Burt, City Manager John Crelly, Fire Chief Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer RJ Kakach, Engineer Eric Seaburg, Engineer Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor Mark Ray, Street Maintenance Supervisor Al Lundstrom, Park Maintenance Supervisor and City Forester Jerry Frevel, Building Official Sue Virnig, Director of Finance G:\Developments-Private\Sweeney Lake Woods\Sweeney_Final PUD Review 020315.docx 7 February 26 2015 —E-- f Fps 2 7 2015 Dear Mayor and Golden Valley City Council Members, Regarding the buffer requirement you will be determining for the three lots of Sweeney Lake Woods, we ask that you consider the following: 1) The original presentation by the applicant to the planning commission included a 25 foot buffer to be installed adjacent to the conservation easement determined by the approved DNR wetland delineation. This was an integral part of the presentation to offset the impact that three large lakefront homes might have on the water quality of the lake. Based in part on this provision, the planning commission recommended approval. 2) At the city council meeting that followed, the presentation that had included a 25 foot buffer for the 3 lot development was reduced to 10 feet. No mention of this reduction was made during the meeting, and city council gave preliminary approval. 3) The size of the buffer did come up in the more recent 2"d round with the planning commission. One commissioner, aware of Governor Dayton's recent statement that all Minnesota waters should be protected by a minimum buffer of 50 feet, strongly urged that, at the very least, the original plan of 25 feet should be implemented. It was noted that the lots across the lake in Hidden Lakes, also a PUD, have a 50 foot buffer requirement enforced by the city. 4) The wetland delineation map shows that there are numerous springs along lot 3 and half of lot 2. Since the delineation goes well up from the shoreline due to these springs, concern was raised that any more than 10 feet of buffer in this highest area could impact the location of the house to be built on lot 3. 5) There are no springs, no wetlands, no trees or growth of any type along the remaining half of lot 2 and all of lot 1. This stretch of approximately 300 feet along the shore consists only of eroding lawn. There is no root structure of any kind preventing erosion, and more importantly, no growth or root structure to naturally filter the runoff from the incline of these walkout sites. 6) The two recently approved lots to the north in Hanson Wood Shores are heavily wooded to the shoreline. These lots have a 10 foot buffer requirement, however, due to in-ground spring activity, the conservation easement is as wide as fifty feet and more, which means the shoreline will remain a wooded conservation area, with an additional 10 feet of buffer beyond. 7) The sensible and important solution at Sweeney Lake Woods would be to allow for a 10 foot buffer requirement along the conservation easement of lot 3 and the north half of lot 2. Where the conservation easement ends in the middle of lot 2, a wider buffer strip should be required and maintained along the shoreline that is now lawn. 8) On all of Sweeney Lake, this 300 foot length of eroding shoreline is the most denuded. Because the site is an incline, a wide buffer is critical for filtration of sediment, fertilizers, chemicals and runoff. Natural buffers consist of native shoreline grasses and native flowering plants, whose root structures go as deep as 4– 8 feet. The root structure of the existing lawn is a few inches. 9) Many Sweeney lakefront homeowners with no buffer requirements have installed native buffers and prairies on their own to protect and improve the shoreline and water quality, and more are in the works. The regional manager of Prairie Restoration supervises several locations on the lake. In his words, "a 10 foot buffer is not nearly enough." He would like to see a fifty foot minimum enforced on all waters. 10)This is a PUD, and as such, the city council has the right and responsibility to enforce good policy for the protection of all. Our hope is that when the buffer issue is discussed for final approval, this simple yet effective solution is applied. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Carol Bemis, 1334 Spring Valley Road Bobby and Barbara Griffin, 1326 Spring Valley Road Scott Eastman, 1400 Spring Valley Road h A. S" y � � r J. + ar a a + rt1 { K } Site G R O up 4931 W.3STH ST.SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARK,MN 55416 CiviI3��GmW-rom Matl Pav31 Pat Saner 761213.3041 952-2562003 SW N Y LAKE WOODS GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA ISSUED FOR: SHEET INDEX SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE FINAL P O C-0.0 TITLE SHEET Q C-1.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN/SURVEY z C-2.0 FINAL PLAT,SITE PLAN � C-3.0 GRADING PLAN O L j a CITY SUBMITTAL C-4.0 UTILITY PLAN C-5.0 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN > O C -6.0 DETAILS W w SW-1.0 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN PROPOSED '^ SW-1.1 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN NOTES V SW-1.2 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN DETAILS Q }. _ SW-1.3 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN ATTACHMENTSLLi J U I SW-1.4 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN ATTACHMENTS > i� DEVELOPER: MASTER LEGEND: THE LECY GROUP ______93Y -------- EX 7 CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL 15012 HIGHWAY 7 J W MINNETONKA,MN 55345 .m° EXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATION Z m 952-944-9499 419 PROPOSED 2'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL ZO e SPOT GRADE ELEVATION(GUTTER/FLOW LINE .- "1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) - PROPERTY OWNER" SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BACK OF CURB(TOP OF +u a9c++zz.9rc THE LECY GROUP CURB) 3: 15012 HIGHWAY 7 —m SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALL (n MINNETONKA.MN 55345 +umw SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALL 952-944-9499 DRAINAGE ARROW EMERGENCY OVERFLOW EOF w ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: -' '----- SILT FENCE I GRADING LIMIT ° CIVIL SITE GROUP ---- - --—- -- -- --.--_.----.. - - - - -_ -- 4931 W 35TH STREET I___� INLET PROTECTION THEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PIAN, SUITE 200 SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS SITE LOCATION ST LOUIS PARK,MN 55416 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MV DIRECT SITE LOCATION MAP 763-213-3944 LICENSE PROF DTHATI AMANEER SUPERVI PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER PERMEABLE PAVERS/GRASS PAVE _ UNDER THELAWS J RESTATE OF SURVEYOR: ACRE LAND SURVEYING 9140 BALTIMORE STREET SNOW STORAGE EASEMENT SUITE 100 Ma ew R.Pavek BLAINE.MN 55449 41 SOIL BORING LOCATION DATE 1A-15 LICENSE No.44263 763-783-1880 CURB AND GUTTER(TO=TIP OUT) ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY ----tee:-------- DATE DESCRIPTION WETLAND DELINEATOR: PROPOSED MANHOLE STORM 9-15-14 PRELIM PLATRUD SUBMITTAL JACOBSON ENVIRONMENTALTCH BASIN MANHOLE STORM 12.2114 FINAL PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL 5821 HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH PROPOSED CATCH BASIN OR CA1-8-15 FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL BROOKLYN CENTER,MN 55430 PROPOSED GATE VALVE 612-802-6619 PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: O PROPOSED MANHOLE SANITARY PROPOSED SIGN TBD PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER oo--»-- PROPOSED STORM SEWER — — PROPOSED WATER MAIN — ,, a ,'. RE VISION SUMMARY EXISTING SANITARY SEWER ----- .-.. DATE DESCRIPTION »-- w EXISTING STORM SEWER —' '— EXISTING WATER MAIN - c----c— EXISTING GAS MAIN —E--E— EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC -- _ —C--c— EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE -- a TITLE SHEET O EXISTING MANHOLE M EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX ❑ EXISTING CATCH BASIN -* EXISTING LIGHT EXISTING HYDRANT IA EXISTING GAS METER O .o O EXISTING STOPBOX 0 EXISTING GAS VALVE ►� EXISTING GATE VALVE -14U.ANA: IU'NVI r_•' , /FIRE HYDRANT,ELF.N.-848.98 / u eo7.9 li/ (1929 DATUM) ..NOBLE DI21VC/r�AJOR � FOUND PINCH' •. DRI VI_ / \ TOP IRON PIPE R -02:'4"',;7„ 'tom \1i. l(•vi 7 n 0 A rn S EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY -O F- RLSM12755 - - - - - - --r�- - - _ _ _- _ 1o05D� SWEENEY SHORES LEGEND a DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND _ '^r -for- Lecy Group O DENOTES IRON MONUMFNT SFT DENOTES UTILITY POLE DENOTES STREET LIGHT dr II 41 DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE d DENOTES CATCH BASIN 1 .1 DENOTES GATE VALVE DENOTES FIRE HYDRANT .. DENOTES EXISTING CONTOUR - -"' --DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES WATERMAIN DENOTES SANITARY SEWER —DENOTES EXISTING FENCE DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. DENOTES TREE LINE DENOTES CONCRETE DENOTES BITUMINOUS Sp5.1 i r r PROPERTI'DESCRIPTION That part of Tract E, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1104, Hennepin County, „ �; •�; - )"' Minnesota, which lies southerly of the recorded plat of HEATHBROOKE. P.I.D.#18-029-24-42-0034 k and .77 m Tract A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1104, Hennepin County, Minnesota. to P,1.0.#18-029-24-43-0002 WITS - This survey was prepared without the benefit of titlework. Easement, appurtenances and encumbrances may exist in addition to those �'- shown hereon. This survey is subject to revision upon receipt of a title insurance commitment or attorneys title opinion. - ADDITIONAL BOUNDARY WORK NEEDED TO FINALIZE BOUNDARY CORNERS. 1 / FOUND MUtxER93 •ej9 eje,. titin'? I _20- \k" 101.17' — —RLS/12755 2 dA T 5372 .. / d'.e "SyTS RLS032755 � �� ail- ,.�'•<' ,�.`t_ .>��..5 \'. FOUND PINCHe2B TOP IRON PIPE 'J •y. _ � r P h~ i N T O 00 Fr 532.2 e5° ode ,ri 41 Calk� PP ha< M op, 12 O�IL RLS/12755 639" CR I'D NORTH Z - r (� O N O 3 f z OZ(n M10 31W IRON PIPE / I hereby certify that this survey, plan / or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. ACRE LAND SURVEYING+l- � � Servirig Twin CRiee Metro ERIC R. VICKARYOUS _ area find beyond 763-458-2997 acrelancisurveyrlmgmfli1 Job #14027 G\Lund P—Jects 2008\ 027-lecy golden valley\dwg 0274wg 9/15/2014 2,08,23 PM CDT Dote:SEPT. 15TH, 2014 Reg.No. 44125 // I iSite _ �1'�- I \b• ``�\ `\ ST1 W H ST TE 2LOUIS PARK,MNI 554106 63-213-3944 952-250.2003 , P-ek Pt ti ```i J�.�-```.```-'��..._ ti may\\\ �1` � �•___�__ k \ `\ \ 14 / AREA ABOVE OHWL= `\ ; 25.54 Amu Ft l ♦.1�_ �- l`�\ ` /' /�• Y" \ TOTAL AREA- `\ Cfl/-♦ \� `'♦ i \,\� ,/ �� .4 / 40.820 sy Ft 0.94 Ae. DELINEATED WETLAND �`\♦ I 2 .\ / AREA ABOVE OHWL- 1 b2 1 '1 r' ! `�1 f- ♦♦ '}I� 26.48.615 SQA Ft `\ 0 . TOTAL AREA= ♦ 0.96 A Ft 41,70 I ♦` I o � r 'Q, 18'BITUMINOUS DRIVE,NO CURB 20 WIDE CORRIDORE / / - / \\ �';;. �/ �`♦ / \` V! MATCH EXISTING GRADE SIGN*NO PARKING FIRE _ PERMEABLE PAVERS/ / y Al/ \ w , ♦♦\♦♦ / \ Z GRASS PAVE \r LU 0- A(PFJVATE DR CAMOT r _. TOTAL AREA t �` t� f� •I)S t ..`. 1s.035 Sq ACFt 1 ' I't I�,•�" _ rc _ AREA ABOVE OHWL= ♦ Lu LU LU O 33.392 S Fl • ., � _ 0.77 Aa `// 1( //// \ �♦♦ TOTAL AREA- \♦♦ 964 Sq ;, Nrv�C. �1 �� f"L L., -_^ - \/ 111\ - /�/�\\ 1d\, ♦ 53.1Ft 24 Ac. V /fit o I ,.,.�j ui fSLu kit- ♦♦ , if t}tl t,..-� I 1`) /// / f1 � \ � Q J r 7rJ=B c`* /4♦ - - ` ' uj �6O ♦\ `♦\ J W p A1.5 Fro ♦5-V,U9 '� i 6 L cf 4� O �u� `J''2� I �7 _ 18'SITU MNOUS DRIVE,NO CURQ k ,ham\ / \�.. \�\ \ L O r z MATCH EXISTING GRADE t `♦ zo co 00 L.1 ♦.•\ z NO PARKING —� ty o ' T j e} Do In _ 21 I N , k L v/ I fib'=6ti LS'J8'L t_- _.. —__—_____— �------------"^_--_..-------------�- -�-------- SNOW STORAGE AREA W _ / 'li� ♦ I Z'S�fi'"n 35'RAD CUL DE-SAC :.. 1\`♦ NO CURB -.- ♦�1'♦♦ F ' ! ( ! ) `♦ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, ( ! SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS I PREPARED NIE OR US ER My DIRECT SUP ERVISION ANOHAOT I AM A DULY ( ... _ LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER /I _ _ /� ♦�``` UNDERTHE LAWS THE STATEOF MINNESOTA �1 � Pa-k DATE 1-8-15 LICENSE NO.44263 ISSUE9SUBMITTAL SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION �-- --:-C-- j' f/ 4 &15-id PRELIM PLATIPUO SUBMITTAL 12-2314 FINAL PLAT/PUO SUBMITTAL 1-8-15 FINAL PLAT PU D RESUB MITTAL / I i SITE AREA CALCULATIONS � EXISTING PROPOSED PROPOSED OUTLOTA 0 q IMERVIOUS AREA 19,372 SF 12.8% 15,130 SF 11.1% 11,715 SF 76.0% � PERVIOUS 132,137 SF 87.2% 121,375 SF 88.976 3,309 SF 22.0% - i� REVISION SUMMARY TOTAL SITE AREA 151,509 SF 100.0°.6 136,485 SF 100.0% 15,024 SF 100.0°.6 - DATE DESCRIPTION IMPERVIOUS SURFACE SITE INFORMATION: ZONING NOTES: EXISTING CONDITION 19,372 SF 12.8% PROPOSED CONDITION 15,110 SF 10.0°/. 136,485 SF 100.0% SITE SIZE (3 LOTS) 151,509SF(3.48 ACRES) EXISTING ZONING R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT PROPOSED CONDITION OUTLOT A 11,715 SF 7.7% 15,024 SF 100.036 AVERAGE LOT SIZE ABOVE CHIN 28,473SF PROPOSED ZONING PUD GOPHER STATE ONE CALL DIFFERENCE(EX.VS PROP.) 7,453 SF 2.8°h FINAL PLAT SITE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS TOTAL 26,825 SF 1T 7% MINIMUM LOT SIZE=10,000 SF WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG MINIMUM LOT WIDTH=BO'Q FRONT SETBACK (800)251)454-TOLL FREE PLAN EROSION CONTROL QUANTITIES (651)454-0002 LOCAL DISTURBEDAREA 54,489 SF FRONT SETBACK(FSB)=35 SILT FENCE/BIO-ROLL 2,203 LF SIDE SETBACK(SSB)=15'FOR STRUCTURES IS OR LESS IN HEIGHT,15'PLUS O.5'FOR EACH C2 .0 O EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 0 SF ADDITIONAL 1'OF STRUCTURE OVER 15'(12.5 FOR LOTS LESSTHAN 100'IN WIDTH) 1® 20'-0' 0 40'-0' INLET PROTECTION DEVICES 4E REAR SETBACK(RSB)=20%OF LOT DEPTH vilSite 493 W ST LOUISA K.NST SUITE `'� ..._ ti •...` / � �-___ I CmI511e0mw wm Mall Pavek Pat Serve' �\ 7832133904 952-250-2003 IY ' / 3 AREA ABOVE 25,543 Sq Ft&- 0.59 Ac. TOTAL AREA- `\ 40,820 Sq Ft j 0.94 Aa / ` - t - I FILTRATION 13ASIN F �` + / SEE DETAIL � BOT=830.00 r��\ \� \� .. / 10 YR=8321'9 AREA ABOVE OHNL- /- 26,485 Sq �� 0.81 Ae.Ft 2 / T E '33.00 TOTAL AREA= 41.700 Sq Ft 0.98 Ac. A 4'WIDE X4'LONG / \ 3-S'RIVER ROCK EDE, in IE=832.50/ z t g� s ,c° 17 0 SiB� 'NVS x , a X -,�.J moi: (�w I �V9 os. - . - w P 8 O ICY -. �►,.� £:L.,4 OUTLOTRN TA (AL AREAATE DINE i1 o7 r\. •� - J _ 15024 Sq Ft $ ��syr _ aka 1 \ O (� g .;v I]-t! ? S�.�.. - __ �y tP 0.35 Ac y� a AREA ASO z / 33,392WSqolHWL- Lu Lu 0.77 0 A. $ �� t T\ _ m \. `. roTAL AREA- J 53,964 Sq Ft 0 1.24 Ac LO c\ Q 0a Cac? 1•1 6(YV[ Zt-� LULL SSR - mm m m PRFJTECT I y 7 r! 9 0�. '. - - 6 W LLJ W %.sz,st I s r, m15 Z m = V �c 0�11��C�b CVvs 4�e `s i�� ` cn g Bbl �I o DO :tn - CZ'Sb8£ t U GENERAL GRADING NOTES:' GENERAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES: BLOCK NO. 0 STRUCTURE LABEL,TYP. a 1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT 8 GENERAL GRADING NOTES. 11.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE TYP.CRY CURB 100'S STATION AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING,INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS.PROVIDE A 1.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN(SWPPP)FOR EROSION AND I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, 2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION(INCLUDING BUT UTILITY STRUCTURE, SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES,WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SEDIMENTATION NOTES AND DETAILS. UTILITY UNE,TYP.(SAN.,WATERMAIN) SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS NOT LIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION,SOIL CORRECTION,EXCAVATION,EMBANKMENT,ETC.)IN �'(�N') PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNERS SOILS ENGINEER.ALL SOIL SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN,OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND 2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTROLLING ALL FINISHED 1 GRADE__ Mti UTILITY SERVICES LINES,TYP. EXISTING GRADES.AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM SUPERVISION AND THAT I AMA DULY TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SILTATION AND EROSION OF THE PROJECT AREA.ALL EROSION CONTROL AND SILTATION 6+00 LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER - , .REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT CONC.WAIN UNDER THE LAWS SO THE STATE OF SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONSTRAFFIC AND EROSION BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH CONTROL MEASURES SHALL COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA'S BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FINISHED ELEV. LOT CORNER MI ESOTA THE SOILS ENGINEER HAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE MANUAL.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY TO CONTROL FRONT UTILITY EROSION AND SILTATION INCLUDING,BUT NOT LIMITED TO,STAKED STRAW BALES,ROCK EASEMENT +F'- CORRECT GRADE.ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE 9a + 3 3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF E T ENTRANCES ANDlOR SILT FENCES.CONTROL SHALL COMMENCE WITH GRADING AND Ma hew R.Pavek NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM(NPDES)PERMIT REQUIREMENTS& THE NEW WORK, CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK BY THE OWNER. SUGGESTED DRIVEWAY _ 6.00 ) ROAD NAME PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY INCLUDES;ALL DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION AS LOCATION F:944.00 11 DATE 1-8-15 LICENSE NO.44263 12. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE,A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE ) I I( 4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-UNE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS,UNLESS STREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED REQUIRED TO PREVENT EROSION AND THE DEPOSITING OF SILT.THE OWNER MAY,AT DRIVEWAY SLOPE 3 BUILDING FRONT PAD ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY HIS/HER OPTION,DIRECT THE CONTRACTOR IN HISMER METHODS AS DEEMED FIT TO I :935.50 OTHERWISE NOTED. TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS.THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. 78:944.50 I�SETBACK DATE DESCRIPTION THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED PROTECT PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS.ANY DEPOSITING OF SILT OR MUD ON NEW OR S.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5%MAX.LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1%MIN. LOT NO I SIDE UTILITY EASEMENT &1574 PRELIM,PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL AND 2%MAX CROSS SLOPE,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. BY THE SOILS ENGINEER THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE EXISTING PAVEMENT OR IN EXISTING STORM SEWERS OR SWALES SHALL BE REMOVED a I P:935.00 LOT DIMENSIONS 12-2314 FINAL PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE.CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE AFTER EACH RAIN AND EFFECTED AREAS CLEANED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER, LOWEST FLOOR ELEV. U8-1s FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL 6.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONTRACTOR. TOP OF BLOCKF1EV. ' BUILDING PAD DRAWINGS.MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:1 13. TOLERANCES - I 93q- RECOMMENDED HOUSE TYPE 7.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS,FREESTANDING WALLS,OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES REAR PAD GROUND ELEV. -��- BUILDING SIDE SETBACK GREATER THAN 4'IN HEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED 13.1. THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY GRADING NOTES: - 9x RETAINING WALL ENGINEER.DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR RENEW AND THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE,OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW,THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY BUILDING REAR SETBACK � SILT FENCE,TYP APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. 1.CUSTOM GRADED LOTS REAR UTILITY EASEMENT - 7 132,THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT 8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE,OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW,THE PRESCRIBED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES.THE ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE. PROPOSED CONTOURS REVISION SUMMARY CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES 13.3. AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE EXIST.CONTOURS DATE DESCRIPTION ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEERANdDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING EN BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION,UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE nnat DeD w N I E ENGINEER. ACTIVITIES. 13.4. TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS V2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS. '- 9.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT 14, MAINTENANCE TYPICAL LOT INFORMATION: ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR,OR 14.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE. EROSION,AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 10. EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND 14.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED,ERODED AND - GOPONECALL.ORG GRADING PLAN STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH RUTTED AREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES.DURING THE CONSTRUCTION,IF REQUIRED, VJW W. HERHERSTATETATE 66 TOLL FREE TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED.EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD,ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDED AND MULCHED. (651)454-0002 LOCAL IN EMBANKMENT AREAS,OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS,ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS.THECONTRACTOR 1 V CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT ARE ,WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED,TO A DEPTH 14.3. WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER,CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, .o OF 4INCHES-RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A SURFACE,RESHAPE,AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER MINIMUM DEPTH OF 4INCHES. CONSTRUCTION. C ivi ' Site 6931 W.357X57.SUIT 2200 5i LOU NMN IS;PAIaGmW.cam5a16 Mell Pavek Pal Sarver \ - - > -.,.--... �, � +_-_ 763213-3964 852.250-2003 N4 j. r a I i •: /FILTRATION BASIN s • .. / -S I' '✓ SEE DETAIL - BOT=830.00 +� `` / \% YR-832.19 68 LF 8'PVC ` � DR26 @ 0.74% F q ES 1 i /.+. TOP ER = 3.00 `1�828.DO� \� J4'= RIPp4P 27'01A 9ry NEENAH CASTING R-4342 7 RE=832.00 ( � ` IE 8'SE-828.50 I E 6 DT NE=828 50 / 30LF 6'PERF.DRAINTILE (1 F IE=828.50 �/fT 4'WIDE X4'LONGSAN.,WAT r �\ SERV.TIPE .I / // Z w`` =832.50 Fi CONNECT TO �% Q \ \ O WATERMAIN W1 WET TAP 236 LF 8'DIP SANITARY � / / Al 'r Z MH7 SEWER Q 0.40% -, / ` ( F C'` 1 - EXISTING 10 D6U RE=843.0 / } maw 89 LF 8'DIP IE N=832.38 c W ro 539 LF 6' EASEMENT \ / \ Oj W �i Nd=d O`-�_X3` Y r it _ WATER `t SANITARY SEWER IE A(PRNATE EASEMENT MH2 / / / \ > /^ !!�� `�\ C j o P EXISTING D6u / / \ KSS EXISTING 10' WM -..- _ RE=84250 I / `. .r� .... - IE N=833.40 ui Z l//i^^ r W / \ Y T J LLIDO U �! W NOTE: I �\ 'ter %% Z Go PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER AND i / \\ W O Z WATERMAIN FROM EX MH TO MH 2 SHALL NOTE BE INSTALLED 3.0'APART,MAINTAIN AT / \ (r W O PROPOSED WATERMAIN FROM STREE LEAST 18'VERTICAL SEPARATION 82 CONNECTION TO EX MH SHALL BE EX SAN MH - SANITARY SHALL BE DIP WATER WORKS I L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ \% 5 INSTALLED 5.0'FROM EXISTING RE-848� GRADE PIPE.PER 10 STATE STANDARDS 1 SANITARY,MAINTAIN AT LEAST 18' TRENCH BOXES SHALL BE USED AS 1 '^ IE 16'=831.04 _-__�__ 1` ` V/ VERTICAL SEPARATIONBSHALL BE - _-__-__-__-__ PROP IE 8'S=832.00 - REQUIRED FOR INSTALLATION- INSTALLED ON UNDISTURBED EARTH \` SHELF PER 10 STATE STANDARDS _ - TRENCH BOXES SHALL BE USED AS REQUIRED FOR INSTALLATION -- -. - .. - <. ` 1 0 w GENERAL UTILITY NOTES: I ° 1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION 10. ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES(MMUTCD)AND THE CITY. a NOTES. 11. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE DUCTILE IRON PIPE(DIP)UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. THIS SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO SIGNAGE,BARRICADES,FLASHERS,AND I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. FLAGGERS AS NEEDED.ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES.NO SPECIFICATION.OR REPORT WAS 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND 12 ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE(PVC)UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY. PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS. 13. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE(RCP)OR HIGH DENSITY 25. ALL STRUCTURES,PUBLIC AND PRIVATE,SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADES LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 3.THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF OF POLYETHYLENE(HDPE)UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. WHERE REQUIRED.THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH. UNDER THE LAWS$O THE STATE OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS 14. ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR Mu NEsorA. UTILITY COMPANIES AND,WHERE POSSIBLE,MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD.THE WATERTIGHT.APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT TRAFFIC LOADING. INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE.THE CONTRACTOR CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES,CATCHBASINS,OR OTHER STRUCTURES. 26.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES. Ma ew R.Pavek MUST CALL THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY AT LEAST 48 HOURS BEFORE ANY 15.PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OF 27.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES. DATE 1-8-15 LICENSE No.44263 EXCAVATION TO REQUEST EXACT FIELD LOCATION OF UTILITIES.IT SHALL BE THE FLARED END SECTION. COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOT IMPACT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH I DE CRIUBMITN SUMMARY INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES. CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.THE LOCATIONS OF 16. UTILITIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN S OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.THE DATE DESCRIPTION SMALL.UTILITIES SHALL BE OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR,BY CALLING GOPHER STATE ONE CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BUILDING LINES. 28.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND SUBl1R s15aa PRELIM.PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL a COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS. THESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. -23-14 FINAL PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL CALL.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED 1-B-1s i FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 17. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE BUMPED 0.04 FEET.ALL CATCH 4.ALL SOILS TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY AN INDEPENDENT SOILS ENGINEER BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE BUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS.RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY UTILITY NOTES: I. EXCAVATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNSTABLE OR UNSUITABLE SOILS SHALL BE THIS PLAN DO NOT REFLECT BUMPED ELEVATIONS. 1.RESERVED FOR SPECIAL CITY NOTES COMPLETED AS REQUIRED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER THE UTILITY BACKFILL CONSTRUCTION 18. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVERALL WATERMAIN,UNLESS OTHERWISE SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTED.EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF I8'VERTICAL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOILS TESTS AND SOIL INSPECTIONS SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES.EXTRA DEPTH WATERMAIN IS - WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER INCIDENTAL. �. 5.UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF'STANDARD 19. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND IO FEET OF HORIZONTAL REVISION SUMMARY SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION'AND'SANITARY SEWER SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL WATERMAIN,STORM SEWER AND SANITARY SEWER PIPES, DATE DESCRIPTION AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION'AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 10114(14 UTILITY REVISIONS MINNESOTA(CEAM),AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AND THE 20.ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. AND COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 6.ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE TO CITY REQUIREMENTS. Y1.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SHALL BE GORE-DRILLED. 7.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPEN,TURN OFF,INTERFERE WITH,OR ATTACH ANY PIPE OR HOSE 22 COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICAL GOPHER STATE ONE CALL TO OR TAP WATERMAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY DRAWINGS. UTILITY PLAN THE CITY.ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF ANY SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED WWW.GOP(800) TEONECALL.ORG DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE THE LIABILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR 23.COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES WITH (800)252-1166 TOLL FREE 8.CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED OR PLACED AT ADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF. (651)454-0002 LOCAL THE DIRECTION OF THE OWNER. 24.ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS HOF A ® C4.0.O 9.ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN CE'AM SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS MODIFIED THE CITY.ALL PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE S ESTABLWCUT.ISHED ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL 4 HEREIN. BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF 20'-0' 0 40'-0' C--iiSite 4i 49311 W 35T40 suIT`E zpo P ` // \ ST.LO PARK,MN 55416 C) �� `�\ CmISd Gmup.com Mall Pavek Pal Sonar r % \ r tb \ 2 \ T v 1 INSTALL INLET PROTECTION - � ♦:� At NEAREST(3)DOWNSTREAM j i J CATCH BASINS-.. ROCK CONSTRUCTION - - I 1 rf ENTRANCE Z aki itTE DRIVE) SILT PENCEUTL OTA(PRIVATE it / ♦ / , _ _♦♦ O ♦.♦♦.'•. Y'I -•__—_^$ `�' � �A 1 \�% Z O •.♦ m f \ W I.f % _ . Lv v >— w I PROTEA TREES% y. A$ INSTALL DOUBLE ROW OF SILT — O ♦ ♦ / + �"+, �EaLONG WETLANQ/LAI(E\� \` W m UJ W v V'-Eo- 1 PROTECT EXISTING SILT FENCE - \ DRIVEWAYk- 0 I I w O PRELIMINARY TREE REMOVAL TABLE: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY TREE NOTES: 0- TYPE SPECIES SIZE REMOVE SIGNIFICANT TYPE SPECIES SIZE REMOVE SIGNIFICANT TYPE SPECIES SIZE REMOVE SIGNIFICANT 1.RESERVED FOR Cm TREE NOTES I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. 1 D BOX 16 X 36 C SPRUCE 12-35FT X X 71 D OAK 18 X X TREE PRESERVATIONPREPAREp MITIGATION FORM SPECIFICATION,OR REPORT WAS BY ME OR UNDER MV DIRECT 2D MAPLE 16 X 37D BASS 31 X X 72D OAK 17 X X SWEENEY LAKE WOODS,GOLDEN VALLEY,MN SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY 3 D MAPLE 10 X 38 C SPRUCE 4-17FT X X 73 D OAK 15X2 X X LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATEOF 40 ASH 9 39D ELM 11 74D BASS 21X2 X X Mn NESOTA. 5 0 BOX 17 X X 40 D OAK 35 X 75 D OAK 24 X X Denanlona: 6 D BOX 10 X 41 D OAK 16X2 X 76 D OAK 21 X "Sgw—rt Waodlam" Tree cluster over 5W sf,w r h dPodw s trees 4-12do or 70 BOX 10 X 42 CSPRUCE 10-25FT X 77 D OAK 18 X conaemus trees 4-12 hgh. Ma'ew R.Pavek 8 D ASH 9 DEAD 43 0 ELM 11 78 D BOX 24 X "C-deo.Tree" 17 or anre o hwghL DATE 1"&15 LI ENSE NO.44263 9 D ASH 12 X X 44 D ELM 11 790 BOX 12 X •Decduoua Tree` 16 or Imre m heglh. 10 D ASH 11 X X 45 C SPRUCE 10-25FT X 80 D OAK 18 X X `Hardwood Dec iuous Tree` lonw sod,catalpa,oek.hard maple.w slow,ash,hickory.b✓ch. I SUE! UBMITTAL SUMMARY 11 D IRON 8 X X 46 D OAK 26 X 81 D BASS 26 X DATE DESCRIPTION 12 D WALNUT' 12 X 47 D OAK 24 X 82 D ASH 10 X btt-o cherry.hacM laspe.box aM basswood. 9-15-14 PRELIM-PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL 83 D OAK 19 X 'SofM'ood Wcitluous Tree" Cattorav ood.paplarshslxn,box elver,w IXay.silver maple.and ekn. 13 C PINE 14-35FT DEAD 48 D OAK 24 X AL "SigMiaM Tree" Haaeh hardwood deciduous tree G du.or more.sofhwood deciduous tree 12'da. 12-23-14 FINAL FLAT RESUBSUBMIMITTAL 14 C PINE 14-35FT X X 49 D MAPLE 33 X 84 D OAK 24 X o-e 1$-15 FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL .conderous Iree 12'or hgher. 15 C SPRUCE 19-5OFT X X SO D MAPLE 35 X X 85 D OAK 42 X X "Specvnen Tree' FFeRhy fvrdw ood deciduous Lee 30"da.or more.coniferous Iree 50'or higher. 16 C SPRUCE 12-50FT X X 51 C SPRUCE 10_ 32FT X X 170 BOX 21 X X 52 D OAK 18 X 18 D Box 14 x x 53 D OAK 19 x TREE REMOVAL INVENTORY: TREE REPLACEMENT INFORMATION: 19 D BOX 14 X 54 C SPRUCE 8-25FT X 20 D BOX 14 X 55 C SPRUCE 11-35FT X SIGNIFICANT TREES SIGNIFICANT 30%(REQUIRED 21 D CW 21 X 56C SPRUCE 8-20FT X TOTAL 77 TREES MITIGATION 22 D BOX 14 X 57 D OAK 27 X X REMOVE 27 EXISTING TOTAL 77 23.1 REVISION SUMMARY 23 D BOX 14 X 58 D OAK 17 X TO REMAIN 53 PROPOSED DATE DESCRIPTION 24 D CW 40 X 59 D OAK 15 X %REMOVAL 1 35% REMOVALS 27 25 D BOX 20X2 X 60 D OAK 28 X REQUIRED 260 MAPLE 15 X 61 D OAK 24 X SEE REMOVALS PLAN FOR ORIGINAL LOCATIONS OF REMOVED PLANT MATERIAL REPLACEMENT 4:1 REPLACEMENT 27 D BOX 14 X 62 D OAK 14 X CATEGORY"B" 28 C PINE 12-20FT X X 63 D OAK 24 X PROPOSED 29 C TAMARACK 20-40FT X X 64 D OAK 31 X TREEGOPHER STATE ONE CALL 30C TAMARACK 20-40FT X X 650 OAK 24 X PLANTINGS 4x(27-23)=1s REQUIRED"B" ORG TREE PRESERVATION 31 D MAPLE 46 X X 66 D BASS 13 X INCLUDING REPLANTING$ WWW.GOPHER 252-1166 52-11 6TOLLL REE 32C TAMARACK DEAD 67D OAK 30 X REPLACEMENTS (800(251)454-TOLLFREE PLAN 33 C SPRUCE 16-40FT X X 68 D BASS 24 X (651)454-0002 LOCAL 34 D CW 22 X 69 D WALNUT 12 X 35 D ASH 22 X 70 D ASH 12 X C5.0 t 20'-0' 0 40'-0' a�€ G civilsite R O V P 4931 W 35TH ST SUITE 200 �- ST LOUIS PARK,MN 55,116 b IA'ad Mall Pat Server ]63-213-3913-39 44 952250.2003 TYPICAL NOTES: g 1. SECTIONS ARE THE MINIMUM THICKNESS REQUIRED FOR A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY. BOTH BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT / �� A[ THICKNESS AND CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE THICKNESS / _ ° -z >"I, SHALL BE RECOMMENDED BY AN INDEPENDENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 6 2. DESIGN SHALL BE BASED ON SOIL BORINGS R—VALUE R.O.W. 20.0'CORRIDORE R.O_W. DETERMINED BY AN INDEPENDENT TESTING COMPANY. 35 Centerline 9.0' 1.0' 3. PRIVATE DRIVEWAY SECTION SHALL BE 7-TON DESIGN STANDARD. - Profile Grade 4. TACK COAT SHALL BE PLACED BETWEEN BITUMINOUS 5 d gg �--25% 2.5% LIFTS. THE STREET SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO b - - PLACING THE TACK COAT. �`yblg a BXINOUS LIFT THICKNESS TO S k BE SPECIFIED BY INDEPENDENT BITUMINOUS WEARING COURSE,TYPE 4IA-SPEC.2331 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER g BITUMINOUS TACK COAT GRADING NOTES: BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE,TYPE 31-SPEC.2331 — AGGREGATE BASE,CLASS 5 100%CRUSHED LIMESTONE,MNDOT SPEC.2211 1 n (THICKNESS TO BE SPECIFIED BY INDEPENDENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER) 1. IN AREAS OF FILL, BACKFILL SHALL BE COMPACTED EXISTING COMPACTED SUBGRADE PER SOIL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRUCTURALLY BUILT WITH A 1:1 SLOPE MAX APPRo' ME ITER 1 in. CITY OF APPRe DEL BER 1 19°° TYPICAL WATER SERVICE CITY OF TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVEWAY (NO CURB) EXTENDING FROM 2' BEHIND THE LIMITS OF BITUMINOUS SANITARY SEWER SERV CE GOLDEN '� (ON 6" N DUCTILE GOLDEN PAVEMENT OUTWARDS FOR OVERSIZING. VALLEY `I IRON MAIN) VALLEY tl1Y ENGINEER REG 23110 I CITY ENGINEDR AEG 25110 2. ALL ORGANIC OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE N9>E N. NT9,:sN��, ,°9 G-SS-03 OY-I�rytl-0 ''/^� REMOVED FROM BENEATH THE ROADWAY. ,m,"1O,L°pL1Ep 'T""E'Aa V! Euu M n wvT Pw CAP Q RUM: 0 arc vs[�-sm°,Sn�m 0�V_ FlNISHEp IRME O } zs eAOc RCNOim�'s meuL � J tY A�°I ; O 9mT.lE7Alelr V TOPSOIL ■ w LLi -� SOLVENT JpNT O da W LU J W -SH• �N9x AT fwxc P.V.C.DRAIN TLE Z O Z W Z I- usm rr uN i� W °rt NPwF ro oar fY MNo[To u.x NOTE: P.4C. AND RISER TO BE 4- P.V.C. •re s SDR 35 r a tMt PAVOL F V W APPROVFO DECEMBER 1.1999 CITY OF APPROVED OECFMBER 1,1999 CITY OF p FTYPICAL HYDRANT GOLDEN CLEANOUT ASSEMBLY GOLDEN INSTALLATION VALLEY VALLEY a CITY ENGINEER REC 23110 CITY ENGINEER qEG 23110 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, MI-wm-01 Gi-SY•'u SPECIFICATION.OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT NEENAH R-2502-0CASTING TiIM ELEVATIOM SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MIN.2ANDM ROUTBIL 5 BETWEUSTINGEN ,y MI NESOTA RINGS.GROUT BETWEEN RINGS,CASTING,AND ALONG PRECAST CONCRETE OUTSIDE. SECTION STORM SEWER . PIAN FOR LOCATION. PRECAST Ma ew R.Pevek DATE 1-8-15 LIC[N6E No.44263 INVERT,AND SIZES GROUT SHELF AND PER 645E5 SHALL BE R• CHANNELS 7 PER ISSUEISUBMITTAL SUMMARY STANDARD PRECAST FOOTSLOPE GATE DESCRIPTION WITH 2 LEAN GROUT, OR POURED B•S. 315-14 PRELIM PLAT/PUO SUBMITTAL REINFORCEDWTH ']..l';• �. , 12-23-14 FI NAL PLATIPU D SUBMITTAL 6•x 6.10110MESH 1-8-15 FINAL PLAT PUDRESUBMITTAL CATCH BASIN -27"DIA. NTS REVISION SUMMARY DATE DESCRIPTION DETAILS C6.0 / .: Site R 11- / 4931 W 35TH ST SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARKMN 55416 C Mall Pavek . Pat Sarver inlSileGmuP com 763-213-3944 952-250-2003 9 A•3 �� u � \w � 3 \ I AREA ABOVE OHWL— 25.543 Ft Ac / Q w 0.59 Ac. TOTAL AREA 40,820 S9 Ft 0.94 Aa A / GO /1 ) r / \ '� AREA A,OVE OHWL- \, 26, 5159 Ft 4, \ TOTAL AREA 41.0700 Ap Ft `% .96 INSTALL INLET PROTECTION '� `��♦ '�� / \`� ! - )ATNEAREST(3)DOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINSOCR . i c7 1 TOC ROCK CONSTRUCTION $. ( ENTRANCE -- - " T ' 3 � :VS-- ;.✓� ! r. - - — e J ►` OUfLOT A(PRIMATE DRIVE) Ij `�� \ \% TOTAL AREA SSI, SILT FENCE �� ` / i ,\ Q _ ' f +�-�• �r.� ter• ---- \. AREA ASO S DHWL— Lu LZLI �--- --- .. � / , \ \q 072 Ac TOTAL AREA— \4% ry 53,964 Sq Ft O (:F 1 - 1.24 Ac. LDLLi U ax PROTECT TREES// l WSTALL DOUBLE OF SILT \� I, FENCE ALONG WETLAI1 /LAKE ` uj uj W UJ J r♦ $ z GO = - \ W z �-- ' W o i L PROTECT EXISTING SILT FENCE \�� iDRIVEWAY a 0 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, OR REPORT WAS SWPPP NOTES: LEGEND: PREPAREID BYTME OR UNDER MY DIRECT 1.SEE SHEETS SW 1.2-1.4 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES, SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY DESCRIPTIONS,AND PRACTICES. ------932 -------- EX.1'CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 932 P CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL UNDER THE LAWS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TA. 2.SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES. ,�° EXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATION 3.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION, --93z.9 PROPOSED SPOT GRADE ELEVATION Ma t ew R.Pavel, INSPECTIONS AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT. DRAINAGE ARROW DATE 1-8-15 LICENSENo.44263 CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY EROSION CONTROL NOTES: ---- SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMIT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY_ _ INLET PROTECTION Wn HIGH FLOW BYPASS/OVERFLOW DEVICE) DATE DESCRIPTION 1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES. �� 9-15-14 PRELIM PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL 12-2314 FINAL PLATRUD SUBMITTAL STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE i-B-15 FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL O PROPOSED MANHOLE OR CATCH BASIN I: H PROPOSED GATE VALVE PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT Y� PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER >�— PROPOSED STORM SEWER EXISTING STORM SEWER REVISION SUMMARY EXISTING WATER MAIN DATE DESCRIPTION 10.'14/14 UTILITY R ISI N EXISTING GAS MAIN EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC EXISTING UNDERGROUND CABLE 0 EXISTING MANHOLE M EXISTING ELECTRIC BOX GOPHER STATE ONE CALL ❑ EXISTING CATCH BASIN ' EXISTING LIGHT WWW.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG STORM WATER (BOG)252-1166 TOLL FREE POLLUTION -6- EXISTING HYDRANT 0 EXISTING GAS METER ^f PREVENTION PLAN (651)454-0002 LOCAL I V • EXISTING STOPBOX • EXISTING GAS VALVE /�(SWPPP)PROPOSED • EXISTING GATE VALVE `w i .O 20'-0® V THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE DESIGN ENGINEER:MATTHEW R PAVEK P.E. OWNER Z �r IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN(SWPPP)MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE ESTABLISHED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN.THESE TRAINING COURSE:DESIGN OF SWPPP SYSTEM(NPDES)GENERAL PERMIT(DATED AUGUST 1,2013#MNRIODMI PAGES 1-35)AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND PRACTICES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART N.G. TRAINING ENTITY:UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA THE LECY GROUP G R O U P SEDIMENTATION CONTROL. INSTRUCTOR JOHN CHAPMAN 15012 HIGHWAY 7 4931 W.35TH ST.SUITE 200 THE TIMING OF THE INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MAY BE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING,OR MINNETONKA,MN 55345 ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 PART III STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS PASSAGE OF VEHICLES.ANY SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY MUST BE COMPLETED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED DATES OF TRAINING COURSE:5AW011-5/162011 IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED.HOWEVER,SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE TOTAL TRAINING HOURS:12CIW&*Ga P PPm Melt Pavek Pel Sarva. ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE. RE-CERTIFICATION:1/13114-1/13/14(B HOURS),EXP.5/31/2017 76}213-3944 952.250.2003 SWPPP(PART IIIA) ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED BY APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL ALL SOURCES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET HAVE AREAS AND QUANTITIES(PART THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SETOUCONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS BEEN STABILIZED.INLET PROTECTION MAY BE REMOVED FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN(STREET FLOODING/FREEZING)HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AND AND SWPPP NARRATIVE(ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION.THE PIANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES THE PERMITTEEIS)HAVE RECEIVED WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY(E.G.CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIPJMNDOT ENGINEER)VERIFYING THE III.A.4.B&C): SWPPP CONTACT PERSON OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS.STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT. NEED FOR REMOVAL THE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP OR AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST,WHEN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE CAN NOT BE OBTAINED IN A TIMELY MANNER,THE SPECIFIC INLET PROTECTION CAN BE REMOVED TO ALLEVIATE THE IMMEDIATE SAFETY CONCERN. SITE AREA(ACRES 3.48 CONTRACTOR: THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS: HOWEVER,EFFORTS TO OBTAIN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE MUST BE DOCUMENTED IN THE SWPPP AND AVAILABLE WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST.PERMISSION TO XXX 1. VERIFY THAT ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AND/OR OBTAIN THE REMOVE INLET PROTECTION BASED ON A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN MUST STILL BE OBTAINED FROM THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF REMOVAL. ON SITE DISTURBED AREA(ACRES) 1.25 NECESSARY PERMITS OFF SITE DISTURBED AREA(AC RES) XXX 2. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS,AND TOTAL DISTURBED AREA(ACRES) 1.25 XXX 3. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE MOUND SITE CANNOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS,OR CONDUITS AND DITCHES UNLESS THERE ISA EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA(ACRES) 0.46 7000 4. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING MOUND INFILTRATION MEAS BYPASS IN PLACE FOR THE STORMWATER PROPOSEDPERVIO IMPERVIOUS US A(ACRES) 0.61 5. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN/POND INSTALL SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING: 6. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN/POND(PART III.B) VEHICLE TRACKING OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE(OR ONTO STREETS WITHIN THE SITE)MUST BE MINIMIZED BY BMPS SUCH AS STONE PADS,CONCRETE OR NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA(ACRES 0.15 ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY 7. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE STEEL WASH RACKS,OR EQUIVALENT SYSTEMS,STREET SWEEPING MUST BE USED IF SUCH BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM BEING TRACKED ONTO QUANTITY OF SOIL TO BE MOVED ON SITE XXX PERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 6. DEMOLISH AND REMOVE ALL EXISTING PAVEMENTS AND STRUCTURES PER THE STREET(SEE PMT MEAD.). SILT FENCE 2,164 OF THE NPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT. REMOVALS PLAN. 9. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL THE PERMITEE MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND,UNLESS INFEASIBLE,PRESERVE TOPSOIL MINIM17JNG SOIL COMPACTION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF INLET PROTECTION DEVICES 4FA TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE 10. ROUGH GRADE THE SITE THE SPECIFIC AREA OF THE SITE DICTATES THAT IT BE COMPACTED.METHODS FOR MINIMIZING COMPACTION INCLUDE THE USE OF TRACKED EQUIPMENT,AND STAYING OFF OF EROSION CONTROL BLANKET OACRES CONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPP 11. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES AREAS TO BE LEFT UN-COMPACTED.METHODS TO PRESERVE TOPSOIL INCLUDE STRIPPING AND STOCKPILING TOPSOIL PRIOR TO GRADING OR EXCAVATION OPERATIONS. TEMPORARY SEED 8 JOACRES 12, CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT,MONITOR AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY AND 'ROCKCHECKDAMS OEACH PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL BMPS AS SHOWN ON PLANS AND IN CONFORMANCE THE PERMITTEE MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS REQUIRED IN PMT W.B.OF THIS PERMIT, WITH NPDES PERMIT,CONTINUOUSLY DURING THE WORK.CONTRACTOR SHALL DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING(PART IV.D): PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENT STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOILS NO LATER THAN 7 DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE RAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING(E.G.,PUMPED DISCHARGES,TRENCHADITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE)RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT MAY HAVE TURBID OR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CEASED. SEDIMENT LADEN DISCHARGE WATER MUST 13E DISCHARGED TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE WHENEVER POSSIBLE.IF THE 13. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER,WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES WATER CANNOT BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING THE SURFACE WATER,IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THE SWEENEY LAKE WOODS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION 14, INSTALL SILT FENCE/INLET PROTECTION AROUND CBS DISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER,DOWNSTREAM LANDOWNERS OR WETLANDS.THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE THAT DISCHARGE POINTS 15. INSTALLSTREET SECTION ARE ADEQUATELY PROTECTED FROM EROSION AND SCOUR.THE DISCHARGE MUST BE DISPERSED OVER NATURAL ROCK RIPRAP,SMD BAGS,PLASTIC SHEATHING OR OTHER 16. INSTAIl CURB AND GUTTER ACCEPTED ENERGY DISSIPATION MEASURES.ADEQUATE SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES ARE REQUIRED FOR DISCHARGE WATER THAT CONTAINS SUSPENDED SOLIDS. 17. INSTALL BITUMINOUS ON STREETS 1S. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD,INSTALL SEED AND MULCH FILTER BACKWASH WATERS MUST BE HAULED AWAY FOR DISPOSAL RETURNED TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS,OR INCORPORATE INTO THE SITE IN A 19. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN/POND MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.DISCHARGE OF THE BACKWASH WATER TO SANITARY SEWER IS ALLOWED WITH PERMISSION OF THE SANITARY SEWERAUTHORITY. 20. FINAL GRADE POND/INFILTRATION BASINS PO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)(PART DIG) SWPPP ATTACHMENTS(ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER): 21, WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE ISSTABILIZED BY INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE(PART IV.E): EITHER SEED OR SODAANDSCAPING,REMOVE BMPS AND RESEED ANY FRS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE AT ALL TIMES FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PROPER OPERATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MCONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE: ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION SWPPPTEMPLATE-SIVE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENT RECORDS RETENTION PART III.E: ATA MINIMUM;INSPECT,MAINTAIN AND REPAIR ALL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES AND SOILSTABILIZATION7 DAYS AF MEASURES ONCE ATTACHMENT B.CONSTRUCTION LANSTORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST O Z ( ) EVERY SEVEN(7)DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING ARNNFALL OF 0.5 INCHES OR GREATER AND WITHIN 70AY5 AFTER THAT.CONTINUE ATTACHMENT C.MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS THE SWPPP(ORIGINAL OR COPIES INCLUDING,ALL CHANGES TO R.AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY INSPECTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITY HAS CEASED.THEREAFTER THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM THESE RESPONSIBILITIES AT LEASTWEEKLY UNTIL ATTACHMENT O:STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT-ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. O VEGETATIVE COVER IS ESTABLISHED.INSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS,EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND INFILTRATION AREAS. ATTACHMENT E:GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT-ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER AVAILABLE UPON REOUEST. A THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THE SITE THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE WRING W li NORMAL WORKING HOURS. �y J BASED ON INSPECTION RESULTS THE CONTRACTOR MAY MODIFY THE SWPPP IN ORDERTO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM LEAVING THE SITE VIA STORM WATER RUNOFF.THIS S ALL OWNER(5)MUST KEEP THE SWPPP,ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS,ON FILE FOR THREE(3)YEARS AFTER SUBMITTAL OUTHE NOT AS OUTLINED IN MODIFICATION MUST BE MADE WITHIN 7 CALENDAR DAYS OF THE INSPECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY THE TERMS OF THE PERMIT,LEGAL,REGULATORY,OR Q PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. > O PART I.C.THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT. SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES: N INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE RECORDED WITHIN 24 HOURS IN WRITING AND KEPT ON FILE BY THE CONTRACTOR AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE SWPPP ON SITE AND THEN THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES. W W V 7. THE FINAL SWPPP, FOR AT LEAST 3 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT. Y O 2. ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT; ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED,REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 12 OF THE HEIGHT PROJECT NARRATIVE: J 0 OF THE DEVICE.THESE REPAIRS MUST BE MADE BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY,OR THEREAFTER AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW ACCESS. Q } 3. RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW SINGLE FAMILY � � /1 CONSTRUCTION(SEE PMT N.E.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE} REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS,CATCH BASINS,AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS,AND RESTABILIZE THE HOMES WITH A SHARED DRIVEWAY.GRADING WILL OCCUR ON SITE TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE CONDITIONS. V d. ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MEAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED TOPSOIL THIS REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PUCE WITHIN 7 GAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED E W BY LEGAL,REGULATORY,OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM(IF REQUIRED): }. IMPLEMENTED,INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY,CONTRACTS,COVENANTS AND OTHER Q BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE;AND SEE(ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR SITE SPECIFIC INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. A THIS PROJECT IS CREATING LESS THAN 1 ACRE OF NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE,THEREFORE NO PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT uj W W SYSTEM IS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT, J 5. ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT Z m POLLLITIONPREVENTIONMANAGEMENT(PARTIV.F): B. THE ORSTORMANAGEMEAGEENTARENOTINEFFECTFORTHISP STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. C. THE WATERSHED REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ARE NOT IN EFFECT FOR THIS PROJECT. � Z O THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT THE FOLLOWING POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES ON THE SITE; r PART IV.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTS AS AVOLUNTARY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE A FILTRATION BASIN IS PROPOSED TO TREAT THE VOLUME OF RUNOFF GENERATED BY 1-OF SOLID WASTE:COLLECTED SEDIMENT,ASPHALT AND CONCRETE MILLINGS,FLOATING DEBRIS,PAPER PLASTIC,FABRIC,CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS AND OTHER RUNOFF OVER THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. ui00 EROSION PREVENTION(PART IV.B): WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUST COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY(MPCA)DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS. SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC(IF REQUIRED): THE CONTRACTOR LS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANING FOR AND IMPLEMENTING APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION PHASING,VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS,HORIZONTAL SLOPE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:OIL,GASOLINE,PAINT AND ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE PROPERLY STORED,INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT,TO PREVENT SPILLS, /� GRADING,AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES THAT MINIMIZE EROSION,SO THAT THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS OF PART ME ARE COMPLIED WITH. LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE.RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM.STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST 1. DURING CONSTRUCTION:. y THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBEMUST BE DELINEATED(E.G.WITH FLAGS,STAKES.SIGNS,SILT FENCE ETC.)ON THE DEVELOPMENT STTE BEFORE WORK BEGINS. BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS. A STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETED LATEALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT NO LATER THAN THE END OF THE NEXT WORK DAY WHEN EXTERNAL WASHING OF TRUCKS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES MUST BE LIMITED TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE.RUNOFF MUST BE CONTAINED AND WASTEWATER THN SEVEN(7)DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. EARTH-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES WILL CEASE FOR AT LEAST 14 DAYS.TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT,CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS(EG.,CLEAN PROPERLY DISPOSED OF.NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE, B. TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN PART III.C.MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THAT AGGREGATE STOCKPILES,DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES,SAND STOCKPILES)AND THE CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS,PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE(5)OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME. U SURFACES ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT BUT MUST COMPLY WITH PART N.C.S. CONCRETE WASHOUT:ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS MUST BE CONTAINED IN A LEAK PROOF CONTAINMENT FACILITY OR W IMPERMEABLE UNER A COMPACTED CLAY LINER THAT DOES NOT ALLOW WASHOUT LIQUIDS TO ENTER THE GROUND IS CONSIDERED AN IMPERMEABLE LINER.THE LIQUID AND 2. POST CONSTRUCTIOWTHE WATER QUALITY VOLUME THAT MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE BY THE PROJECTS PERMANENT STORMWATER O SOILS WITHIN 200 FEET OFA PUBLIC WATER(AS DESIGNATED BY THE MINNESOTA DNR)MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMES. SOLID WASTES MUST NOT CONTACT THE GROUND,AND THERE MUST NOT BE RUNOFF FROM THE CONCRETE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS.LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DESCRIBED IN PMT IIID.SHALL BE ONE(1)INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE It MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA REGULATIONS.A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TO INFORM CONCRETE PROJECT.SEE PART III.D.1.FOR MORE INFORMATION ON INFILTRATION DESIGN,PROHIBITIONS AND APPROPRIATE SITE CONDITIONS. THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE THAT DRAINS WATER FROM ANY PORTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE,OR EQUIPMENT OPERATORS TO UTILIZE THE PROPER FACIUTIES.CONCRETE WASHOUT MAY ALSO OCCUR OFF SITE ACCORDING TO THE APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS DIVERTS WATER AROUND THE SITE,MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE,OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE INTO ANY SURFACE WATER HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, STABILIZATION OF THE LAST 200 LINEAL FEET MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER FUELING OPERATION PLAN:ALL FUELING SHALL TAKE PLACE ATTHE DESIGNATED FUELING LOCATION AND ACCORDING TO BEST PRACTICES FOR SITE FUELING OPERATIONS AS PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC: PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR SPILLS. PERMANENT SEED MIX SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY STABILIZATION OF THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES MUST BE COMPLETE WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A . FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER SURFACE WATER AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH RAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. SPILL PREVENTION PLAN:ALL SPILLS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY CLEANED UP AFTER DISCOVERY,THE SITE SUPERINTENDENT,WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DAY-TODAY ONSITE AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261( AT 35 LBS PER STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS WILL BE THE SPILL PREVENTION COORDINATOR AND WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING CLEAN UP PROCEDURES,POSTING CLEAN UP MIN JESOTA. RECOMMENDATIONS,AND ENSURING PROPER CLEAN UP TRAINING OF APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL. ACRE' TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES THAT ARE BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM(WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK DITCH CHECKS,BIO ROLLS, . DRY MEAS MNDOT REED MIX 35-221(DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL)AT 40 LBB PER ACRE. SILT DIKES ETC.)DO NOT NEED TO BE STABILIZED.THESE AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER NO LONGER BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT . MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL. SYSTEM. SANITARY AND SEPTIC WASTE:SANITARY/SEPTC FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED IN A NEAT AND SANITARY CONDITION,FOR THE USE OF THE CONTRACTOR'S EMPLOYEES.A LICENSED SANITARY WASTE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR AS REQUIRED BY STATE REGULATIONS WILL COLLECT SANITARY WASTE FROM PORTABLE UNITS. Ma ew R.Pavek PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER FINAL STABILIZATION(PART N.G): CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY EROSION CONTROL NOTES: DATE 1-8-15 LICENSENO.44263 SEED NOTES(PART III.AA.A): 1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES. ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURE FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE ACCORDING THE DEFINITIONS IN THE NPDES GENERAL PERMIT PART N SECTION G.THE CONTRACTOR ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL MUST SUBMITA NOTICE OF TERMINATION(N.O.T.)WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL STABILIZATION IS COMPLETE OR WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER SELLING THE SITE OR PORTION OF THE DATE DESCRIPTION SITE(THAT HAS NOT UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION)TO ANOTHER PARTY.A COPY OF THIS NOTICE OF TERMINATION/PERMIT MODIFICATION FORM MUST GO TO THE NEW 9-15-14 PRELIM.PLAT/PUD SUBMITTAL GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS: OWNER.THE ORIGINAL CURRENT OWNER MUST PROVIDE A SWPPP TO THE NEW OWNER THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES THE REMAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.SEE THE 12-2314 FINAL PLATAPUD SUBMITTAL IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3INCHES. SWPPP THE SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE(ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)AND SWPPP PUN SHEETS FOR FINAL STABILIZATION MEASURES 1-8-15 FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING,MULCHING&BLANKET. SEED TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112(WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP)FOR WINTER AND 21-111(CATS COVER CROP)FOR SPRINGSUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MDPS SHALL BE APPLIED AT ASEEDING RATE OF 100 LBSIACRE MULCH IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING,WITHIN 24 HOURS,MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEED GERMINATION.MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 9W COVERAGE(2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH) REVISION SUMMARY SLOPES DATE DESCRIPTION 3:1(HORVAIERT.)OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH 10114114 UTILITY REVISIONS SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALT.BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET. SEE PIAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS. SEDIMENT CONTROL(PART N.C): SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST MINIMIZE SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS,INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS AND STORM SEWER INLETS. STORM WATER a.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS THAT ARE DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM(E.G.,DITCHES WITH POLLUTION ROCK CHECK DAMS)REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS. PREVENTION PLAN b.IF THE DOWN GRADIENT TREATMENT SYSTEM IS OVERLOADED,ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS MUST BE INSTALLED TO (SWPPP)NOTES ELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING,AND THE SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN PART IILA4,A THROUGH C. c IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN SHEET FLOW AND MINIMIZE RILLS AND/OR GULLIES,THERE SHALL BE NO UNBROKEN SLOPE LENGTH OF GREATER THAN 75 FEET FOR SLOPES W 1 . 1 WITH A GRADE OF 3:108 STEEPER x iv Site G R 4:1' U U P 4931 W.36TH ST SUITE 200 OVERFLOW IS YM OF THE CURB ST.LOUIS PARK.MN 55416 BOX HEIGHT cn,nsHeGr�NP prom Matt Pavek Pel Sarver OVERFLOW AT TOP OF 763-213-3944 952-2532DO3 FILTER ASSEMBLY EXISTING CURB,PLATE,BOX, AND GRATE v. y r, r• N• .r .r GRATED UNDERGRAIN COLLECTION SYSTEM y W W r W W W W y w, W W W W W m LWT MATERIAL.SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER,6' r ON-GRADE 10'AT LOW POINTpp y �, / W W r T°r wen wo1 v TRAY. N. m m W y W w' y r HIGH-FLOW FABRIC i NOTES: W y y W W W y m 1.REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC. 5T tLGPE 2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEM AFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT. 3.REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ER04C. CURB INLET FILTER W R.CON57RUCnON GOLDEN CITY OF _ /'� NTS W CR W ECipNu W W ENTRANCE VALLEY-v My elle .✓ +- +- .r .✓ W-FL417 N. r• W r• N CONNECTTO STORM SEWER OR DISCHARGE L W W W y W W W y W W W W W W W W W W WOVERFLOW'LATCH BASIN• 0 :2 SEE UTILTTY PIAN O ^ T X4'HORIZONTAL MEMBERS MONOFILAMENT GEOTECTILE FABRIC AS PER w li fAN71N000S AROUND TOP AND MNDOT TABLE 38861(MACHINE SLICED} J BOTTOM.FASTENED TO EACH POST ADDITIONAL 610'OF FABRIC FLAP AT BOTTOM Q USING 2-20D COMMON NAILS OF BOX ] O TYPICAL PLAN VIEW W LU ,Q� 0 �r PLANT MATERUL:SEE VJIDSCAPE PLAN Q Err— T_- ommrn[FAwc SEE GRADING PIAN FOR DEPTH LL1r,1' k y qq vW ■ _ rXPX2.6LONG WOOD L; POSTS,B READ. LLJ W UJI �aa r T PAVEMENT 3H:1L 7` O yNY M1°lwrw 610'FABRIC FLAP-BURY UNDER ROCK TO W Z r PREVENT UNDERWASHING .- W o WOODEN LATH SHALL BE NAILED SECURELY THE POST MEMBER TO SECURE FILTER FABRIC, I I IF-1 ITIS s _ II_II�t II� II� 1 17 WASHED ROCK T DEEP X 1' 4 WIDE GRA35 PRE-1REATMEM STRIP - 14 16s- i C ..•)-j(' �I-�I I Ir NOTES. UNDISTURBED,UNCOSMU WI 1)CONTMCTOR SHAH CONSTRUCT SILT BOX TO FR AROUND THE INLET STRUCTURE WITH 6 INRUSOL O CITY OF MINIMUM CLEARANCE TO EDGE$OF STRUCTURE SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH IN BASIN _ NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE(MaDOT TYPE I-HIGH FLOW RATE SILT FENCE GOLDEN 2)MLT BOXTO BE RACED ON AN EVEN SURFACE 6'BELOWSTRUCTURE OPENING. I�I I III—I I III— - ) ~ VALLEY (3'4i DEPTH) 'T� OVER MMPI EXTENDING I-1 U 3)TOP ff SILT BOX TO EXTEND 1B'MINIMUM ABOVE EXISTING GRADE. � W MIN.PuWi1NG MEDIUM DEPTH 15' I FROM DRAINORAIV PIPE SIDES. 8Y-Fb61 UNDEDOUBL GRAVEL INLET PROTECTION SILT BOX-CATCH BASIN WITH AWELLBLENOUSCONSTRUKYON D 7-1 S DOUBLE WASHED STONE OR 70X HOMOGEN ORGANIC SAND Y•Y2'WASHED RIVER RUN PEA GRAVEL D_ 30%ORGANIC LFAF COMPOST NTSPERFORATED UNOERORAN OURET PIFE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, 6'DIAMETER PJC.SEE UTILITY RAID SPEOR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY MUNDER RECT SUPERVISIOIC AND N ANDD DITHAT I AM A DULY TYPICAL SECTION VIEW LICENSEDTHE LA ES IONALOF ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF TME ENGIN OF MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING 'B' TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL -A- BURYTHETOPENDOFTHE 1, INSTALL SILT FENCE ANRgR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THE PRACDCE WRING CONSTRUCTION. �1. Pavek SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES, MATTING IN A TRENCH 4'OR 2 ALL DOOM-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS MUST BE IN PUCE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTNITY BEGINS DATE 1-S-15 LICENSEN0.44263 10'SPACING,4'DOWN FROM MORE IN DEPTH TRENCH 3, PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES. ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY 4.INSTA-LUTUIES(OATER,SMMARYSEWER ELECTRIC.PHONE.FIBEROPTIC,ETC)PRIORTO SETTING FINAL GRADEOF BKMETENTON DEVICE DATE DESCRIPTION 5, ROUGH GRADE THE SITE.IF BIORETENTION AREAS ARE BEING USED AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS LEAVE A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET OF COVER OVER THE PRACTICE TO PROTECT THE UNDERLYING SOILS FROM CLOGGING. 315-14 PRELIM PLATIPUO SUBMITTAL ~ • 12-23141 FINAL PLATIPUD SUBMITTAL 'C' OVERLAP:BURY UPPERS 6.PERFORM AIL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS. 1.3-15 FINAL PLAT PUD RESUBMITTAL OF LOWER STRIP AS IN'W 7, SEED AND MULCH ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE AND V.OVERLAP END OF 'E'OVERFALL B CONSTRUCT BIORETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA TOP STRIP 4'AND STAPLE. b ✓ 9, IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMENATE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES, 10.RANT AND MULCH BIORETENTION DEVICE. 4A A 11.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED. NOTE GENERAL NOTES REVISION SUMMARY �e 1.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TO DATE DESCRIPTION KEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TO 1. IN THE EVENTTHAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION,THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION 1/14/14 UTILITY REVISIONS 'D' EROSION STOP:FOLD OF MATTING BURIED IN SILT TRENCH AND SOIL ING OF 2.GRADBIORETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USING LOW-COMPACTION EART"OVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENTCOMPACTION OF UNDERLYING SOILS. TAMPED.DOUBLEROW OF 3, ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED BIORETENTXXI DEPTH XLBYATIONI SHALL BE UNDISTURBED,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. STAPLES. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART —b TYPICAL STAPLE q8 TO KEEP MATTING FIRMLY -1 GAUGE WIRE PRESSED TO SOIL. STORM WATER POLLUTION EROSION BLANKET BIO-RETENTION, INFILTRATION, FILTRATION(RAIN GARDEN-TYP.) PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)DETAILS NTS NTS SW 1 .2 ATTACHMENT A:SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENT Divi Site GR OU P 4931 W.35TH ST.SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARK.MN 55416 C,noteGmup can Mal Pavek Pat Servo General Site Information(IILA) S. D-baMahotls bbewed mparok nitnkm antl sedxmrermY.linins ota p,o'bVYsaedadtagii unless 763213-3944 952-250.2003 1 Iadde_(e 9 iniad.-Nr flmvm Yesi deted area) 3. Desc be Pad .i v.g rid dapowi d Named.-xtrus ortnk wde'a g.1 lua hydrauio Ruda nam +J ig Describe the edition and type d all tempon y and perm nen!eros.n prcverNm and sediment mnbol BIM Mane,exM O SCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA PND INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE J,ZED m ro.peddle- tl pdtlpcb wood Pr.mnaMe ad..-tomo mmpouras aM addq amadng b A•mn R ch l P,xlkes(&APs).Include me 5mrq der insbllapm vntl pmwdurss u¢etl m awdan edd4ona'14nrrparary BMPSn ]045,rKiudng res...detl ame¢s are semfaary coma mmM new T(111'A4A) 7. Fatlranape or nwersan CAchss,tlescebepadkesmstablze the n<rx wetlstl penrreter wmm:n200 inialfeel Vihe A-L HAZARDOUS WASfE W1LL SE APPROPRIATELY C:SPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORD NG TO LOCAL AND STATE THE PRO.ECT WALL BE PROTECTED BY TWO TA MAIN BMP'S.SILT FENCE AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES P16PmtY eye a K m d d schage m surface ler Tne Last 2001 neateet mus d'ed.Mhin M hears aan UWS. Attachment A oannecvn9 Wninon-m ora adnsvdtio m P-n VIF dmh has lam lY permanent)maned id all • THE SILT FENCE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL OF SITE AND MONITORED AS d-l-bpecia Slmes+ ,Ied.,-in wla rasa; tl All data nn ranag mrtaa of me letup aP«xnenl 4. DercnaIc dPedd Ange and dWU'd add-tae n comolancew Min Rdh 7035 SWPPP Site Specific Document NECESSARY INLET PROTECTION DEVICES WILL BE INSTALLED IN ALL CATCH BASINS ON THE SITE AND ANY donna d,segles Min fol calender daysal e+mm.tin,ad wanes cadet,Pmpedy edge ala caL¢nddnnin In.!area nas ALLOJNSTR ON DEBRIS AND SOLID WASTE WELL BE APPROPR 4TELY DISPOSED OF OFF S TE ACCORDING bmpaarey a pemundialy cdaedd TO LCOAL PND STATE UWS. OFF SITE THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM SITE.AS PROJECT PROGRESSES th the Genera Polltaligl PfIYMLbi1 PIaY(SWPPP) WA-NO DITCHES Or:SITE S. Deacnbe management d ponabk bikR b Pravenl tppm9 and disposal d ssnHay swedes m acco,tlanee wen Mnn R ch To comPiY with the General SYrmwaYr Permit forronYnctbn Activity ADDITIONAL I3MPS SUCH 115 EROSION CONTROL BLMIKET MAY BE tIfIUZm.