05-19-15 CC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA
Regular Meeting
of the
City Council
Golden Valley City Hall
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chamber
May 19, 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 May 5, 2015 3-8
B. Approval of City Check Register 9
C. Minutes of Boards and Commissions:
1. Planning Commission - April 27, 2015 10-16
2. Human Services Fund - March 9, 2015 17
3. Environmental Commission - March 23, 2015 18-19
4. Joint Water Commission - January 7, 2015 20-22
5. Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission - March 19, 2015 23-30
D. Amendment of Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-Law Changes 15-41 31-33
E. Bids and Quotes:
1. Award Contract for TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue Intersection Improvement 34-36
Project
F. Authorize Maintenance Agreement with MnDOT for Traffic Signal at TH 55 and 37-43
Winnetka Avenue 15-42
G. Authorize Agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. for Surveying and Private Utility 44-51
Inspections Services for the Douglas Drive Reconstruction Project
H. Approve Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park 52-53
I. Second Consideration - Ordinance #557 - Adoption of Chapters 1305 and 1323 of 54-55
the 2015 State Building Code
J. Approve Plat for Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 and Authorize Agreement for the 56-81
PUD Permit and Development Agreement 15-43 & 15-44
K. Authorize Memorandums of Agreement with Sundial Solar for 2015 Rooftop Solar 82-85
Retrofitting Project 15-45
L. Authorizing Issuance and Sale of: 86-90
1. $1,870,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A 15-46
2. $800,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series
2015B 15-47
3. $6,695,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015C 15-48
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7 PM
A. First Consideration - Ordinance #588 - Amendment to the 2015 Master Fee Schedule 91-93
for Electrical Rates
5. OLD BUSINESS
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Authorization to Sign Amended PUD Permit - RLT Second Addition PUD No. 91, 94-110
Amendment No. 3 - 8905 Wayzata Boulevard - The Luther Company, Applicant
B. METRO Blue Line Update 111-114
C. Announcements of Meetings
D. Mayor and Council Communications
7. ADJOURNMENT
cit} of UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
gold erg GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA
valley May 5, 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, Snope and Fonnest
1 B. Pledge of Allegiance
2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA
MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to
approve the agenda of May 5, 2015, as submitted and the motion carried unanimously.
3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to
approve the consent agenda of May 5, 2015, as revised: removal of items: 31-Resolution
Authorizing Submittal for Bikeway Participation Program and 3L-Approve the revised Bylaws
for the Environmental Commission, Human Rights Commission, Open Space & Recreation
Commission, and Planning Commission and the motion carried unanimously.
3A1. Approve Minutes of the Council/Manager Meeting - February 10, 2015
3A2. Approve Minutes of the City Council Meeting - April 23, 2015
3113. Approve City Check Register and authorize the payments of the bills as submitted.
3C1. Approve solicitor's license for the Budget Exteriors, Inc.
3C2. Authorize the Issuance of the License as recommended by Staff.
3D. Accept for filing the Minutes of Boards and Commissions as follows:
1 . Planning Commission - April 13, 2015
2. Human Rights Commission - March 26, 2015
3. Board of Zoning Appeals - February 24, 2015
3E. Accept Letter from Craig McDaniels regarding Resignation from Human Service Fund.
3F. Approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by
staff.
3G. Adopt a Proclamation for Arbor Day - May 15, 2015, and Arbor Month - May 2015 in
the City of Golden Valley.
3H. Adopt upon second consideration Ordinance #554, Amending Sections 6.34: Tobacco
and 10.67: Smoke Free Environment to prohibit sale and use of e-cigarettes in public
and work places.
31. Adept Resolution 15-37, AuthE)FiZiRg Submittal fer the Hennepin GGWRty Bikeway
PaFt'GipatiGR Program.
3J. Adopt Resolution 15-38, Authorizing Execution of Assignment and Assumption
Agreements with Jewish Housing and Programming.
3K. Receive and file the Notice of Metropolitan Council Action regarding the General Land
Use Plan, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, for 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road,
2430 and 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2485 Rhode Island North.
Unofficial City Council Minutes -2- May 5, 2015
3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA - continued
3M. Approve the following Board and Commission reappointments:
Board of Zoning Appeals Environmental Commission
David Perich 1 year-expires 5/1/16 Dawn Hill 3 years-expires 5/1/18
George Maxwell 1 year-expires 5/1/16 Larry Johnson 3 years-expires 5/1/18
Nancy Nelson 1 year-expires 5/1/16 Human Services Fund
Richard Orenstein 1 year-expires 5/1/16 Kathryn Frommer 3 years-expires 5/1/18
Planning Commission Open Space and Recreation Commission
Ronald Blum 3 years-expires 5/1/18 Bob Mattison 3 years-expires 5/1/18
Andy Johnson 3 years-expires 5/1/18 Daniel Steinberg 3 years-expires 5/1/18
Civil Service Commission
Ben Peterson 3 years-expires 5/11/18
3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
31. Adopt Resolution 15-37, Authorizing Submittal for the Hennepin County Bikeway
Participation Program.
City Engineer Oliver answered questions from Council.
MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt
Resolution 15-37, Authorizing Submittal for the Hennepin County Bikeway Participation
Program upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor: Harris, Snope, Fonnest,
Clausen and Schmidgall and the following voted against: none and the motion carried.
3L. Approve the Revised Bylaws for the Environmental Commission, Human Rights
Commission, Open Space & Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission.
MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Council Member Snope to
approve the revised Bylaws for the Environmental Commission, Human Rights Commission,
Open Space & Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission and the motion carried
unanimously.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing PUD No. 123 - 7751-
7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2430 and 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, 2485 Rhode
Island Avenue North - Intuitive Investments, Applicant
Planning Manager Zimmerman stated that items 4A and 4B are related. He presented the
staff report and answered questions from Council. Physical Development Director Nevinski
answered questions from Council.
Mr. Todd Schachtman, Applicant, reviewed the plans and answered questions from Council.
Ms. Elisa Richardson, Tanek Architects, answered questions from Council.
Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the
public hearing.
There was Council discussion regarding the Preliminary Plan PUD No. 123 for Liberty
Crossing.
Unofficial City Council Minutes -3- May 5, 2015
4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing - continued
MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Clausen to
approve the Preliminary Plan for Liberty Crossing PUD No. 123 subject to the following
conditions and the motion carried unanimously:
1. The plans prepared by Tanek, submitted March 12, 2015, shall become a part of this
approval.
2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire
Department, dated April 8, 2015, shall become a part of this approval.
3. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Engineering
Division, dated April 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval.
4. Public bicycle racks or similar facilities for the parking/storage of a minimum of 14
bicycles shall be provided, based on a calculation of 5% of the 276 parking spaces
required for the apartment building.
5. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20).
6. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 123" in its title.
7. A park dedication fee of$60,100, or 2% of the land value, shall be paid before release of
the Final Plat.
8. A traffic, pedestrian, and safety study shall be done as a part of the Final PUD proposal.
9. 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. 5(E):
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 worked closely with the City
during a lengthy pre-application process-and has continued to refine the proposal-in
order to accommodate the unique circumstances surrounding the site. The flexibility
allowed under a PUD is necessary to achieve the outcome that will not only benefit the
applicant, but the City as a whole. 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. Given the lack of open
space or other sensitive environmental features on the site today, there is little available
for the applicant to preserve. However, the proposal does take advantage of the natural
areas of Pennsylvania Woods and Decola Pond B to the east and, in partnership with
the City, will use a constructed swale to manage stormwater more effectively and result
in the creation of additional green space within in the Rhode Island Avenue right of way.
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 proposal not only provides for an increase in residential
density in an underutilized area well served by transit, but the creative inclusion of
regional flood storage within the development provides a benefit to the greater area.
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 higher density residential use is compatible with the neighboring
property to the east and the density being proposed is consistent with the City's revised
Comprehensive Plan. 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. The potential for reduction in
Unofficial City Council Minutes -4- May 5, 2015
4A. Public Hearing - Preliminary PUD Plan for Liberty Crossing - continued
flooding along Medicine Lake Road and within the Decola Ponds area provides great
benefit to the City and its residents. 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. The flexibility provided by the PUD allows for a
better site layout and coordination between the two uses on the site. Staff believes this
standard has been met.
413. Public Hearing - Ordinance #556 - Rezoning 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road,
2430 and 2480 Winnetka Avenue North, and 2485 Rhode Island Avenue North,
Intuitive Investments, Applicant
Mayor Harris opened the public hearing. No one came forward. Mayor Harris closed the
public hearing.