-. g, DexnDe addlaowleraam pcvembn xauresma[wvl Ee irPlexrYtl acme side tlunrg mnaburndn(e9.donsnuticn 7040: Ju 3YNm la:•-wckr Fr y, /' .tint rt. 2. analetW aSWaPPaYbb Mhme anlidpabtl gwM6ua brtla laedme p+ojeclbr abawim pavenamsed wdxnt phaang.^^nxrlirrnp sol dslurbanu,vepebave buabslror:zoMalawpe g'ad,np,Sopa Maininylenadng dc.). SAMTARVANOSFFTICSERdied,tilViCES W-L BE PROVIDE?TJ WORKERS WITH PORTABLE FACILITIES MAiN!AINED AS SEEP BMR(IIIA 4 b) OTHER EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES INCLUDE Suri NOT LIMITED TO.IAINIM:ZE SITE EXPOSURE WHEN NEEDED BY THE PROMOER, Construction Activity Information Ade PadESWII POSSIBLE 6 Describe Sart preaendon and re%poae fo-tue5ng antl eeupxdorvehde mavdenallu' 3. Atbchbtlhs SWPPPasle xp mar kldudss Ou fdlPwrtp features(III A,3 b-9 rip metmanrnp 1100-root butler zone a r *V EMPLOYEES WILL BE TRAINED IN TECHYLQUES DESGNED TO MIMMZE SPILLS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT PrdjM tame: SWEEN E'LIKE V.00DS S. Hapldii.e imisdd tinkin,Odie-ft,mAppaMw A Part C3 rcgaNl Eend1 d ora foal name dad.e de, lines mtl tliredion V Ilrwbr at pre and Poticmstrucron spxmwder reduneam BMPs for Potions of me site Oral drain m yepal vadery. Project location(MIRY decal»whoacmstme5m adivay ocwrs,bclWaaddress 8avaaabY.) L-Eidaiwge crass bwktl wan ted ptna YTR IUA SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS. • Ldiand s d inpervbus sudacec and soA types. i. Describe cmUnxM aM gatpoul d vehicle and equipment wan ester antl Mn^. Pddassadaaaibe arae: 1801 NOBLE ORNE._ L«arondareas main be daWrbetl pmh 9erpau eegressirp come sb -_. ._-- - _._-._--. _._..__.._ _-_. _-_ 10. It epDbabk tlescnce aidOPnal erodon Peventlon 6A1Pa m be impiexnka a vie ane m Prokd PYnnetl hharaem areas Cryo Ta II, GOLDEN VALLEY SMa' MN 23-: 554. Laationdareasmpnasedmnstr.-n ALL CCNSTRUCTICN V541CLE5 SHALL OE WASHED OFF SITE P At sddaworders and ezabnp-da,d,vAh'nmeinkfmm ma prole.bountlann Out YAl receive sbrmwaer MINIMIZE SI TE EXPOSURE IN AREAS AD,ACENT TO FILTRATION ARFi1 VBWd,AmgkudadfappoNm,Wc Uddofpryed: 44D5F42.53-N.93D2V17,9;rW rvnuH hom the sae(AmM-able on naps wcn as USGSTSmnuta quatlranpk mapsaequiveleM)W,an-dao B. Describe ahrup ane arcpacal al-more<arW-a'- rier wslwut wzk¢wmat castes 1.-corral line ground Ma add df mI1«rim of IeriWdeAmgi idi: wters+ecervirp.undf asaoneled wpm.mnswdmn ace+ny caul cot M m me sten sneer may nnry Da�deMdred van ALL CONCRETE WASHOJT SHALL OCCUR OFF BRE. an bmw ialwkp dean dredbn aria d-da ro ma sonata ester Sediment Control Practices(IV.C) [3 CPS®Online mol OUSGS Tdpoyephic trap Mefhoasm be used brhnal9tabifixadond a'I exposed sdiareas Descnbe the memods of sediment control SNIPS to be implemented at mil see during conooction to m mimic sediment Al den wh«e consbuction wil actor: GOLDEN VALLEY im peck to surface waves,mclid ng curb and gutter systems Final Stabilization(IV.G) I . Wire smrrtaiermNWthe a sures rmdratl as tie resuhdanenvimnrnenbl artnaeabgw',Wdher required decal, Descnba memotl of final statiaet-(p.de-el wear)of alltli Hied areas Aimatam wM1«acarsbudipn YAll coca' HETINEPIN Gay.Pr haerslrawmwdthe pmjedT ❑Yes Ia N. 1. Gew'be Mdhodsbbe u¢etl b•dow gadieK Pennaler mnirpl 1 All Townships where--fid,w l pour: H yes.detrnbC mwmate xawrn care natlressed in me SWPPP.(IlI.A6.) SILT FENCE WALL BF INSTALLED AT THE OEXN NHiLL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE FINAL STABLIZATiON W LL BE ACO!APL.SHED WITH PAVEAEN7 SOD MID LANDSCAPE NATER:ALS Project abe(rMmber d acres to be dshi-it. 1 n WA 2. D-bd Mathade b be used Id mdain sa.I Sind:An: 2 Dealdro.procadu m pleang tintil amb l-kin..it Ym naeng penat tt v.nge(lied Pad IVG 16) S. IS Ore propclbwkdin ald.•st area wchmaadtlapna:xnurcs wduo be necessarym prokc[tlnnkirp wkr supply SEED ANDMU--C ASWELLASEROSIONCON'TROLBiJiNKETSWUWB TILREDASNECEBSARY UPONFr yTA6 IZATtOf1 pE5CR19ED A80VE,?HE CO:TTRACTOR AtJG OWNER SHALL'JUT!:A1-Y TRAISFER. Project type: management ernsas tlda t nMnnR-,-7050 ora 701 Y.ON. 3. pesc"Le N.dI id be u¢etl for nam do:n eld W--. THE 1PDFS PERMIT TO THE NEXT OWNERWTH DOIX/hE'rTSDESCRIBING THE NATURE OF TERMINATION ®Resiaenael ❑Gdmn«deVlndasTaed m l ❑Renarucam If yes,deeribe Ore edtlalpml xre ausm b.uced.(111/7) SEE:NET PROTECT,O!J DETAILS PROCEDURE ❑RnNenOel and maticmdmcam ❑stmt ldeHribel' WA ---- 4. pmeribe Nahodsm midm¢e vehdeln k•p almwtrud'wmh antl sbMbwr,.irp amiailka. Cundative ImpeMaus sufece: s. Does me ale discharge he a wkaraous tan luded in Main R 70500180.wTHE PRCJEtT\ALL TILIZE A ROCK CO!:SfRJCTiDN ENTRANCE bp 6b7 ❑Yea 0No Documentation of infeasibility:(If Applicable) J I'yes a Lader d approval hom Min^note Dewrtrrant d Naha Rssm+us mist ba oblarmd Omr io applaahpn b Ora Eaiangran dirrywimssWaw: 0.5 (m IMnmarWYM aPa) perms(Pill IB8and Part Ill 6)Bj 5. Olimai Mdlhods,II..Al.nle, ..ledFzetlixMmMrpr ie IN, tonperms)mbe it%alkd rokeep rumYawYTmm WT FE lnflNanon atlas when excavated nYw mgnalstabi'beWn of me mnVhW5,d '.9 a. Pod.-.-merndb� ielele suYea 0.6 as are didn"Yahsin) 7. Deasare aleduharaeYadane,"is listed Sped*adyas(di MapoCubrys)wsYeswr(sJ:phospnaus.Wrdairy. SILT FENCE TO BE!NSTAU WIMIM-01A1 ELY AFTER GRADING TO PROTECTN-TRATION AREAS Q Tdalmwawa olimpmws wnc�e 0.1 (Y as Raven YMn nolo) dasoNed Yfl atadc'mpairment7 Use me Speoal W.0 Y" Aakrs Seamn Tool a[ - _ ®Vin El No S. Deas-be ratlgdab Mused! exd'mmpacapn aM peswebp wa k 1 :h'tTmsak Z Reeewing iew[vs Hm Wp IdT 'ing LIGHT TRACKED EOIPPM8J W'L BE USED TOPSOIL WILL BES RIPPED AD ST ED O e Das are INd ed wY nave en appwed Total Mwmum Daily Lwds(TMDL)w;n an Approved Whsle Loi Al-der Tye Spada aYr! Il 5l Willem- mnarempnadway7 MYes❑rlo 7. DasPhe WRs to Preverve 50foot natu+a'o-AferbeMeen line p4ddacoa diva.,n ae andasurtxx wYrapata der O IM.^axe.vmAaia,-a4„ -va clo,rM P '.ea g.. r nedindad eWirrem mnepls A A tlY,ls iA Iiia. } /A� Womb IP Nam dwaly drag aan I� n_-.tier Hyes 11.1 li OCJBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE W.LL REINSTALLED KOrIG WETLAND.PROJECT W LL NDT DSTURB:MTii1N 207 _J e� 07010206598 BASSETT CREEK STREAM Yes^,•No Yes •rrJa a. List Ore n-ng ester me areas V the site discharging m;aM 1M Mkdtdn;,)aenm,d in the TMDL. FEET OF WF7LANO Q J 27-0W601 SWEENEY IAKE UUIE Yn No Vn NO SWEENEY LAKE,ENTIRE SITE,PHOSPHORUS 9, peac'�M aan burse oftedimdmat�m rnmmdumwakg,pdrAniA Rom,a'a,ls stc)a.Pe,lVC,ciw-P«cod a� > O Yn ON. Yn oNd b cat tla BMP!antl any doer apecds mnstrucnm stP.mwkr re:ateC imp!exmaWn ati,ams dentinetl in line lZ D WALU YY.. M Np Yn No 9. MPrdl.mdp mal ad n'1 1 mPo ry--n been dueml0 a more ac dit Iteen ma mmmpn a S anas �/� W S Cs rani J act Nola ,b ca w¢b.h< a L1"peter ad Hakra 4wrcn roNat PONDS,B.:MP MANHOLES,RAIN WATER GARDENS 1.: amore a me aRe rs cath Id d ped -,pa rJ-.0 ❑Yea®N � Q V .war MYmW rnq Pia-ra+hEl-v awwtdls;PAaPAprua knpdh ei'-o adcv If me see Ras n mp Ad 119 do IWil one kite d led iaired ester ora mwk,a taxa b the Lwler b0 no yea-ft I.phach p4,)s^owt^,II- .Wan WI:be des .,,i-ired anacepNance•d[h Part Ili C d The J .a pec.Of GNY,rmparrawf ing.red If apedhc BMh der const aAm ora aeMAied n me TMDLm , .arta tans WN Append,AIC 1 C 2 C 38(C d�tron O stream))mad M added b me SWPPP antl mpkxMed.(111 A])The eddi5ona BMPs wN app1Y m lhoss polron d the N`A C7 pmjecT and area m ora d are rlenNr-e tlecnape twints. CUA W lop - s6aes7-Ica ms1�m-ua«M6K)-Ica AwYbk YdrmaM hrmaY www.pcasule.mn.m des-z9¢.e3oo amts?-lex mest.uz-suxasa.as]�xar AwLadenakm.d.eromau www.P:atu`a...n ear xvs.em -11- mast zed sv:or mu4s7Mu .Ya.aekn a..e wr«mau www.pca¢merm.as esf z9e.e3m ex as>.Jssa nresl.w.svx«ao6s7M6t Awilw<In a:remedw Carmol a-lif .'NI-IININ, a N1�e laf> wpmrm2A1.41J1p9481 ib/fur A%a).fl wRetrml fl NU/09 N/rfI13 Loge Spr: wartm2-p i/r31m691gIU PW 7of7 UJ W LU W J Dares of Ponet-flon(BMyy deaeaba whramnmc' SEE SHEET SWI.2 Dewatering and Basin Draining IV.D m eon ddMty acus.Mduda address levakble) g g( ) C--di.man dale: _fillrAiS EsYwbd mmplaim tlaY:_Sn20181. W.'Unepmed nratle Crindenrpa Msr mains,? Ovdc ON, �1 O 9. IMnnty edjxant Wblk cabers vAerc me MmnesW Deparbrcd d Natural Resouoes(DNR)has detlaree'Mprk n war Htlesdte measures ro M uaetl tabeaVi�spou d Wrdtl a aepixm!aoen w'r era memoi m prevent nasion or e e a _ r reffiktidW during fah ate-dg timeMmes scour V mscharg,pointy(see Part iV D One wmA). O General Construction Project InformationW WA w Descnba Me din4uc9nn ad"(wnal IN be Will,gvraral 8mafna,ale): THE PROJECT WILL BE THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOM E AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE N EW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH A SHARED Selection of a Permanent Stormwater Management System(f 11.D.) 2. W'I the pq ecl include used M1.+,era la badrwsh Yre^sr7 ❑Yes ON, �/� DRIVEWAY. 1. WII the prolaat dank a newcdmulaars impwlwa addam greater IMn or equal m one are? ❑Yn®No II yea deaPee naw Codi bar+.wasn ester cad.M xnaged on IM sae or Proprl Csposed(see Pan III G 3 pl me perm[; {/ Decide.del typos meld et Me Pnjad THE EXIST WG SOILS AT THE SITE ARE PRMAR ILY LOAM a CLAY LOAM H yes,A water qualAyv*-done Mich id-tiff from me wxlaMe Mw krpi-ei surfaces must bend fined on s^.e lade N HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP-C'PER THE VIES SOIL SURVEY. Part IIID of rhe x"dU mmugh W-11mbvn unless pohmaed d.e b one a Om nim-in Part IIID!j II4iitvatidd•p.h,dled war di,drier m.mM d one dk,me raaudmn(e.p,a.l atan system,wet ea dimedalan bean ragidml pmdng a eg-Iiint melee Additional BMPs for Special Waters and Discharges to Wetlands(Appendix A,Parts C and D) Site Locationmap-Ands maps N.s.Geobplc Wrvey T.5 Mrx3[e quadmgl<,NarlorulWala,a lnvedory maps or 1. spacial WeYn.Dass ypv proved tla iurge msPeca'wles� ❑Yes®'.d (~j ",maerlq showingthe Iwatiomand typed a0 rewlNng waters,Imiklmn,walmtls,drainage deches,sfamwem,pones or 2. DeaaibeYddn rremM will M dada mbeat rump hom me newimpaYmus surfaces creme byline PmldIt 011 DI: 2. Il proxrMtymbedrmk or roatl aorccm vinare tic lacks n9nl cr wY pecludes the nsWta:imdarrydtM wrxnmr W ball Aetc.that will move mmff iron rhe pOjecL Use andle,al-l-pDie daacemof Ii-nd Ostanceminewd-dy Wdsedimentatbn basin stprmwrer managemM prvtias men gnler Veabrartzucnug•asudsvnks smaller pdnds.apra chanarsarepuiretl 1rrF.lrati.FlHu1. prip+m dreharge m vu•raw xelers Decttbe what Omer veanre t p v.aetl 71 Regional pantic ry.A a Combnabon of practices L A` - t 3. DescYM aor+w and sediment contmic der exposed wN tress cam -0-posime stupe m a spec:.:wkrs,and! HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PUN, IxluaeIII wlh im ientl tlssign inbrmaEm fa me xmM aMeded.Sn Pad Ill.Dame perrtk!la spedAc requi:exnY YmpPrary wtlmem bavmia crass OW CunM1ve or nose acre debrbed none nitre SPECIFICATION,BYM ORUNDPORT WAS -- associated cairn each xmotl. WA PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT WA SUPERVISION AND THAT I AMA DULY 4. Dex:•M me undaWNetl MHer zonek Mused;nd Lau man lNJ lr:eN leer M1om the sPa:e: N. LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WA UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF .. 3. If a des nd tenable b meet me treaomnl+equiexnl hsr mecadet qually volume MunM wNy Ths can abtle Crokmrl m WA MI ESOTA. YN ( bedmtico•rwd projects vAere me Lack VrgMVwYP+,duan the rrimlbibndant perrmnent starmeater managexr[ 3. Describe h-th,Penilient ter,AnagewMsyale wgi erste mat line p,,,0 Wv proied nJ^o.'I ray and Yd✓a ' Puadr DeeP.M whd dher rearmed.wcM1 n grassecawaks,artubr pontla a ynt chambers,call be irry:emeraea b hom ere 1,aM 2-year'.4F.our prttpiYiion everr6 rens-rrs me sax. Deal runoff poor m diccnape m soda¢esters.(ill C) ).AIA SITE_ - _ ngA 6. De«r:ne nowme pemanem stomm.Iacer manapexnr system wa mtnonie any i,,rnsenme kmperamrc dvod weam Ma ewRPavek 4. For pr)acts mal dacha,,,to(rout sbeana.indud.V bib-in m tmd anama,idenay memod d Indorporaan,tann,ame re rrerring esters rewlb-q.n me 1,and hyea,L-hour praplaron evems DATE 148-1$ LICENSE NO.44263 - - mnedle into Ina pamenenl aorrtwwTer menagexMsystem WA j;; .• WA 7. Wenanes co,syo.ir proledamcnafge am+mwkr'w:m ma PderNal nora.,nrxam ed.erse:npacdemaYed:to;ep.' ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY omnersbn d a nam al welbrrd m a#ommakr pond)? Ely. ON. If Yes dovbe me csallaM megaton aegwnce mar vnR be rdlkaetl it acwrdvnce wine Part O d ApnMu A DATE DESCRIPTION Erosion Prevention Practices(IV.B) wa 9-.15-14 PRELIM PLATIPUD SUBMITTAL DeacdM the types d tampdnysmsbn p-naon BHP.aspedted to be lmpmenanel on In,.see dump-land npn: 12-2314 FINK PUTIPUD SUBMITTAL ' 1. DeecnM conshudkn phasing,vegetawe baler WM,ndirodelabpe gradin 1-&15 Ft ALPUTPUD RESUBMITTAL - � aa+a Wa+cmaadion pin ticesm minmize Inspections and Maintenance(IV.E) eroaRn.Dabeate areae nd to be disturbed/e.9.,scam saga,stakes signs,ale fern.,,em.)More work begins. DescnM ppretlurea to icWnelY impel me cmarumpn and -. - - SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL LOCATIDNSOF THE SITE. • 2. OesPTiM McObtls d kmpdradl stablidn k antl sol stm les e h dnugp ted ifers,iddel-blanks em Onu every seven lit Mys tlurmg active cmr.•wlbn and. . Y ,mi Lap (,.,mulches, Y ta. ) NAmk 24 moors aster a rbMall even[„eater man 0 5 eK.hn n 2d Mun.and wthin seven(r1 tlaYs aper treat _ - TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION W LL BE SEED AND MULCH AND EROSION BLANKETS WHERE REIXPRED. mapeNon moa anode kabi zed.eta.ration.dY.ntipn and sediment control BMP%and rdMa1.zeas WITH PERMANENT COVER BEING EITHER SOD OR LANDSCAPE FEATURES. INSPECTOR WILL FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND FILL OUT'ATTACHMENT 8-CONSTRUCTION 3. Deem.Meaads d diselpabng va"abng smmam,-mange channels and at channel-te(e.g.chaps dame STORMWATIBR INSPECTION CHECKUST.' sedixnt baps,nP rip.em). SOD WU.BE UTILIZED ALONG CHANNELS AND RIP RAP AT CHANNEL OUTLETS Pollution Prevendon Management Measures(IV.F) 4. OvacnM Memodem Mused Yr sbbd¢inion ddad andswbwead pereatns(NPls Hut m,lda,hYdnulb and Yalurmrs. 1. DerriM padcm der aWrage dbuairg ppduds ryrhapdenbalbinch pdufantam mnirtae aapowremaorn•w . REVISION SUMMARY h,ti-Meedlc vremtameytabrsdilstati.atbn xmMa fix., d1l.iran...dap-swat.) DATE DESCRIPTION FINAL STABILIZATION OF SAKES WILL BE SOD. KL BUILDING PIYDDUCTS WLL BE SEALED AJD STORED I!J A MANNER TO MINIMIZE EXPCSURE. 3. Oev the Memods m be used M enepY diwipabm al qpe aWaY(e 9 dp rip Wlash Pads gab-etc 2. Des be aapi¢s der abuge d pestcdw.herbiddes mu tittles,(erNuers,4eabrcnl cliamwl,vntl iand¢ape maemk RIP RAP WLL BE UTILIZED AT PIPE OUTLETS. ALL LANDSCAPE TREATMENT CHEMICALS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED iN A MANNER TO MNIVEZE EXPOSURE lewv'Pca.aaY.mn.u 691-x9ab30. 1p065J-3W m6512.2 si-r-IiiI.- Avallablen MtemaM It- carr-itae.rm.ua de11-296 3 • bW- maSr--tieLtl- l-slee AweaNe Lai Y[emarlve fama[s w,w.pca.Aa[e.mn.us . b51--300 • =6573464 TTY bat 16t51I3 or WbS]YH wai;rilebalkxdnf 4 aw•Nmhlt•i113/bl Fa/tfN] ➢oge]o/] wgarrmi-1t I/1J/dib/N/IJ ➢.yea./] wgdrrmi-ri i/OIW as/a/D Pcge boll STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)ATTACHMENTS SW1 .3 ATTACHMENT B:SWPPP INSPECTION FORM ATTACHMENT C:MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM ividslte GR O V P 4931 W.35TH ST.SUITE 2o0 ST LOUIS PARK_MN 55416 CMISheGroup com Marl Pavek Pal Sarver 9 Does to 6mr^IIa!� �o�nlalled '+_. _ _... _.... ❑ ❑ O 763-213-3944 952-2562003 4'Aa Isyasbt be ry ProroM'aho«d ofl - __. _ ❑ ❑_ ❑. 5 1.6wemPreeewash- mobtel oneAl' ❑ 171 ❑ ATTACHMENT 6 .-conc,ek waahgut area nuked wag•cion, ❑ n ❑ Comments: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE ATTACHMENT B: be Construction Stormwater 1 Were any d-1 r,.seen dung Mia mspecton,sediment.w•kr or cth. e? ❑Yes 0 N a eastoAll once aterr to deter inethatnand treatment basins must t Inspected a[least once a year to determine that basin retention and treatment Inspection Checklist Ilya pate the exact ksabon of I�e In nkafdmhage Photaq.,mexse,'ge ant tleacnbetedacnarpe(oI odo characteristics are ade Nate.Astor+a treatment basin will be considered foam o4 aheen.,dc)tlawwN¢be removeNHowtla th•d.schargehappen�How much was dschargetl'a Mow wl'nbe R g Construction Stormwater Pro ram stopped,arm hmvbng w11 talebsbP?IS Me tllscharge g0ir,pr ta-aQacent site,writhe dkcrargea«diment della?f inadequate if sediment has decreased the wet storage volume by 50 percent or 9 yes.w.A fie della kw—,d varhn]days? ccc ora c-s-,•.n;-•<,.:.� dry storage volume by 25 percent of its original design volume.Based on this inspection,if a storrowwer basin requires sediment cleanout,the basin will be Sar.TN:nsp.sbe0)C dress oaf adbezz.A ienir(or in.—)N led P WN 1,201 g•ETv airpleti Sya•,ct-Od doiur restored to its original design contours and vegetated state within one year of sypem(NPOES/SDS)Conprucdon 8tamwe[w Ptamit(Peroral kw•d m Mgu51,2019.The complRion or This Ph•ctlip does oat the inspection date. 9,v.M«tnar.t P.rmt reglircmeMs ars k mriplkrice;6.,ue rcmansitiay ono.P.m,esa,)b rew.,a vnar:mtl rn• P°""f r°oak^"w^+a. a Wnly ort po,mmater ranaGement svpem be a.¢ed.n Mz proied«requue0 and in aoxrdvrce. Part-�l.Ooflhe 2. All outlet structures,culverts,outfall structures and other Facility Information stormwaler facilities fes which maintenance requirements are not otherwise Sir-- specified herein must be inspected in the spring,summer and fall of each year. Fact"edm•.a Pant nurnt,.r: Within 30 days of the Inspection date,all accumulated sediment and debris e. 1f any de-7 vii,`81AF ons-e? ❑re,[)No must be removed such that each stormwater facilityoperates as designed and e4y. sae: zip coact: .rye,,w,erc�what aMP a bewq eaed�Now macn water„ne.rq dewacerea�1,the w,ta,dear vinare a Ine water tang kept P 9 discharged m? permitted.Contributing drainage areas must be kept clear of litter and Inspection Information vegetative debris,inflow pipes and overflow spillways kept clear,inlet areas kept clean,and undesirable vegetation removed.Erosion impairing the function or Yrcpeaornamr. Pro"°nnnba: integrity of the facilities,If any,will be corrected,and any structural damage �'fn'n yi: T..: ❑an❑ao 10 k a mpyM the SWPPP bcat•d on ma mnnacda,a4e'+ ❑y«❑No impairing or threatening to impair the function of the facilities must be repaired. k•b Map.mor c•dlf d in«drrant.ra roipn oonbol end”[k doevnwnkd k 1M Slonm abr PoluSon PrsmOon Pkn 11.Has tle SWPPP been followed and mpbmeMed oa cde'+ ❑Yes O No (SNPFP)? OY«❑NO klMsin,e ooroomi•winni—nm.—innt. 121,,w*rrwnb•on basin required br In.,roed as speafied m me petmm 0 Y 0 N 3. Volume control facilities and contributing drainage areas must be Rrnkb emount0f applinbl•): Nyes,arc they rmrdabetl as Wedried in the permit? El Y.0 N inspected everythree months during the operational period(between spring Is sR•witldn one genal mde dspoda or knpaketl wareyp ❑Yes ON. 13.Is tll•topsod an[M1k pmpafzng preservetl'+ ❑Yes ON, snowmelt and first substantial snowfall)and monitored after rainfall events of i Q Iry.A renew App•nd.A utl M.r.pplk.N.Pam,a r&wwwva If yea eiiPkm how bre toPsal is being Preserved.If not outrun wy it was lel«Sbk. inch or more to ensure that the contributing drainage area is clear of litter and z debris,inflow pipes and overflow spillways are clear,Inlet areas are clean, O Note:SNA is seleded al anytime,speafy wiry In the oars ent area torthat vection. undesirable vegetation is removed and there is no erosion impairing or O W threatening to impair the function of a facility. If sediment has accumulated in a ti 14 Ara ay inFarabm sys+ems marked to avow gorrpacdon? ❑ves[]No Erosion Control Requirement(Pad Iv.e) infiltration feature,within 30 days of inspection deposited sediments must be road iMilbatron areas love PreevatmeM devus? ❑ves pNo removed,the Infiltration capacity of the underlying soils must be restored.and Q i ves No NA 15.D•acnernknce peon of s d no—,np! noted during W.n rsenan,requaad oo,r—e a—.and recommences aa:e or O t. snI rkbamsm whore no conpMa+an set tofu ? Ie•N• opmpl.6on of mw.cr e.aons any surface disturbance must be stabilized.Inspection must ensure that N Has lh•nrtlto tligudap a sb.m lMnrMree? sediment traps and foreba are trapping W W IX ys Aping sediment and that more than 50 percent of the storage volume remains,the contributing drainage area is stable �/ p /�► dbfi Yebgu•d 200'bele hon dot of dschu.wehk 24 hour? ct rrxdsh r S M 'ar•BMPa nskped kYsbutl•k? wawaca.a,r.ml.aa 65-6100 sots$7-1sf4 t1Yf11-IAiflt.r 117.3SN Mlik MpkaatM fmm.b vww,.p[iaat<.mn.w est-39001DJ IO165)LM TTT Nf- L Lt-'l))Im tlO..,f.JIa4 . AvakMek.tamatF+e rumab J W U W-abmNf J/.ne Poae1o/1 ap,rrmll6 )/a/r4 Pogelo(4 � > W W LLJ � W Z _ Dooip_egq have energytl 16 CoPropxsE amendmeMa to teu SNPPCorn.— m 2L (i.e..no erosion is observed),and Inlets and outlet/overflow spillways are in W O r good conditions with no erosion.Maintenance techniques used must protect W D the infiltration capacity of the practice by limiting soil compaction to the n aa,an.aareasm vine concern greatest extent possible(e.g.,by using low-impact earth-moving equipment). //^^ v, Sediment Con"[Requirement(Part IVC) Yes I No NA 18 A idieonal commenk 1. PanrMxaxtrd,-10 10 itow,radieM melds? n n r7lF 2 Pa' rwmm:trenched in where 'ale? I0 ro W 3. 50 Fool-narpal bulr•r mahtaind aroura all sedan weterYp I 1 11 It BNo have retluMaM seaeneM nnbdsb«nlmhMtl] 1771 1771 11' d , _4. Dlsebzuras: IHEREBV CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. 5. VeNck bado_g Best Many _t Progta(s�BM�at til silo eats?,_-. _❑_ __D. Q_. Aller tliscover,me SPEGFICATON,OR REPORT WAS _...__ _._.._ Y LarmM1 requoes nanY Mthe dalcierc,es MN noY be lountla:hkeMekkl6e cgnMed vAhina PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY ._ Atlbackedsed_rn(eme_vr_d volin_ahowl+__.___ Q__. speced P•rmd orbene.S«permt!or rma dekfa ]. Are eF'6babon poked nd�dmd m avoid octan? TNs irapec5on cM1e'cllbt k an option for small mns9uMwn sees large conshfedon sites ora linear project,requxe more exlenswdmore krcatm spectre mcpedan requhemenYs LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 6 An as rditra5m areas clad vin a retreabrent tlmks+ The Pertnaee(s)iyarc resporedefa me inapedbn and mantanann or IemPorary and pemunent voter qua1M UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF q. Do as 'bs hale dmefer sonhol? management BMP's as wea as erosion F—ino i ora swi—fit control BMPs undi another Penneee has M»ainM MINNESOTA. eroGe under Uuz Pemxt amrdmq to Parl II d 5.,a Me prop t has undergone Fnal SIsW—n ora a Nola or Cuomsrdc Tern eon nos bean submrtletl to Na MPCA Ma[hew R.Pavek GATE 1-8-15 LICENSE NO.44263 ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY Maintenanca•Erosion and Sediment Control BMPS(Part IV E.) DATE DESCRIPTION 9.15-74 PRELIM.PLATMUDSUBMITTAL YsNe NA 12-2314 FINAL PLATIPUD SUBMITTAL _❑. 1-6-15 FINAL PLAT PDD RESUBMITTAL 1__Ar—e a1F wuslyshd&ed iMan�g096 groom wveR _.__.._. � _..❑._ _Q_. 2. M dlaT bn observed+ 9. Pakxkr CaMml-HassedimeM rcaehetl o«MM1M bei MMNe de+ios? 4. Markt okcGon tlevc«rrurdair,etl ora turcponi Canmems. I. I. Other REVISION SUMMARY Y« No NA DATE DESCRIPTION 1. Pro aO rrebrkk the nn leach polWnk undar oweri ❑ I n ❑ i_Hesasvubesn raprcleE bomik NaMOus rtrhriaki.__ _—.._—._—___O.__i_Q.��_ 2 nrwv.priaYe.an.a '. 