MOTION made by Council Member Fonnest, seconded by Council Member Schmidgall to
adopt Ordinance #556, Rezoning 7751-7775 Medicine Lake Road, 2480 Winnetka Avenue
North, and 2485 Rhode Island Avenue North from Commercial to High Density Residential
(R-4) and 2430 Winnetka Avenue North from Light Industrial to High Density Residential (R-
4), Intuitive Investments, Applicant upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of:
Harris, Fonnest, Schmidgall, Clausen and Snope, the following voted against: none and the
motion carried.
4C. Public Hearing - Amendments to the General Land Use Plan Map - 9000 and 9050
Golden Valley Road
Associate Planner Goellner presented the staff report and answered questions from Council.
Planning Manager Zimmerman and City Manager Burt answered questions from Council.
Mayor Harris opened the public hearing.
Mr. Jerad Ducklow, 7002 6th Street North, Oakdale, real estate broker representing the
property owner of 9000 Golden Valley Road, said he is neither opposed nor supportive of the
amendment, but asked why the City would move forward before a residential buyer asked for
it. He asked if this amendment was approved, how long the property could continue to be
marketed as a potential commercial/retail use. He said the property owner has requested the
item be tabled, because a prospective buyer is planning to move forward and if the property
is re-guided the value of it could be harmed.
Mayor Harris closed the public hearing.
There was Council discussion regarding the proposed amendment to the General Land Use
Plan Map for 9000 and 9050 Golden Valley Road.
MOTION made by Council Member Clausen, seconded by Mayor Harris to adopt Resolution
15-39, Amendment to the General Land Use Plan Map Amendment for 9000 and 9050
Golden Valley Road upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris, Fonnest,
Clausen and Schmidgall, the following voted against: Snope and the motion carried.
Unofficial City Council Minutes -5- May 5, 2015
5. OLD BUSINESS
5A. Authorize City Manager to Sign Contract with Hammel, Green and Abrahamson
(HGA) for Replacement of Brookview Community Center Phase II
Director of Parks and Recreation Birno presented the staff report and answered questions
from Council. City Manager Burt answered questions from Council.
Ms. Nancy Blankfard, HGA, reviewed the different phases of the proposed replacement.
There was Council discussion regarding the different replacement phases for Brookview
Community Center.
MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Fonnest to adopt
Resolution 15-40, Authorizing the City Manager to sign a Contract with Hammel, Green and
Abrahamson for Replacement of Brookview Community Center Phase II upon a vote being
taken the following voted in favor of: Clausen, Snope, Schmidgall and Fonnest, the following
voted against: Harris and the motion carried.
5B. Second Consideration - Ordinance #555 - Amending Salaries for Mayor and
Council Members
Finance Director Virnig presented the staff report and answered questions from Council.
There was Council discussion regarding the proposed amendments to the Mayor and Council
Member salaries.
MOTION made by Council Member Snope, seconded by Council Member Clausen to adopt
upon second consideration Ordinance #555, Amending Salaries of Mayor and Council
Members upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Snope, Clausen and Harris,
the following voted against: Fonnest and Schmidgall and the motion carried.
6. NEW BUSINESS
6A. First Consideration - Ordinance #557- Adoption of Chapters 1305 and 1323 of the
2015 State Building Code
Physical Development Director Nevinski presented the staff report and answered questions
from Council.
MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Snope to
adopt upon first consideration Ordinance #557, Adopting Chapters 1305 and 1323 of the
2015 State Building Code upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor of: Harris,
Snope, Clausen, Schmidgall and Fonnest, the following voted against: none and the motion
carried.
6B. Announcement of Meetings
The 2015 Bike Rodeo will be held on May 6, 2015, at 6 at the Crystal Community Center.
Open for Business will have office hours at the City of Golden Valley on May 8, 2015, from 9
to 11 am in the Council Conference Room.
Unofficial City Council Minutes -6- May 5, 2015
613. Announcement of Meetings - continued
Week three of the 2015 Brush Pickup Program will begin May 11, 2015, in the area south of
Highway 55.
The next Council/Manager meeting is May 12, 2015, at 6:30 pm.
Some Council Members may attend the Golden Valley Historical Society event on Human
Trafficking Awareness on May 14, 2015, at 6:30 pm at the Perpich Center of Arts Education.
Some Council Members may attend the Cornerstone Creek Neighborhood Meeting on May
14, 2015, from 6:30 to 8 pm at the Golden Valley Byerly's Community Room.
The next City Council meeting is May 19, 2015, at 6:30 pm.