65f.t%1pp • 100{sT.]aU Tttest}R-ss'¢xaWisT.]Ie4 1w11aN<1d Ynmarlve lum.Y wwrpu.atpearn.ua • 65f-2Mibq aWas1-1164 M6N.3ab5Di er lOo35T. 11YN . AnN.Ne M Nampive/armab agsnmtJf.I/.fu ANe10/4 w4aum2 3/a/u Popeao/4 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)ATTACHMENTS SW 1 .4 ORDINANCE NO. 544, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Approval of Final Plan of Development Sweeney Lake Woods P.U.D. No. 120 The Lecy Group, Applicant The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows: Section 1. City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" is amended in Section 11.10, Subd. 2, and Section 11.55, by approving the Final Plan of Development for Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) 120 thereby allowing the applicant to construct three new single family homes on the property located at 1801 Noble Drive. This PUD is subject to all of the terms of the permit to be issued including, but not limited to the following specific conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Civil Site Group, received January 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire Department to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 2, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated February 5, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 4. The riparian buffer strip along the delineated wetland shall be that width which is required by City Code. 5. No additional driveway or utility access shall be allowed along the private driveway without a PUD Amendment. 6. A park dedication fee of $13,920, or 2% of the land value with credit for one unit, shall be paid before release of the Final Plat. 7. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 120" in its title. 8. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. In addition the Council makes the following findings pursuant to City Code Section 11.55, Subd. 6(Q): 1. The PUD plan is tailored to the specific characteristics of the site and achieves a higher quality of site planning and design than generally expected under conventional provisions of the ordinance. 2. The PUD plan preserves and protects substantial desirable portions of the site's characteristics, open space and sensitive environmental features including steep slopes, trees, scenic views, creeks, wetlands and open waters. 3. The PUD plan includes efficient and effective use (which includes preservation) of the land. 4. The PUD plan results in development compatible with adjacent uses and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and redevelopment plans and goals. 5. The PUD plan is consistent with preserving and improving the general health, safety and general welfare of the people of the City. 6. The PUD plan meets the PUD Intent and Purpose provision and all other PUD ordinance provisions Section 2. The tract of land affected by this ordinance is legally described as follows: Tract E and Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1104, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Sec. 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" 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. Adopted by the City Council this 3rd day of March, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk r ity of Itoii)J,ii IIIIIIIIIIIIIII w V 1q� ^' 1111111111111111111111111111 I °� 4 �� IIIII � IIIII01�� 9ioou 4 A 111, " W,.. : Public Works Department 763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax) 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Executive Summary For Action Golden Valley City Council Meeting March 3, 2015 Agenda Item 6. A. Proposed Code Amendment to Section 4.31: Stormwater Management Prepared By Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Summary The City has a stormwater management ordinance that was last updated in 2010. The ordinance is the regulatory mechanism that helps the City to enforce its stormwater requirements to ensure the protection of its water resources. The ordinance is part of the City's overall stormwater management program that is required under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). In response to changing federal regulations, the MPCA reissued its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit in 2013. The City applied for and received permit coverage under the new permit in April 2014. As part of the MPCA approval, the City is required to make updates to its stormwater management program, including its Stormwater Management Ordinance, within 12 months of permit coverage. Updates to the City's Stormwater Management Ordinance are based upon Environmental Protection Agency rules, the MPCA Construction Permit, MPCA MS4 Permit language and guidance documents, guidance from the Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition, and the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) draft watershed management plan. The City Attorney has also reviewed the ordinance. Major revisions to the ordinance include the following: 1. Updating and clarifying the project thresholds which trigger permit applications and project reviews by the City and its partner agencies. 2. Construction site stormwater runoff controls -adding recommended language and references to the MPCA Construction Permit for sites equal to or greater than one acre. 3. Post-construction stormwater management -adding recommended language from the MPCA MS4 Permit and BCWMC watershed plan for sites equal to or greater than one acre. This includes requirements for new development, redevelopment, and linear projects, and limitations and exceptions to the requirement. 4. General Performance Standards - Buffers -adding the new BCWMC buffer requirements for consistency with the watershed plan. 5. Illegal Discharge - adding recommended language regarding the prohibition of illegal discharges into the City's stormwater system and surface waters, including the City's authority to inspect private properties to ensure compliance. Attachment • Proposed City Code Amending Section 4.31: Stormwater Management -strikeout version (19 pages) • Proposed Ordinance#545 Amending Section 4.31: Stormwater Management (14 pages) Recommended Action Motion to adopt Ordinance #545, Amending Section 4.31: Stormwater Management of the City Code upon first consideration. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Subdivision 1. Statutory Authorization and Purpose A. Statutory Authorization. This Section is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 462; Minnesota Rules, Parts 6120.2500- 6120.3900, Minnesota Rules Chapters 8410, 8420 and 7050.0210. B. Findings. The City of Golden Valley finds that uncontrolled Stormwater runoff and construction Site Erosion from land Development and Land Disturbing Activities can have significant adverse impacts upon local and regional water resources, diminishing the quality of public health, safety, public and private property and natural resources of the community. C. Purpose. The general purpose of this Section is to establish regulatory requirements for land Development and Land Disturbing Activities aimed at minimizing the threats to public health, safety, public and private property and natural resources within the community resulting from construction Site Erosion, and post-construction Stormwater runoff and 1 Illicit Connections. D. This ordinance is intended to meet the current construction site erosion and sediment control and post-construction stormwater management regulatory requirements for construction activity and small construction activity (NPDES Permit) as defined in 40 CFR pt. 122.26(b)(14)(x) and (b)(15), respectively. E. This ordinance is intended to meet the Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) developed under Minnesota Statutes 2009, Section 115.03, subdivision 5c. Subdivision 2. Definitions and General Provision A. Definitions. The following terms are defined for purposes of this section as set forth below. Terms not defined in this section shall have the meaning customarily assigned to them as a matter of general usage. For the purposes of this section, the words "must" and "shall" are mandatory and not permissive. 1. Administrator: The individual responsible for overseeing the requirements of the City Code for purposes of this section of this code; the Administrator shall be the City Engineer or his/her designee. 2. Alteration: Any change or modification of land, water, vegetation or existing structures. 3. Applicant: A Permittee, or any person or entity that applies for any Permit for a project that includes a Land Disturbing Activity. Applicant also means that person's agents, employees, and others acting under that person's direction. 4. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission or BCWMC: The watershed management organization established by a joint powers agreement between nine (9) member cities including the City of Golden Valley. The BCWMC is responsible for managing water resources within the forty (40) square mile Bassett Creek watershed. Most of the City of Golden Valley is located within the Bassett Creek watershed. 5. Best Management Practices or BMPs: Erosion and Sediment Control and water quality management practices that are the most effective and practicable means of controlling, preventing, and minimizing degradation of Surface Water, including construction-phasing, minimizing the length of time Soil areas are exposed, prohibitions, and other management practices published by state or designated areawide planning agencies. Examples of BMPs can be found in City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 1 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2000, Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual, Metropolitan Council 2001, State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual, MPCA 2005, Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1992, and Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Minnesota Department of Transportation 201302, as these documents may be amended from time to time. 6. Calculated High Water Level: The peak elevation calculated for a one hundred (100)-year precipitation or snowmelt runoff event. 7. Development: The construction, installation or Alteration of any structure; the extraction, filling, clearing or other Alteration of land or vegetation; the change of cross section of any water body or watercourse; the subdivision of land pursuant to the City Code. 8. Earth Material: Any rock, natural Soil or fill or combination thereof 9. Erosion: The wearing away of Soil by rainfall, Surface Water runoff, wind, or ice movement. 10. Erosion Control: Methods employed to prevent Erosion. Examples include Soil stabilization practices, horizontal slope Grading, temporary or Permanent Cover, and construction phasing. 11. Final Stabilization: The establishment of Permanent Cover on the entire Site. 12. Floodplain: Those areas within the City which include the beds proper and the areas adjoining Bassett Creek or its tributaries, which have been, or hereafter may be, covered by a Regional Flood. 13. Grade: The vertical location of the ground surface. 14. Grading: Any Land Disturbance or landfill, or combination thereof 15. Hazardous Materials. Any material, including any substance, waste, or combination thereof, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics may cause, or significantly contribute to, a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, property, or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. 15.16. Illicit Connections: An illicit connection is defined as either of the following: a. Any drain or conveyance, whether on the surface or subsurface, which allows an illegal discharge to enter the storm drain system, including but not limited to any conveyance which allows any non-Stormwater discharge including sewage, process wastewater, and wash water to enter the storm drain system and any connections to the storm drain system from indoor drains and sinks, except discharges from sump pits, regardless of whether said drain or connection had been previously allowed, permitted, or approved by an authorized enforcement agency; or b. Any drain or conveyance connected from a residential, commercial or industrial land use to the storm drain system, which has not been documented in plans, maps, or equivalent records and approved by an authorized enforcement agency. 16.17. Land Disturbance or Land-Disturbing Activities: Any land change that may result in Soil Erosion from water or wind and the movement of Sediments into or upon waters or lands. This may include, but is not limited to, a disturbance that results in a City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 2 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE change in topography, or disturbance of the existing Soil cover (both vegetative and non-vegetative). Land-Disturbing Activities include clearing and grubbing, Grading, excavating, transporting Earth Material and filling of land for all new construction and redevelopment. Activities that do not meet the thresholds for projects identified in Subdivision 4(A) are not considered Land-Disturbing activities. 17.18. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District or MCWD: The MCWD issues Permits for Erosion Control and Stormwater management in a small area of the City south of Interstate 394 and east of Highway 100. 18.19. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System or NPDES Program: The program for issuing, modifying, revoking, reissuing, terminating, monitoring, and enforcing Permits under the Clean Water Act, Sections 301,318, 402, and 405 and United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 33, Sections 1317, 1328, 1342, and 1345. 19.20. Owner: Includes fee owner, contract purchaser, and lessee for whom construction is being undertaken. 20.21. Permanent Cover: Final Stabilization. Examples include grass, native vegetation, landscape rock, mulch, asphalt, and concrete. 21.22. Permit: An official document or certificate issued by the City of Golden Valley authorizing performance of a specified activity. 22.23. Permittee: An Applicant or any person or entity who signs the application submitted to the City and is responsible for compliance with its terms and conditions. 24. Regional Flood: A flood which is representative of large floods known to have occurred generally in Minnesota, and reasonably characteristic of what can be expected to occur on an average frequency in the magnitude of the one hundred 1 (100)-year recurrence interval. 23.25. Redevelopment: For the purposes of determining post-construction stormwater management requirements, any construction activity where, prior to the start of construction, the areas to be disturbed have 15 percent or more of existing impervious surface(s). 24.26. Sediment: The product of an Erosion process; solid material both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, is being transported, or has been moved by water, air, or ice, and has come to rest on the earth's surface either above or below water level. 25.27. Sediment Control: Methods employed to prevent Sediment from leaving the Site. Sediment Control practices include silt fences, Sediment traps, earth dikes, drainage swales, check dams, subsurface drainpipe slope drains, storm drain inlet protection, and temporary or permanent sedimentation basins. 26.28. Site: A parcel or parcels of real property owned by one (1) or more than one (1) person, which is being or is capable of being developed as a single project. 27.29. Soil: The unconsolidated mineral and organic mineral material on the immediate surface of the earth. 2-8,30. Stabilized: The exposed ground surface has been covered by staked sod, riprap, wood fiber blanket, or other material, which prevents Erosion from occurring. Ground surface which has been seeded is not Stabilized. 29.31. Stormwater: Precipitation runoff, Stormwater runoff, snowmelt runoff, and any other surface runoff and drainage. Stormwater does not include construction Site dewatering and Sump Discharge. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 30.32. Stormwater Management Facilities: Structural and non-structural components of the Stormwater Management System associated with the quality and quantity of Stormwater runoff 31.33. Stormwater Management Plan: A plan which describes how Stormwater runoff and associated water quantity and water quality impacts resulting from the proposed Development project will be controlled and managed. 32.34. Stormwater Management System: Public and/or private systems of collecting, conveying, storing and treating Stormwater runoff 33.35. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan or SWPPP: A plan for Stormwater discharge that includes Erosion prevention measures and Sediment Controls that, when implemented, will decrease Soil Erosion on a parcel of land and decrease off site nonpoint pollution. 34.36. Sump Discharge: Water that has been filtered through the ground or Soil layers resulting in clear water. Sump Discharge is not considered Stormwater. 35.37. Surface Waters: All streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, Wetlands, reservoirs, springs, rivers, drainage systems, waterways, and watercourses, whether natural or artificial, public or private. 36.38. Temporary Erosion Protection: Methods employed to prevent Erosion before Final Stabilization. Examples include; Erosion netting, wood fiber blanket, wood chips and silt fence. 37.39. Wetlands: Wetlands are defined in Minn. R. 7055.0130, Subd. F and includes those areas that are inundated or saturated by Surface Water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated Soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. B. Responsibility. Neither the issuance of a Stormwater Management Permit nor compliance with its conditions or the provisions of this Section, shall relieve any person from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for damages to persons or properties, nor shall the issuance of any Permit hereunder serve to impose any liability on the municipality or its officers or employees for injury or damage to persons or property. A Permit issued pursuant to this Section shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility of complying with any other requirements established by law, regulation or ordinance. C. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not the intention of this Section to repeal or abrogate any existing Grading, drainage and Erosion Control or Stormwater management policies or Permits issued under pre-existing Section 4.31, which Permits shall continue in full force and effect; however, where this section imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this section shall prevail. D. Compatibility and Compliance with other Regulations. This Section is not intended to modify or repeal any other ordinance, rule, regulation or other provision of law. The requirements of this Section are in addition to the requirements of any other ordinance, rule, regulation or other provision of law, and where any provision of this Section imposes restrictions different from those imposed by any other ordinance, rule, regulation or other provision of law, whichever provision is more restrictive or imposes higher protective standards shall control. E. Application to all Water Entering System. This Section shall apply to all water entering the City's Stormwater Management System from any land within the City. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE F. Responsibility for Administration and Waivers. The Administrator shall administer, implement, and enforce the provisions of this Section. Any powers granted or duties imposed upon the Administrator by this Section may be delegated to persons or entities acting in the interest of the City. The Administrator may waive any submittal or administrative requirement that will not adversely affect achievement of the purpose, goals and performance standards of this Section. Subdivision 3. Permit Authority for Land-Disturbing Activities A. City of Golden Valley. The City of Golden Valley is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities listed in Subdivision 4(A) within the boundaries of the BCWMC and the MCWD. The City may issue a Stormwater Management Permit approving Land- Disturbing Activities in these areas. B. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC). Although the BCWMC is not a permitting authority, it has the authority to review and approve projects that disturb an area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more or will result in more than two hundred (200) cubic yards of cut or fill, and projects listed in the BCWMC document "Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals." Such projects must comply with BCWMC guidelines, policies, standards and requirements. The BCWMC will review the Applicant's submittal only after the project has received preliminary review by the City indicating general compliance with existing local watershed management plans. C. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The MCWD is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities in excess of five thousand (5,000) square feet or fifty (50) cubic yards within the MCWD boundaries. In addition, projects meeting criteria listed in the MCWD regulatory rules may also be subject to review and permitting. Where required, the MCWD Permit is in addition to a Permit required by the City of Golden Valley. D. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The MPCA is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities requiring an NPDES Permit for construction activity, including the requirements for developing and implementing a SWPPP. The NPDES Permit is required for construction activity that results in land disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre, or a common plan of development or sale that disturbs greater than one acre, as defined in the NPDES Permit. Where required, the NPDES Permit is in addition to Permits required by the City of Golden Valley and the MCWD. Subdivision 4. Stormwater Management Permit A. Activities Requiring a City of Golden Valley Stormwater Management Permit. 1. Land-Disturbing Activities which remove Soils or vegetation, including but not limited to clearing, digging, dredging, draining or filling. Any of the following activities shall require a Stormwater Management Permit: a. Any activities which disturb Soils or vegetation in excess of four-thousand (4,000) square feet. b. Any activity that would involve construction, installation, demolition, modification or expansion of a building foundation wall. c. Construction or demolition of a swimming pool. d. Construction or demolition of a retaining wall of sufficient height to require a building Permit. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 5 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE e. Any Land-Disturbing Activities within City right-of-way that have a duration greater than seventy-two (72)hours and are not covered by a right-of-way excavation, utility, or plumbing Permit. f Cutting, filling, disposal, hauling in, or storage of more than thirty (30) cubic yards of Soil. g. Construction, reclamation, expansion, removal or modification of a parking lot. h. Construction, expansion or modification of a Stormwater Management Facility . .. ' . ••- • . ' ' or Stormwater BMPs. i. Any Land-Disturbing Activities within the one hundred (100)-year Floodplain or Calculated High Water Level of any water body, or immediately adjacent to any Wetland or public water body, including shoreline restoration and creek bank stabilization. j. Those activities required to meet "Level 1 standards" and "Nondegradation the standards" of the BCWMC as set forth in the current version of BCWMC's "Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals" as amended from time to time. 2. The following activities may be undertaken without a Stormwater Management Permit: a. Maintenance of existing yards. b. Emergency work to preserve life or property. B. Application Submittal Requirements. Each City of Golden Valley Stormwater Management Permit application shall include two (2) sets of plans and supporting documentation and one (1) electronic copy of the plans and supporting documentation. The following items shall be required with each application, except to the extent waived by the Administrator: 1. Completed application forms and fees required by the City and BCWMC, if applicable. 2. Provision made for financial securities as required in Subdivision 4(F). 3. Copies of Permits or Permit applications required by other jurisdictions. 4. Existing Site conditions on a certified survey, prepared to City standards and including existing topography, easements, vegetation and drainage. 5. Stormwater Management Plan and Narrative. Plans must be prepared to City standards and the standards of BCWMC, MCWD, and MPCA, if applicable. For construction sites equal to or greater than one acre,plans must be submitted that: a. Meet the requirements of Part III and Part IV of the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit. aTb. Meet the post-construction stormwater management requirements listed in Subdivision 5 of this ordinance. C. Application Review Process and Permit Approval. 1. Pre-Review. The Administrator shall make a determination regarding the completeness of a Permit application within fifteen (15)business days of the receipt of the application and notify the Applicant if the application is not complete. Incomplete applications may result in automatic denial of the Permit. 2. Permit Review and Decision. Both the City and the appropriate watershed management organizations review Permit applications. The Administrator shall City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 6 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE notify the Applicant of Permit approval or denial within sixty (60) days of receipt of a complete application. 3. Permit Approval. Upon approval of the application, the Administrator shall issue a Permit. 4. Permit Denial. If the Administrator determines that the application does not meet the requirements of this Section, the application will be denied. All land use and building Permits shall be suspended until the Applicant has an approved Permit. 5. Plan Modifications. The Applicant must amend any submitted plans as necessary to include additional requirements, such as additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems identified, or to address situations whenever: a. There is a change in design, construction, operation, maintenance, weather, or seasonal conditions that has a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to surface or ground waters. b. Inspections or investigations by Site operators, local, state or federal officials indicate the plans are not effective in preventing or significantly minimizing the discharge of pollutants to surface or ground waters or that the discharges are not meeting water quality standards; or c. The plan is not achieving the general objectives of minimizing pollutants in Stormwater discharges associated with construction activity. 6. Permit Duration. Permits issued under this section shall be valid for the period during which the proposed Land-Disturbing or filling Activities and Soil storage takes place or is scheduled to take place. The Permittee shall commence permitted activities within sixty (60) days of the issuance of the Permit for Grading or the Permittee shall resubmit all required application forms, maps, plans, schedules and security to the Administrator, except where an item to be resubmitted is waived by the Administrator. The Permit will expire or terminate when: a. The Site has been Stabilized and approved by the Administrator; or b. There has been one hundred eighty (180) days of inactivity. 1 D. Performance Standards for Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control. 1. All Grading material and Soil however placed on a Grading Site shall remain within the limits of the Grading Site and not travel onto adjacent property, streets, or other public or private property as dust, mud, chunks, or otherwise, unless approved by all affected adjacent property owners and the Administrator. -h2. All proposed Stormwater BMPs must be maintained in accordance with the plans, details, and specifications approved by the City. 3. Projects within the BCWMC boundaries that disturbing an area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more or will result in more than two hundred (200) cubic yards of cut or fill shall meet the current requirements for Construction Erosion and 1 Sediment Control Plans specified by the BCWMC. Projects required to meet water quality standards "Level 1 standards" and Nondegradation standards" of the BCWMC shall meet the current design and maintenance requirements for the proposed BMPs as specified by the BCWMC. 24. Projects within the MCWD boundaries that disturb an area of five thousand (5,000) square feet or more or will result in more than fifty (50) cubic yards shall meet the erosion and sediment control requirements specified in the current regulatory rules. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 7 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 3-5. Projects with land disturbing and on-site activities equal to or greater than one acre shall meet the requirements of Part III and Part IV of the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit for erosion and sediment controls and waste controls. E. Applicant Responsibilities. 1. Inspections. The Applicant is responsible for regular inspections and record keeping needed to document compliance with the Permit requirements. At a minimum, the applicant must inspect the construction project once a week and within 24 hours of a rainfall event of one-half(1/2) inch or greater in a 24-hour period. The City may conduct inspections as needed to ensure that both Erosion and Sediment Control measures and Stormwater BMPs mimes are properly installed and maintained prior to construction, during construction, and at the completion of the project. The Applicant shall notify the City a minimum of seventy-two (72) hours prior to the following required City inspections: a. Initial Inspection - when all Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs are installed. This inspection must be completed before a building Permit can be issued. b. Project Complete Inspection—when the project is complete including, but not limited to, final Grading, installation of all Stormwater Management Facilities, and Final Stabilization measures are complete. One (1)-year warranty begins after inspector approves project. c. Warranty Inspection—completed one (1) year later to confirm that permanent 1 Site stabilization methods have been successful and vegetation,has been established. 2. Reporting. The Applicant shall submit reports to the Administrator under the following circumstances and shall submit recommendations for corrective measures, if appropriate, with such reports: a. There are delays of more than seven (7) days in obtaining materials, machinery, services or manpower necessary to the implementation of the Stormwater Management Plan as scheduled. b. There are delays of seven (7) days in land disturbing or filling activities or Soil storage. c. The work is not being done in conformance with the approved plans and Permit. Any changes to the approved plan must be submitted to the Administrator for review and approval before work can commence. 3. Right of Entry. The issuance of a Permit constitutes a right-of-entry for the City or its contractor to enter the construction Site. The Applicant shall allow the City and its authorized representatives, to: a. Enter the permitted Site for the purpose of obtaining information, examining records, conducting investigations or surveys; b. Bring such equipment on the Site as is necessary to conduct such surveys and investigations; c. Examine and copy any books, papers, or digital files pertaining to activities or records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of the permitted Site; d. Inspect the Stormwater pollution control measures; e. Sample and monitor any items or activities pertaining to Stormwater pollution control measures; City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 8 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE f Correct deficiencies in Stormwater and Erosion and Sediment Control measures consistent with Subdivision 4(G)(5-6) of this Section. F. Financial Security. 1. Amount and Type. The Applicant shall provide security for the performance of the work to provide all temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures described and delineated in the approved Permit in an amount not less than one hundred and twenty five fifty percent (12550%) of the approved estimated cost of performing the described work. The type of the security shall be one (1) or a combination of the following to be determined by the Administrator: a. Bond or bonds issued by one (1) or more corporate sureties duly authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. The form of the bond or bonds shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney; b. Deposit, either with the Administrator or a responsible escrow agent or trust company at the option of the Administrator, of money, negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deposits of public monies, or other instrument of credit from one (1) or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the State or Federal government wherein said financial institution pledges funds are 1 on deposit and guaranteed for payment; b:c. Irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; or gid. Cash in U.S. currency. 2. Release. Security deposited with the City for faithful performance of the approved plans and to finance necessary remedial work shall be released one (1) year after final inspection has been approved by the Administrator,provided no action against such security has been filed prior to that date. The City reserves the right to retain all or a percentage of the security for a warranty period at the discretion of the Administrator. 3. Reduction of Security. The Applicant may have the option to reduce the security one (1) time within the first twelve (12) months of the issuance of the Permit, and thereafter, one (1) time within any twelve (12) month period, which period shall commence on the anniversary date of the issuance of the Permit and shall end on the day preceding the anniversary date of the issuance of the Permit. G. Enforcement Actions to Ensure Compliance. 1. Orders. The Administrator may issue an order to modify the approved Permit and stipulate a time frame for compliance per Subdivision 4(C)(5) The Applicant shall comply with said order. 2. Permit Suspension. The Administrator shall suspend the Permit and issue a stop work order if the Administrator determines that the Permit was issued in error, the Applicant supplied incorrect information, or the Applicant is in violation of any provision of the approved plans, the Permit, or this Section. The Administrator shall reinstate a suspended Permit upon the Applicant's correction of the cause of the suspension. 3. Construction Stop Work Order. The City Building Official may issue a stop work order for a related building Permit if requested by the Administrator. 4. Permit Revocation. If the Applicant fails or refuses to cease work as required, the Administrator shall revoke the Permit and the Applicant shall be subject to enforcement, penalties, and loss of its financial security in accordance with terms of City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 9 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Subdivision 4(G)(6) of this Section. The Administrator shall not reinstate a revoked Permit. 5. Remedial Corrective Action. The City or a private contractor under contract with the City may conduct remedial or corrective action on the project Site or adjacent Sites affected by project failure or to implement actions specified in an order to modify plans and Permit. The City may charge Applicant for all costs associated with correcting failures or remediating damage from the failures according to the order including but not limited to, materials, equipment, staff time and attorney's fees. If payment is not made within thirty (30) days, payment will be made from the Applicant's financial security or, in the case where no Permit was issued, payment will be assessed against the property. 6. Action Against Financial Security. In any of the following circumstances, the City shall use funds from the financial security to finance remedial work undertaken later by the City or a private contractor under contract to the City, and to reimburse the City for all direct costs including, but not limited to, staff time and attorney's fees: a. The Applicant ceases Land-Disturbing Activities and/or filling activities prior to completion of the Stormwater Management Plan; b. The Applicant fails to conform to the Stormwater Management Plan as approved or as modified under this Code, and has had his/her Permit revoked under this Code; c. The techniques utilized under the Stormwater Management Plan fail within one (1) year of installation, or before Final Stabilization is implemented for the Site or portions of the Site, whichever is later; d. The Administrator determines that action by the City is necessary to prevent excessive Erosion from occurring on the Site; or e. The Applicant fails to establish Wetland, Stream, or Shoreline buffers as described in the Stormwater Permit. 7. Misdemeanor Violation. Any violation of the provisions of this Section or failure to comply with any of its requirements shall constitute a misdemeanor. 8. Cumulative Enforcement. The procedures for enforcement of a Permit, as set forth in this Section, are cumulative and not exclusive. Subdivision 5. Post-Construction Stormwater Management A. The following projects must include a site plan with post-construction stormwater management BMPs that meet the requirements of this section and are designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit: 1. New development and redevelopment projects with land disturbance of greater than or equal to one acre, including projects less than one acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale. 2. Non-residential development and redevelopment projects greater than one half acre and less than one acre that, at the time of permitting, discharge stormwater through their private systems directly to a surface water without being routed through a stormwater management facility or BMP. B. Rate Control. Post-construction stormwater runoff rates must not exceed pre-project rates for the 2, 10, and 100-year 24-hour precipitation events. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 10 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE C. Stormwater volume control techniques and practices including, but not limited to, infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, and green roofs, shall be given preference as design options provided they are consistent with City zoning, subdivision, and Planned Unit Development requirements, and sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration reduction requirements. D. The Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) and performance goals developed under and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 2009, Section 115.03, subdivision 5c, along with the MIDS calculator and design sequence flowchart, and design criteria in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, is the recommended method for achieving the post-construction stormwater management requirements described in this section. E. For new development projects there shall be no net increase from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1. Stormwater discharge Volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in 5(G) below. 2. Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 3. Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP) F. For redevelopment projects there shall be a net reduction from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1. Stormwater discharge Volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in 5(G) below. 2. Stormwater discharges of TSS 3. Stormwater discharges of TP G. Stormwater management limitations and exceptions 1. Limitations a. Infiltration prohibited. The use of infiltration techniques are prohibited when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in, the following areas: 1. Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit. 2. Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. 3. Where less than three (3) feet of separation from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock exists. 4. Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by infiltrating stormwater. 5. Within twenty five (25) feet of a sanitary sewer pipe due to the possibility of inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system b. Infiltration restricted. The use of infiltration techniques will be restricted when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: 1. With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils 2. Within 1,000 feet up-gradient, or 100 feet down-gradient of active karst features 3. Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area(DWSMA) as defined in Minn. R. 4720.5100, subp. 13 4. Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 11 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE c. Linear Projects 1. Linear projects on sites where infiltration is not prohibited or restricted that create one acre or greater of new impervious surfaces, shall meet the requirements of Subdivision 5(E) for the increase in impervious surface. 2. Linear projects on sites where infiltration is prohibited or restricted that create one acre or greater of fully reconstructed surface, shall meet the requirements of Subdivision 5(F) above for the impervious surface. 3. Mill and overlay and other resurfacing activities are not considered fully reconstructed. 4. A reasonable attempt must be made to obtain right-of-way, property, or easements during the project planning process for volume control practices. For linear projects where the lack of right-of-way or property precludes the installation of volume control practices to meet 1 or 2 above, exceptions as described in 5(G)2 below can be applied. 2. Exceptions. A lesser volume control standard on the site of the original construction activity may be applied, at the discretion of the city, under the following circumstances: a. The permittee or owner of the construction site is precluded from infiltrating stormwater due to limitations under Subdivision 5(G)la, b, or c above, and b. The permittee or owner of the construction site implements volume reduction techniques, other than infiltration, on the site of the original construction activity that reduce stormwater discharge volume but may not meet the requirements of post-construction stormwater management. H. Mitigation. There may be circumstances where the permittee or owner of a construction site cannot cost effectively meet the conditions for post-construction stormwater management for TSS and/or TP on the site of the original construction activity. For this purpose, the City or permittee/owner shall identify locations where mitigation projects can be completed. Any stormwater discharges of TSS and/or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity must be addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: 1. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference, with consultation and approval of the City: a. Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity b. Locations within the same Department of Natural Resource (DNR) catchment area as the original construction activity c. Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up-stream d. Locations anywhere within the City 2. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. 3. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this section cannot be used to meet the mitigation requirements. 4. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original construction activity. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 12 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 5. The City shall determine, and document, who is responsible for long-term maintenance on all mitigation projects. 6. If the City receives payment from the owner and/or permittee for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or permittee meeting the conditions for post-construction stormwater management, the City shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all projects must be in compliance with this section. Subdivision&6. General Performance Standards A. Lowest Floor Elevation. The lowest floor elevation of all new principal and accessory structures, and additions to existing structures, shall be at least two (2) feet above the the City Code. Calculated High Water Levels shall be determined by the City based on the relevant federal, state, BCWMC, and City studies. A. Freeboard. The elevation separation of buildings with respect to lakes, streams, ponds, basins, Wetlands, and Stormwater Management Facilities shall conform to the following: 1. All new and existing structures and uses located in the Floodplain are subject to Section 11.60 of the City Code. 2. For structures and uses located outside the Floodplain, the following shall apply: a. The lowest floor elevation of all new principal and accessory structures, and additions to existing structures, shall be at least two (2) feet above the Calculated High Water Level of adjacent Wetlands, basins, ponds, and Stormwater Management Facilities, or be structurally flood proofed in accordance with Section 11.60 of the City Code. Calculated High Water Levels shall be determined by the City based on the relevant federal, state, BCWMC, and City studies. B. Setbacks. New principal structures shall be setback twenty-five (25) feet from the following features: 1. A delineated Wetland edge. 2. The top of bank of a pond, filtration basin, or infiltration basin, as determined by the Administrator, unless such a feature is incorporated into the architectural design of the building and the construction plans are prepared and signed by a licensed structural engineer. C. Buffers. 1. Native or Natural Vegetation Buffers must be established or preserved in accordance with this section and the requirements of the BCWMC. -- - - .. - . . . - - -- _ • - - city property, is encouraged and supported by the City, consistent with the BCWMC's Watershed Management Plan and the City's Surface Water Management 2 Projects listed in the BCWMC document "Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals" may be required to create buffers consistent with City standards and BCWMC policies. 2. The buffers zone widths are as follows: City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 13 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE a. Streams. Ten (10) feet or twenty five (25)percent of the distance between the ordinary high water level and the nearest existing structure, whichever is less. b. Wetlands. Based on a Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification or similar classification system, buffer widths will be as follows (measured from the delineated wetland edge): i. Preserve— 75 feet average and minimum of 50 feet ii. Manage 1 —50 feet average and minimum of 30 feet iii. Manage 2 or 3 —25 feet average and a minimum of 15 feet c. Lakes. Minimum of ten (10) feet in width measured from the OHWL. d. Stormwater Management Facilities. Buffers shall extend from the normal water level, or bottom of a dry basin, up to the top of bank of the Stormwater Management Facility, as determined by the Administrator, and shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet in width. 