Some Council Member may attend the PRISM's 2nd Annual Gala on May 28, 2015, from 5 to
9 pm at the Metropolitan Ballroom.
6C. Mayor and Council Communication
Council Member Snope stated Xcel Energy is tree trimming in Golden Valley neighborhoods.
City Manager Burt reviewed the agenda for the Council/Manager Meeting of May 12, 2015.
Council Member Clausen stated someone may be in the Golden Valley area saying a tree
needs to be taken down due to emerald ash borer and it may be a scam. City Manager Burt
stated if residents are concerned about a tree to call the City Forester.
Council Member Snope stated there have been a lot of discussions on social media lately and
Council Members may not participate in it because they prefer to conduct their business at the
City Council meeting in a public format and asked people to stay respectful of others.
City Manager Burt updated Council on the CenterPoint - Douglas Drive construction on the
loop line through Golden Valley.
7. Adjournment
MOTION made by Council Member Schmidgall, seconded by Council Member Snope, and
the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:01 pm.
Shepard Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
golden Ar MEMORANDUM
vall(2y Administrative Services Department
763-593-8013 /763-593-3969(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. B. Approval of City Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley.
Attachments
• Document sent via email
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 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,
April 13, 2015. Chair Kluchka called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Blum, Cera, Johnson, Kluchka,
Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman,
and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Commissioner Baker was absent.
1. Approval of Minutes
April 13, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
Waldhauser referred to the discussion regarding surface water management for the
Liberty Crossing proposal and said there seems to be some inconsistencies. She said
that in some places the minutes state that the site would be net neutral and in other
places the minutes state that the surface water issues on the site would be a net
improvement.
Zimmerman clarified that the applicant is responsible to do what they need to do to have
the site be net neutral. He said the City is interested in going above and beyond that to
get the site to a net positive position in regard to stormwater.
MOVED by Cera, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of the April 13, 2015, minutes as submitted.
2. Single Family Residential (R-1) Side Setbacks
Zimmerman gave a brief history of the side setback issues. He explained that in 2006, the
City Council asked the Planning Commission to study issues related to the scale of
remodeled and infill housing. In 2008, the City Council adopted the Planning
Commission's recommendations regarding building height, side yard setbacks, and side
wall articulation. He stated that the side yard setback requirements were amended so that
they varied with the height of the structure, increasing the size of the setbacks as the
home rose above 15 feet. He stated that staff was made aware of differences in
interpretation between the language of the 2008 amendment and how it has since been
applied. The City Council addressed the issue at their April 7 meeting and approved
Zoning Code text amendments to help clarify the setback language and to grandfather in
properties that had built under a different interpretation.
Segelbaum asked if there is a distinction in the Zoning Code between new construction
and renovation of existing structures. Zimmerman said yes, the Code does state that any
new construction has to conform to the current requirements.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 2
Zimmerman stated that at the April 7 Council meeting, staff was directed to bring this item
back to the Planning Commission to help address the following concerns: protecting
neighboring homes from the blockage of light and air by taller structures for both new
homes and renovations, discouraging garage-dominated front facades and preserving
back yard areas by not having such large side setbacks therefore pushing more of the
home into the backyard, simplifying the Zoning Code for better comprehension and
administration, adding illustrations to the Zoning Code to prevent misinterpretation in the
future, and to consider how side setbacks should be applied going forward.
Kluchka said the only actionable item seems to be the concern about discouraging
garage-dominated front facades and preserving back yard areas. He asked if the Council
had any discussions about the conflict between the recent subdivision study calling to
leave rear yard setbacks alone, and the concern of preserving back yard areas.
Zimmerman stated that the rear yard setback requirement was recently changed from
20% of the lot depth to 25 feet. He said the Council did not talk about potential Zoning
Code changes as it relates of the recent subdivision study, but that there isn't necessarily
a conflict depending on how deep the lot is.
Waldhauser noted that allowing wider houses won't prevent people from building a house
with a garage-dominated front facade. Zimmerman said modern families have a certain
expectation for the size of a home. If that is restricted by requiring larger side yard
setbacks they are still going to want the same size house, it will just force people to push
the house further back on the lot, whereas if there is flexibility to spread the square
footage across the front of the lot, more of the back yard space will be preserved.
Zimmerman discussed some of the key items as amended in 2008 versus how they have
been interpreted and applied. He said the Zoning Code states that the overall height of
the home is measured at the front and that the additional setback is applied equally on
both sides of the house. He said staff has been interpreting and applying the Code by
determining the height of each portion of a home separately, and then determining
setbacks individually on each side. He showed the Commissioners several pictures
illustrating how existing homes could have been built using each interpretation. He
showed another illustration that stemmed from a study that the City of Austin, TX, did
which uses a tent-shaped building envelope. The tent shaped envelope is based on the
same setback calculations as required by the current Zoning Code, and anything that fits
in the envelope can be built. He showed several illustrations of existing homes built in the
City, on various sized lots, and showed how they would fit within the tent-shaped building
envelope. Zimmerman added that there are also building lot coverage maximums,
impervious surface requirements, and articulation requirements that still apply and are
taken into consideration.
Kluchka said if there is an interest in discouraging garage-dominated front facades maybe
the City should encourage allowing a benefit or incentive to people not doing a garage-
dominated front facade, instead of changing the math and formulas.
Cera questioned how much space would be available to build a house on an 80-foot wide
lot, with a three-stall garage and large side setbacks on both sides. Kluchka said that he
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 3
thinks the market calls for three-stall garages and that there may be no way around
garage dominated fronts. Waldhauser questioned if the City wants or needs three-stall
garages on 80-foot wide lots. Kluchka asked about the predominance of 80-foot wide lots.
Zimmerman said lot sizes vary throughout the City, but that 80 feet is the minimum
required width.
Segelbaum noted that the height of the houses in the illustrations were shown as being
measured at the top of the roof line and not at the mid-point. Zimmerman explained that
part of staff's interpretation has been to measure the overall height of a house at the mid-
point of the highest pitched roof in the front. In order to determine the side yard setback,
the height was measured along the side in question to the soffit if there was a hipped-
roof, or to the mid-point if there was a gabled roof.
Segelbaum said the City is at risk of having inconsistent interpretations of the Code and
that simplicity and clarity is important. He said the tent-shaped building envelope might be
a way to simplify things. Kluchka asked if the way the Code has been interpreted uses the
tent-shaped building envelope. Zimmerman said it is similar, but there aren't different side
yard setbacks for each side.
Kluchka asked about the widths of the lots in the recently approved Laurel Ponds PUD
proposal. Zimmerman said the lots in that PUD are approximately 40 feet in width.
Kluchka said the houses in that proposal all had garage-dominated front facades and the
Planning Commissioners were supportive of it. Waldhauser said part of the reason
garage-dominated fronts worked in that situation is because it is a mini community unto
itself that buyers will accept and was not being imposed on an existing neighborhood.
Segelbaum said the tent-shaped building envelope is less restrictive and that it seems
that if the City is more restrictive there will be more garage-dominated front facades.
Waldhauser stated that there were neighbors who were excited about the clarification in
the setbacks with the understanding that both side yard setbacks are supposed to be
increased with the height of the house and she assumes the Council is aware of that.
Kluchka agreed that the original intent was not to allow encroaching into a side yard.
Zimmerman stated that Golden Valley has pretty aggressive side yard setback
requirements compared to surrounding communities. He stated that on an 80-foot wide
lot, with the increased setback requirement on each side, there could be a 19-foot
setback on each side. Blum asked if there was extra space on smaller lots. Zimmerman
said lots that are 65 feet or less in width have different setback requirements.
Segelbaum said applicants could still go to the Board of Zoning Appeals and ask for a
variance. He said he is concerned there could be unintended consequences with the tent-
shaped building envelope method. Zimmerman said the same issues would apply with
any method used. Kluchka said he would like to maintain some protection for the
neighboring properties. Waldhauser said it would be nice to allow most renovations to be
done without a variance. Cera questioned if different requirements should be adopted for
new construction versus remodeling. Blum said he thinks a builder would use design
software in order to come up with a design that fits the requirements of the Zoning Code,
and it would probably be easier to figure that out using the tent-shaped method.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 4
Zimmerman noted that if the Code is too restrictive people may not choose to build in
Golden Valley. He said there is also the issue of allowing improvements to the current
housing stock.
Blum said he is interested in what kinds of incentives could be used to help stop garage-
dominated front facades. Cera said they could encourage more impervious surface, but
he doesn't think three-stall garages can be prohibited. Segelbaum suggested saying in
the Code that no more than 75% of the front facade can be garage.
Waldhauser said she knows the Board of Zoning Appeals has allowed variances for two-
stall garages and asked if a standard sized garage is now three stalls. Zimmerman said
no, the Board of Zoning Appeals still feels that a standard garage is two stalls.
Kluchka asked the Commissioners how they felt about the Council's concern regarding
the preservation of back yard space. Cera said he thinks changing the rear yard setback
to 25 feet will go a long way in preserving back yard space. Waldhauser stated that
properties with short back yards are usually on corner lots that have houses facing a side
street with two front yard setback areas. Kluchka agreed that the recently approved 25-
foot rear yard setback requirement does preserve back yard space so he is not sure how
much more restriction is needed.
Kluchka opened the meeting for comments.
Bob Shaffer, 3125 Quail Avenue North, said he was on the Planning Commission/City
Council when the Zoning Code was rewritten. He said the intent was to allow one side of
the structure to move with the increase in height, not both sides of the structure. He said
he likes the tent-shaped building envelope because it won't really change the way things
have been done, however it could be difficult for people to apply on their own and they
may have to hire a professional. He said that topographical issues should be considered
as well and he is not sure how that would work with the tent-shaped method. He said one
of the issues in the past was having houses that towered over other ones because of the
topography of the lot. He also said dealing with dormers should be considered, because
those can become difficult. He stated that if side setbacks keep getting increased houses
will be built further back on the lot and garages will dominate the front facade. He added
that the group of people who have been upset about this issue is fairly small so the City
needs to be careful about broad, sweeping changes that could affect the majority of the
City.
Cera questioned how the idea of requiring only one side to have a larger setback got lost.
Shaffer said measurements were supposed to be taken on each side because it was the
impact to the neighboring properties that was taken into account. He added that the tent-
shaped idea will do the same thing.
Cera asked Shaffer his thoughts on triple garage front facades. Shaffer referred to the
City of Minneapolis and stated that they have many detached garages because they have
alleys. He said Golden Valley doesn't have many alleys so the opportunity to build a
detached garage isn't there. He noted that the culture and history of Golden Valley has
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 5
been to have attached garages. Waldhauser stated that detached garages also take a
large amount of back yard space. Shaffer said he doesn't want it to become so difficult to
build that people won't build in Golden Valley.
Blum asked Shaffer if he thinks the tent-shaped method will be harder to interpret. Shaffer
said he thinks it will be a little harder to interpret. He added that a survey showing
topography will probably need to be required as well.
Peter Knaeble, 6001 Glenwood Avenue, said he supports what staff is recommending
and suggested that the Zoning Code be rewritten to match how it has been interpreted for
the last 7 to 8 years. He said he doesn't think there have been many complaints with the
way the Code has been interpreted and he thinks there have been several good quality
homes built. He stated that on a typical 80-foot wide lot, a two-story home that is 28 feet
in height would have 19-foot setbacks on both sides if the Code were interpreted the way
the Planning Commission and Council recently decided it should be. He reviewed the
setback requirements for several other cities and said the City of Golden Valley should be
careful in regard to requiring a 19-foot setback on both sides because that would only
allow for a 42-foot wide house which will turn a lot of people away and doesn't make
sense.
Segelbaum asked Knaeble for his thoughts about garage-dominated front facades.
Knaeble said the definition of"garage-dominated front" could be subjective. He said he
thinks the market should be able to build what people want to build. He reiterated that the
way the Code has been interpreted for the last several years has worked well.
Waldhauser asked Knaeble about measuring the height at the mid-point of a roof at the
front of the house to determine the side setbacks versus the height on the side of the
house. Knaeble said he thinks staff has been interpreting height correctly. Waldhauser
said the intent in 2008 was to measure the height of the house at the front facade and use
that height measurement to determine what the setback should be on both sides. Knaeble
said he doesn't think it is clear that that was the intent. He said he thinks the Code is clear
enough to support the way staff has been interpreting it.
Segelbaum said he is supportive of the tent-shaped building envelope method, but he
wants the issue of the garage-dominated front facades addressed in the right way. He
asked staff to review ways to attempt to address those issues.
Kluchka asked about the process for this issue. Zimmerman said the direction from City
Council was to clarify the Zoning Code language as soon as possible. He said the issue
will come back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. He add that limiting the
amount of garage in the front is something that can be addressed. Waldhauser said she
doesn't want to restrict what houses look like.
Blum said he respectfully disagrees with Shaffer that using the tent-shaped building
envelope method to determine setbacks will be difficult for people to understand. He said
he thinks that method will be fairly easy to use and is a clear visual representation of what
can or cannot be done. He said he wants to keep lots attractive to people wanting to build
in Golden Valley.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 6
Cera said he thinks the tent-shaped building envelope method is better than the way staff
has been interpreting the Zoning Code. He said he still doesn't have a clear idea how this
method will avoid "too tall" houses. He said he wants to avoid garages that stick out in
front of a house and suggested there be a starting point for houses and a starting point for
garages.
Waldhauser said she likes the tent-shaped building envelope approach because it gives
design flexibility and doesn't take away light and air space from neighboring properties.
She said she is sure there will be cases where it is difficult to use, but he she thinks most
cases will be easy. She added that she would like to enforce the original interpretation of
measuring the height of a house at the midpoint of the roof.
Johnson said the reason the Zoning Code was probably misinterpreted is that the market
pushed it that way. He said a ratio is easier to understand than the "wedding cake"
interpretation. If the intent is to keep the original language and to have the house fall
within the same parameters, he suggests the original language be reviewed to see if it still
makes sense, and then consider adopting the ratio method rather than complicated math
since Golden Valley already has aggressive setback requirements.
Segelbaum said he supports using the tent-shaped building envelope approach. He said
would like to address the other issues with garage-dominated fronts, etc. at a later point.
He said there will also be complications with eaves and someone could circumvent the
intent by having large eaves or roof overhangs. Zimmerman stated that the Code allows
30" of eaves and overhangs into the setback area. Segelbaum said because of
topography, one home could still look like it is towering over its neighbor. He said looking
at the height of the home along the side in question might help that situation, but the tent-
shaped method might be the best compromise for simplicity. Waldhauser said all of the
surrounding houses could be taken into account.
Kluchka said he thinks the City Council concerns seem to be philosophically in conflict
with the goals and outputs of the subdivision study. He said this tent-shaped method is
doing the opposite. It is saying houses can be bigger and closer together. He said he is
conflicted and confused by what the Council is saying they want. He said he likes the
tent-shaped building envelope approach and thinks it could be successful, but he wants to
offer deference to the original study and maybe start the side yard setbacks in a little
further.
Waldhauser said that not too long ago standard size lots were 100 feet wide and in most
neighborhoods that is still the standard. Kluchka said he would like to know the relative
impact and how many lots are 80 versus 100 feet wide. Zimmerman said he would get
that information from the subdivision study and bring this item back to the next Planning
Commission meeting.
--Short Recess--
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
April 27, 2015
Page 7
3. Other Business
• Election of Officers
Waldhauser nominated Cera as Chair, Cera accepted the nomination. Segelbaum
volunteered to be the Vice Chair, Kluchka volunteered to be the Secretary. The vote
was unanimous to elect Cera as Chair, Segelbaum as Vice Chair and Kluchka as
secretary.
Zimmerman referred to the language regarding design review that the Planning
Commission has been adding as a condition on the past several PUD proposals. He
stated that the City Attorney has said that no authority has been given to the Planning
Commission to have design review.
Kluchka said that the former Planning Director stated in the past that when the Building
Board of Review was disbanded that the Planning Commission was supposed to start
considering design review. Segelbaum agreed and said the Planning Commission has
been focused on quality materials more than design. Zimmerman noted that the PUD
section of the Zoning Code does have some design review standards. Kluchka said the
Planning Commission has to be more rigorous in the Preliminary review and be diligent
in their findings in saying how PUDs meet the design standards in the Code.
Segelbaum said he thinks there are trade-offs in approving a PUD and that the Planning
Commission can ask for certain things.
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Waldhauser stated that the Bottineau Planning Advisory Committee had their last
meeting. She said it will be several months until a recommendation is made about the
location and number of stations.
Zimmerman reported that the City Council agreed to a more conservative approach
regarding the Community Center.
Cera reported on the City Council's discussion about organized garbage hauling. He
stated the Council consensus was not to have a single source garbage hauler, but to
have staff review the idea of splitting the City into zones and having individual haulers
pick up garbage on the same day.
5. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 pm.
Charles D. Segelbaum, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
Golden Valley Human Services Fund (GVHSF) Meeting
Minutes
March 9, 2015
Present: Hilmer Erickson, Kathryn Frommer, Alan Ingber, Connie Sandler, Toots Vodovoz,
Peggy Watkins, and Andrew Wold. Also present: Denise LaMere-Anderson, Andrea Mac
Arthur, and Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison.