4.3. The following standards shall guide the creation or restoration of buffers to achieve the goals and policies of the City's Surface Water Management Plan. The Administrator may modify or waive standards depending on each project Site and goals for the water body wetland. delineated Wetland edge or top of bank of the Stormwater Management Facility. The use of a meandering buffer strip to maintain a natural appearance is encouraged in areas of flat topography. b. An access corridor, not to exceed twenty (20) feet in width or twenty percent (20%) of the buffer edge, whichever is less, is permitted. c. Accessory structures intended to provide access to Wetlands such as stairways and docks are permitted in the access corridor. d. The City may require that the buffer may be placed in a conservation easement. e. Monuments identifying the conservation easement, designed in accordance with City standards, should be placed every one hundred (100) feet to delineate the buffer edge and at intersections with property lines. f Buffer strip vegetation should be appropriate to the goals for the water body. Where acceptable natural vegetation exists in buffer strip areas, the retention of such vegetation in an undisturbed state is preferred. The Minnesota PCA's Midwest"provides guidance on buffer plant selection. D. Maintenance of Private Stormwater Management Facilities. 1. No private Stormwater Management Facilities may be approved unless a maintenance plan is provided and is consistent with City's Standards and/or BCWMC and MCWD standards. All such facilities shall be inspected annually or more often, with reports submitted to the City, and maintained in proper condition consistent with the performance standards for which they were originally designed. 2. Owners of private Stormwater Management Facilities shall enter into an agreement with the City describing responsibility for the long-term inspection, operationand maintenance of the facilities. Subdivision 67. Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control A. Illegal Disposal. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 14 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 1. Discarded Materials. No person shall throw, deposit, place, leave, maintain, or keep or permit to be thrown, placed, left, maintained or kept, any refuse, rubbish, garbage, or any other discarded or abandoned objects, articles, or accumulations, in or upon any street, alley, sidewalk, storm drain, inlet, catch basin conduit or drainage structure, business place, or upon any public or private plot of land in the City, so that the same might be or become a pollutant, except in containers, recycling bags, or other lawfully established waste disposal facility. 2. Landscape Debris. No person shall dispose of leaves, dirt, or other landscape debris into a street, road, alley, catch basin, culvert, curb, gutter, inlet, ditch, natural watercourse, flood control channel, canal, storm drain or any fabricated natural conveyance. B. Illegal Discharges and Illicit Connections. 1. No person shall cause any illegal discharge to enter the municipal Stormwater system unless such discharge consists of non-Stormwater that is authorized by an NPDES point source Permit obtained from the MPCA or is associated with 1 firefighting activities. 2. The commencement, conduct or continuance of any illegal discharge to the storm drain system is prohibited except as described as follows: a. The following discharges are exempt from discharge prohibitions established by this ordinance: water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising ground water infiltration, uncontaminated pumped ground water, sump pump discharge, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlorinated swimming pool discharges, and street wash water. b. Discharges or flow from firefighting. c. Discharges associated with dye testing; however, this activity requires a verbal notification to the City's Public Works Department prior to the time of the test. 3. The prohibition shall not apply to any non-stormwater discharge permitted under an NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted for any discharge to the storm drain system. 2A. No person shall use an Illicit Connection to intentionally convey non-Stormwater to the City Stormwater system. C. Good Housekeeping Provisions. Any Owner or occupant of property within the City shall comply with the following good housekeeping requirements: 1. Chemical or Septic Waste. No person shall leave, deposit, discharge, dump, or otherwise expose any chemical or septic waste in an area where discharge to streets or storm drain systems may occur. This section shall apply to both actual and potential discharges. For swimming pools, the chlorination system should be suspended for seven (7) days to allow for chlorine to evaporate before discharge to the Owner's property or into the storm sewer system. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 15 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 2. Runoff Minimized. Runoff of water from residential property shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Runoff of water from the washing down of paved areas in commercial or industrial property is prohibited unless necessary for health or safety purposes and not in violation of any other provision of the City's Code. 3. Storage of Materials, Machinery, and Equipment. Materials or equipment shall be stored to limit risk of contamination by runoff a. Objects, such as motor vehicle parts, containing grease, oil or other hazardous substances, and unsealed receptacles containing hazardous materials, shall not be stored in areas susceptible to runoff b. Any machinery or equipment which is to be repaired or maintained in areas susceptible to runoff shall be placed in a confined area to contain leaks, spills, or discharges. 4. Watercourse Protection. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes, or such person's lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the property free of trash, debris, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to use, function, or physical integrity of the watercourse. D. Removal of Debris and Residue. 1. All motor vehicle parking lots located in areas susceptible to runoff shall be kept clean of debris and residues. Such debris and residue shall be collected and disposed of in accordance with law. 2. Fuel and chemical residue or other types of potentially harmful material, such as animal waste, garbage or batteries, which are located in an area susceptible to runoff, shall be removed as soon as possible and disposed of properly. Household hazardous waste may be disposed of through the County collection program or at any other appropriate disposal Site and shall not be placed in a trash container. E. Notification of Spills or Leaks. 1. Notwithstanding other requirements of law, as soon as any person responsible for a facility or operation, or responsible for emergency response for a facility or operation has information of any known or suspected release of materials which are resulting or may result in illegal dischar eg s or pollutants discharging into stormwater, the stormwater management system, or surface waters, said person shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment, and cleanup of such release. In the event of such a release of hazardous materials said person shall immediately notify emergency response agencies of the occurrence via emergency dispatch services. This shall include immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illegal discharge is a spill of leak as defined in Minn. Stat. 115.061. If the discharge of prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on-site written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least two (2)years. F. Compliance Monitoring. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 16 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 1. Right of Entry. City inspectors and regulators shall be permitted to enter and inspect facilities subject to regulation under this Subdivision of the ordinance as often as may be necessary to determine compliance with this ordinance. a. If a discharger has security measures in force which require proper identification and clearance before entry into its premises, the discharger shall make the necessary arrangements to allow access to representatives of the City of Golden Valley. b. Facility operators shall allow approved City employees ready access to all parts of the premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling, examination and copying of records that must be kept under the conditions of an NPDES permit to discharge stormwater. c. The City shall have the right to set up on any facility such devices as are necessary to conduct monitoring and/or sampling of the facility's stormwater discharge to ensure compliance with this section. d. The City has the right to require the discharger to install monitoring equipment as necessary. The facility's sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating condition by the discharger at its own expense. All devices used to measure stormwater flow and quality shall be calibrated to ensure their accuracy. e. Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be inspected and/or sampled shall be promptly removed by the operator at the written or oral request of the City employees and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access shall be borne by the operator. f Unreasonable delays in allowing City employees access to a facility is a violation of this ordinance. A person who is the operator of a facility commits an offense if the person denies the City reasonable access to the facility for the purpose of conducting any activity authorized or required by this ordinance. 2. Search Warrants. If City employees have been refused access to any part of the premises from which stormwater is discharged, and he/she is able to demonstrate probable cause to believe that there may be a violation of this ordinance, or that there is a need to inspect and/or sample as part of a routine inspection and sampling program designed to verify compliance with this ordinance or any order issued hereunder, or to protect the overall public health, safety, and welfare of the community, then the City may seek issuance of a search warrant from any court of competent jurisdiction. G. Violations, Enforcement, and Penalties. 1. Violations. It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this section. Any person who has violated or continues to violate the provisions of this section, may be subject to the enforcement actions outlined in this section or may be restrained by injunction or otherwise abated in a manner provided by law. In the event the violation constitutes an immediate danger to public health or public safety, the City is authorized to enter upon the subject private property, without giving prior notice, to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. The City is authorized to seek costs of the abatement as outlined in Chapter 10 of the City Code. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 17 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 2. Warning Notice. When the City finds that any person has violated, or continues to violate, any provision of this section, or any order issued hereunder, the City of Golden Valley may serve upon that person a written Warning Notice, specifying the particular violation believed to have occurred and requesting the discharger to immediately investigate the matter and to seek a resolution whereby any offending discharge will cease. Investigation and/or resolution of the matter in response to the Warning Notice in no way relieves the alleged violator of liability for any violations occurring before or after receipt of the Warning Notice. Nothing in this subsection shall limit the authority of City employees to take any action, including emergency action or any other enforcement action, without first issuing a Warning Notice. 3. Notice of Violation. Whenever the City of Golden Valley finds that a person has violated a prohibition or failed to meet a requirement of this section, the City may order compliance by written notice of violation to the responsible person. The Notice of Violation shall contain: a. The name and address of the alleged violator, b. The address when available or a description of the building, structure or land upon which the violation is occurring, or has occurred; c. A statement specifying the nature of the violation; d. A description of the remedial measures necessary to restore compliance with this section and a time schedule for the completion of such remedial action; e. A statement of the penalty or penalties that shall or may be assessed against the person to whom the notice of violation is directed; f. A statement that the determination of violation may be appealed to the City by filing a written notice of appeal within five (5) days of service of notice of violation; and g, A statement specifying that, should the violator fail to restore compliance within the established time schedule, the work will be done by a designated governmental agency or a contractor and the expense thereof shall be charged to the violator. Such notice may require without limitation: a. The performance of monitoring, analyses, and reporting; b. The elimination of illicit connections or discharges; c. That violating discharges, practices, or operations shall cease and desist; d. The abatement or remediation of storm water pollution or contamination hazards and the restoration of any affected property e. Payment of a fine to cover administrative and remediation costs; and h. The implementation of source control or treatment BMPs. 4. Civil Penalties. In the event of alleged violator fails to take the remedial measures set forth in the notice of violation or otherwise fails to cure the violations described therein within five (5) days, or such greater period as the City shall deem appropriate, the City may impose a penalty not to exceed $1000.00 (depending on the severity of the violation) for each day the violation remains unremedied after receipt of the notice of violation. H. Appeal of Notice of Violation. If the violation has not been corrected pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Notice of Violation, or, in the event of an appeal, within five (5) days of the decision of the municipal authority upholding the decision of the City then City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 18 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE representatives of the City of Golden Valley shall enter upon the subject private property and are authorized to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. It shall be unlawful for any person, owner, agent or person in possession of any premises to refuse to allow the government agency or designated contractor to enter upon the premises for the purposes set forth above. I. Cost of Abatement of the Violation. Within five (5) days after abatement of the violation, the owner of the property will be notified of the cost of abatement, including administrative costs. The property owner may file a written protest objecting to the amount of the assessment within five (5) days. If the amount due is not paid within a timely manner as determined by the decision of the municipal authority or by the expiration of the time in which to file an appeal, the charges shall become a special assessment against the property and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. J. Violations Deemed a Public Nuisance. In addition to the enforcement processes and penalties provided in this section, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is declared and deemed a nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken. Subdivision 8. Responsibility for Stormwater Drainage on Private Property A. Responsibility. Property Owners are responsible for Stormwater drainage on private property. The City assumes responsibility for drainage when Stormwater runoff enters the City's right-of-way or storm sewer system. B. Technical Assistance. Upon written request, the City may provide technical assistance to investigate or correct a drainage problem on private property. C. Petition. Property owners may petition the City for public improvements to correct a drainage problem on private property. D. Costs. Property owners are responsible for paying all costs associated with correcting drainage problems on private property including City staff time, consultant costs, legal fees, and design and construction costs. E. Assessment. Project costs will be assessed to each property contributing flow to the problem area in accordance with Minn. Statute 429 and pursuant to the City's Assessment policy. City Ordinances City of Golden Valley,MN WSB Project No.2092-26 Page 19 ORDINANCE NO. 545, 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE Amending Section 4:31: Stormwater Management The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains: Section 1. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 1(A) is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Statutory Authorization. This Section is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 462; Minnesota Rules, Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900, Minnesota Rules Chapters 8410, 8420 and 7050.0210. Section 2. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 1(C) is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Purpose. The general purpose of this Section is to establish regulatory requirements for land Development and Land Disturbing Activities aimed at minimizing the threats to public health, safety, public and private property and natural resources within the community resulting from construction Site Erosion, post-construction Stormwater runoff, and Illicit Connections. Section 3. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 1 is hereby amended by adding Sections (D) & (E) to read as follows: D. This Section is intended to meet the current construction site erosion and sediment control and post-construction stormwater management regulatory requirements for construction activity and small construction activity (NPDES Permit) as defined in 40 CFR pt. 122.26(b)(14)(x) and (b)(15), respectively. E. This Section is intended to meet the Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) developed under Minnesota Statutes 2009, Section 115.03, subdivision 5c. Section 4. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 2(A)(5) is hereby amended by changing the last sentence to read: Examples of BMPs can be found in Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2000, Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual, Metropolitan Council 2001, State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual, MPCA, Storm Water Management for Construction Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1992, and Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Minnesota Department of Transportation 2013, as these documents may be amended from time to time. Section 5. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 2 is hereby amended by adding new Sections (15) & (25) to read as follows and renumbering subsequent subsections as needed: 15. Hazardous Materials: Any material, including any substance, waste, or combination thereof, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics may cause, or significantly contribute to, a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, property, or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. 25. Redevelopment: For the purposes of determining post-construction stormwater management requirements, any construction activity where, prior to the start of construction, the areas to be disturbed have fifteen percent (15%) or more of existing impervious surface(s). Section 6. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 3(A)(B)(C)(D) is hereby amended to read as follows: A. City of Golden Valley. The City of Golden Valley is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities listed in Subdivision 4(A) within the boundaries of the BCWMC and the MCWD. The City may issue a Stormwater Management Permit approving Land Disturbing Activities in these areas. B. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC). Although the BCWMC is not a permitting authority, it has the authority to review and approve projects that disturb an area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more, or will result in more than two hundred (200) cubic yards of cut or fill, and projects listed in the BCWMC document "Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals." Such projects must comply with BCWMC guidelines, policies, standards and requirements. The BCWMC will review the Applicant's submittal only after the project has received preliminary review by the City indicating general compliance with existing local watershed management plans. C. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). The MCWD is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities in excess of five thousand (5,000) square feet or fifty (50) cubic yards within the MCWD boundaries. In addition, projects meeting criteria listed in the MCWD regulatory rules may also be subject to review and permitting. Where required, the MCWD Permit is in addition to a Permit required by the City of Golden Valley. D. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The MPCA is the permitting authority for Land Disturbing Activities requiring an NPDES Permit for construction activity, including the requirements for developing and implementing a SWPPP. The NPDES Permit is required for construction activity that results in land disturbance of equal to or greater than one (1) acre, or a common plan of development or sale that disturbs greater than one (1) acre, as defined in the NPDES Permit. Where required, the NPDES Permit is in addition to Permits required by the City of Golden Valley and the MCWD. Section 7. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(A)(1) is hereby amended by revising Sections (h) & (j) to read as follows: h. Construction, expansion or modification of a Stormwater Management Facility or Stormwater BMPs. j. Those activities required to meet the standards of the BCWMC as set forth in the current version of BCWMC's "Requirements for Improvements and Development Proposals," as amended from time to time. Section 8. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(B)(5) is hereby amended to read as follows: 5. Stormwater Management Plan and Narrative. Plans must be prepared to City standards and the standards of BCWMC, MCWD, and MPCA, if applicable. For construction sites equal to or greater than one (1) acre, plans must be submitted that: a. Meet the requirements of Part III and Part IV of the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit. b. Meet the post-construction stormwater management requirements listed in Subdivision 5 of this Section. Section 9. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(D) is hereby amended to read as follows: D. Performance Standards for Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control. 1. All Grading material and Soil however placed on a Grading Site shall remain within the limits of the Grading Site and not travel onto adjacent property, streets, or other public or private property as dust, mud, chunks, or otherwise, unless approved by all affected adjacent property owners and the Administrator. 2. All proposed Stormwater BMPs must be maintained in accordance with the plans, details, and specifications approved by the City. 3. Projects within the BCWMC boundaries that disturb an area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or more or will result in more than two hundred (200) cubic yards of cut or fill shall meet the current requirements for Construction Erosion and Sediment Control Plans specified by the BCWMC. Projects required to meet water quality standards of the BCWMC shall meet the current design and maintenance requirements for the proposed BMPs as specified by the BCWMC. 4. Projects within the MCWD boundaries that disturb an area of five thousand (5,000) square feet or more or will result in more than fifty (50) cubic yards shall meet the erosion and sediment control requirements specified in the current regulatory rules. 5. Projects with land disturbing and on-site activities equal to or greater than one (1) acre shall meet the requirements of Part III and Part IV of the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit for erosion and sediment controls and waste controls. Section 10. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(E)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Inspections. The Applicant is responsible for regular inspections and record keeping needed to document compliance with the Permit requirements. At a minimum, the Applicant must inspect the construction project once a week and within twenty-four (24) hours of a rainfall event of one-half (1/2) inch or greater in a twenty-four (24) hour period. The City may conduct inspections as needed to ensure that both Erosion and Sediment Control measures and Stormwater BMPs are properly installed and maintained prior to construction, during construction, and at the completion of the project. The Applicant shall notify the City a minimum of seventy-two (72) hours prior to the following required City inspections: Section 11. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(F)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Amount and Type. The Applicant shall provide security for the performance of work to provide all temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures described and delineated in the approved Permit in an amount not less than one hundred and twenty five percent (125%) of the approved estimated cost of performing the described work. The type of the security shall be one (1) or a combination of the following to be determined by the Administrator: Section 12. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(F)(1) is hereby amended by adding Section (c) to read as follows and renumbering subsequent subsections as needed: c. Irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; or Section 13. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 4(G)(6)(e) is hereby amended to read as follows: e. The Applicant fails to establish Wetland, Stream, or Shoreline buffers as described in the Stormwater Permit. Section 13. City Code Section 4:31 is amended by adding a new Subdivision 5 to read as follows and renumbering subsequent Subdivisions as needed: Subdivision 5. Post-Construction Stormwater Management A. The following projects must include a site plan with post-construction stormwater management BMPs that meet the requirements of this Section and are designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit: 1. New development and redevelopment projects with land disturbance of greater than or equal to one (1) acre, including projects less than one (1) acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale. 2. Non-residential development and redevelopment projects greater than one half(1/2) acre and less than one (1) acre that, at the time of permitting, discharge stormwater through their private systems directly to a surface water without being routed through a stormwater management facility or BMP. B. Rate Control. Post-construction stormwater runoff rates must not exceed pre- project rates for the two (2), ten (10), and one hundred (100) year twenty four (24) hour precipitation events. C. Stormwater volume control techniques and practices including, but not limited to, infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, and green roofs, shall be given preference as design options provided they are consistent with City zoning, subdivision, and Planned Unit Development requirements, and sanitary sewer inflow and infiltration reduction requirements. D. The Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) and performance goals developed under and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 2009, Section 115.03, subdivision 5c, along with the MIDS calculator and design sequence flowchart, and design criteria in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, is the recommended method for achieving the post-construction stormwater management requirements described in this Section. E. For new development projects there shall be no net increase from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1. Stormwater discharge Volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in 5(G) below. 2. Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 3. Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP) F. For redevelopment projects there shall be a net reduction from pre-project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1. Stormwater discharge Volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in 5(G) below. 2. Stormwater discharges of TSS 3. Stormwater discharges of TP G. Stormwater management limitations and exceptions 1. Limitations a. Infiltration prohibited. The use of infiltration techniques are prohibited when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in, the following areas: 1) Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit. 2) Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. 3) Where less than three (3) feet of separation from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock exists. 4) Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by infiltrating stormwater. 5) Within twenty five (25) feet of a sanitary sewer pipe due to the possibility of inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system. b. Infiltration restricted. The use of infiltration techniques will be restricted when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: 1) With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils 2) Within one thousand (1,000) feet up-gradient, or one hundred (100) feet down-gradient of active karst features 3) Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minn. R. 4720.5100, subp. 13 4) Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour c. Linear Projects 1) Linear projects on sites where infiltration is not prohibited or restricted that create one (1) acre or greater of new impervious surfaces, shall meet the requirements of Subdivision 5(E) for the increase in impervious surface. 2) Linear projects on sites where infiltration is prohibited or restricted that create one (1) acre or greater of fully reconstructed surface, shall meet the requirements of Subdivision 5(F) above for the impervious surface. 3) Mill and overlay and other resurfacing activities are not considered fully reconstructed. 4) A reasonable attempt must be made to obtain right-of-way, property, or easements during the project planning process for volume control practices. For linear projects where the lack of right-of-way or property precludes the installation of volume control practices to meet 1 or 2 above, exceptions as described in 5(G)(2) below can be applied. 2. Exceptions. A lesser volume control standard on the site of the original construction activity may be applied, at the discretion of the City, under the following circumstances: a. The permittee or owner of the construction site is precluded from infiltrating stormwater due to limitations under Subdivision 5(G)(1)(a), (b), or (c) above, and b. The permittee or owner of the construction site implements volume reduction techniques, other than infiltration, on the site of the original construction activity that reduce stormwater discharge volume but may not meet the requirements of post-construction stormwater management. H. Mitigation. There may be circumstances where the permittee or owner of a construction site cannot cost effectively meet the conditions for post-construction stormwater management for TSS and/or TP on the site of the original construction activity. For this purpose, the City or permittee/owner shall identify locations where mitigation projects can be completed. Any stormwater discharges of TSS and/or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity must be addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: 1. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference, with consultation and approval of the City: a. Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity b. Locations within the same Department of Natural Resource (DNR) catchment area as the original construction activity c. Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up-stream d. Locations anywhere within the City 2. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. 3. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this Section cannot be used to meet the mitigation requirements. 4. Mitigation projects shall be completed within twenty four (24) months after the start of the original construction activity. 5. The City shall determine, and document, who is responsible for long-term maintenance on all mitigation projects. 6. If the City receives payment from the owner and/or permittee for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or permittee meeting the conditions for post- construction stormwater management, the City shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all projects must be in compliance with this Section. Section 14. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 6(A) is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Freeboard. The elevation separation of buildings with respect to lakes, streams, ponds, basins, Wetlands, and Stormwater Management Facilities shall conform to the following: 1. All new and existing structures and uses located in the Floodplain are subject to Section 11.60 of the City Code. 2. For structures and uses located outside the Floodplain, the following shall apply: a. The lowest floor elevation of all new principal and accessory structures, and additions to existing structures, shall be at least two (2) feet above the Calculated High Water Level of adjacent Wetlands, basins, ponds, and Stormwater Management Facilities, or be structurally flood proofed in accordance with Section 11.60 of the City Code. Calculated High Water Levels shall be determined by the City based on the relevant federal, state, BCWMC, and City studies. Section 15. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 6(B)(2) is hereby amended to read as follows: 2. The top of bank of a pond, filtration basin, or infiltration basin, as determined by the Administrator, unless such a feature is incorporated into the architectural design of the building and the construction plans are prepared and signed by a licensed structural engineer. Section 16. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 6 (C)(1) & (2) are hereby amended to read as follows and renumbering subsequent subsections as needed: 1. Native or Natural Vegetation Buffers must be established or preserved in accordance with this Section and the requirements of the BCWMC. 2. The buffers zone widths are as follows: a. Streams. Ten (10) feet or twenty five percent (25%) of the distance between the ordinary high water level and the nearest existing structure, whichever is less. b. Wetlands. Based on a Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) classification or similar classification system, buffer widths will be as follows (measured from the delineated wetland edge): i. Preserve — Seventy-five (75) feet average and minimum of fifty (50) feet ii. Manage 1 — Fifty (50) feet average and minimum of thirty (30) feet iii. Manage 2 or 3 — Twenty five (25) feet average and a minimum of fifteen (15) feet c. Lakes. Minimum of ten (10) feet in width measured from the OHWL. d. Stormwater Management Facilities. Buffers shall extend from the normal water level, or bottom of a dry basin, up to the top of bank of the Stormwater Management Facility, as determined by the Administrator, and shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet in width. Section 17. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 6(C)(3) is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. The following standards shall guide the creation or restoration of buffers to achieve the goals and policies of the City's Surface Water Management Plan. The Administrator may modify or waive standards depending on each project Site and goals for the water body. a. The use of a meandering buffer strip to maintain a natural appearance is encouraged in areas of flat topography. b. An access corridor, not to exceed twenty (20) feet in width or twenty percent (20%) of the buffer edge, whichever is less, is permitted. c. Accessory structures intended to provide access to Wetlands such as stairways and docks are permitted in the access corridor. d. The City may require that the buffer be placed in a conservation easement. e. Monuments identifying the conservation easement, designed in accordance with City standards, should be placed every one hundred (100) feet to delineate the buffer edge and at intersections with property lines. f. Buffer strip vegetation should be appropriate to the goals for the water body. Where acceptable natural vegetation exists in buffer strip areas, the retention of such vegetation in an undisturbed state is preferred. Section 18. The second sentence in City Code Section 4:31 Subdivision 6(D)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows: All such facilities shall be inspected annually or more often, with reports submitted to the City, and maintained in proper condition consistent with the performance standards for which they were originally designed. Section 19. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 6(D)(2) is hereby amended to read as follows: 2. Owners of private Stormwater Management Facilities shall enter into an agreement with the City describing responsibility for the long-term inspection, operation, and maintenance of the facilities. Section 20. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 7(B) is hereby amended by adding sections (2) & (3) to read as follows and renumbering subsequent subsections as needed: 2. The commencement, conduct or continuance of any illegal discharge to the storm drain system is prohibited except as described as follows: a. The following discharges are exempt from discharge prohibitions established by this ordinance: water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising ground water infiltration, uncontaminated pumped ground water, sump pump discharge, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlorinated swimming pool discharges, and street wash water. b. Discharges or flow from firefighting. c. Discharges associated with dye testing; however, this activity requires a verbal notification to the City's Public Works Department prior to the time of the test. 3. The prohibition shall not apply to any non-stormwater discharge permitted under an NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted for any discharge to the storm drain system. Section 21. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 7(C) is hereby amended by adding Section (4) to read as follows: 4. Watercourse Protection. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes, or such person's lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the property free of trash, debris, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard to use, function, or physical integrity of the watercourse. Section 22. City Code Section 4:31, Subdivision 7, is hereby amended by adding Sections (E), (F), (G), (H), (I), and (J) to read as follows: E. Notification of Spills or Leaks. 1. Notwithstanding other requirements of law, as soon as any person responsible for a facility or operation, or responsible for emergency response for a facility or operation has information of any known or suspected release of materials which are resulting or may result in illegal discharges or pollutants discharging into stormwater, the stormwater management system, or surface waters, said person shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment, and cleanup of such release. In the event of such a release of hazardous materials, said person shall immediately notify emergency response agencies of the occurrence via emergency dispatch services. This shall include immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illegal discharge is a spill of leak as defined in Minn. Stat. 115.061. If the discharge of prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on-site written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least two (2) years. F. Compliance Monitoring. 1. Right of Entry. City inspectors and regulators shall be permitted to enter and inspect facilities subject to regulation under this Section of the City Code as often as may be necessary to determine compliance with this ordinance. a. If a discharger has security measures in force which require proper identification and clearance before entry into its premises, the discharger shall make the necessary arrangements to allow access to representatives of the City. b. Facility operators shall allow approved City employees ready access to all parts of the premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling, examination, and copying of records that must be kept under the conditions of an NPDES permit to discharge stormwater. c. The City shall have the right to set up on any facility such devices as are necessary to conduct monitoring and/or sampling of the facility's stormwater discharge to ensure compliance with this Section. d. The City has the right to require the discharger to install monitoring equipment as necessary. The facility's sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating condition by the discharger at its own expense. All devices used to measure stormwater flow and quality shall be calibrated to ensure their accuracy. e. Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be inspected and/or sampled shall be promptly removed by the operator at the written or oral request of the City and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access shall be borne by the operator. f. Unreasonable delays in allowing the City access to a facility is a violation of this Section. A person who is the operator of a facility commits an offense if the person denies the City reasonable access to the facility for the purpose of conducting any activity authorized or required by this Chapter. 2. Search Warrants. If the City has been refused access to any part of the premises from which stormwater is discharged, and is able to demonstrate probable cause to believe that there may be a violation of this Section, or that there is a need to inspect and/or sample as part of a routine inspection and sampling program designed to verify compliance with this Section or any order issued hereunder, or to protect the overall public health, safety, and welfare of the community, then the City may seek issuance of a search warrant from any court of competent jurisdiction. G. Violations, Enforcement, and Penalties. 1. Violations. It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Section. Any person who has violated or continues to violate the provisions of this Section, may be subject to the enforcement actions outlined in this Section or may be restrained by injunction or otherwise abated in a manner provided by law. In the event the violation constitutes an immediate danger to public health or public safety, the City is authorized to enter upon the subject private property, without giving prior notice, to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. The City is authorized to seek costs of the abatement as outlined in Chapter 10 of the City Code. 2. Warning Notice. When the City finds that any person has violated, or continues to violate, any provision of this Section, or any order issued hereunder, the City may serve upon that person a written Warning Notice, specifying the particular violation believed to have occurred and requesting the discharger to immediately investigate the matter and to seek a resolution whereby any offending discharge will cease. Investigation and/or resolution of the matter in response to the Warning Notice in no way relieves the alleged violator of liability for any violations occurring before or after receipt of the Warning Notice. Nothing in this subsection shall limit the authority of the City to take any action, including emergency action or any other enforcement action, without first issuing a Warning Notice. 3. Notice of Violation. Whenever the City finds that a person has violated a prohibition or failed to meet a requirement of this section, the City may order compliance by written notice of violation to the responsible person. A. The Notice of Violation shall contain: a. The name and address of the alleged violator; b. The address when available or a description of the building, structure or land upon which the violation is occurring, or has occurred; c. A statement specifying the nature of the violation; d. A description of the remedial measures necessary to restore compliance with this Section and a time schedule for the completion of such remedial action; e. A statement of the penalty or penalties that shall or may be assessed against the person to whom the notice of violation is directed; f. A statement that the determination of violation may be appealed to the City by filing a written notice of appeal within five (5) days of service of notice of violation; and g. A statement specifying that, should the violator fail to restore compliance within the established time schedule, the work will be done by a designated governmental agency or a contractor and the expense thereof shall be charged to the violator. B. Such notice may require without limitation: 1. The performance of monitoring, analyses, and reporting; 2. The elimination of illicit connections or discharges; 3. That violating discharges, practices, or operations shall cease and desist; 4. The abatement or remediation of storm water pollution or contamination hazards and the restoration of any affected property 5. Payment of a fine to cover administrative and remediation costs; and 6. The implementation of source control or treatment BMPs. 4. Civil Penalties. In the event of alleged violator fails to take the remedial measures set forth in the notice of violation or otherwise fails to cure the violations described therein within five (5) days, or such greater period as the City shall deem appropriate, the City may impose a penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1000.00) (depending on the severity of the violation) for each day the violation remains unremedied after receipt of the notice of violation. H. Appeal of Notice of Violation. If the violation has not been corrected pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Notice of Violation, or, in the event of an appeal, within five (5) days of the decision of the municipal authority upholding the decision of the City then representatives of the City shall enter upon the subject private property and are authorized to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. It shall be unlawful for any person, owner, agent or person in possession of any premises to refuse to allow the government agency or designated contractor to enter upon the premises for the purposes set forth above. I. Cost of Abatement of the Violation. Within five (5) days after abatement of the violation, the owner of the property will be notified of the cost of abatement, including administrative costs. The property owner may file a written protest objecting to the amount of the assessment within five (5) days. If the amount due is not paid within a timely manner as determined by the decision of the municipal authority or by the expiration of the time in which to file an appeal, the charges shall become a special assessment against the property and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. J. Violations Deemed a Public Nuisance. In addition to the enforcement processes and penalties provided in this Section, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this Section is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is declared and deemed a nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken. Section 15. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 3.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 16. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Adopt by the City Council this 3rd day of March, 2015. /s/Shepard M. Harris Shepard M. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: /s/Kristine A. Luedke Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk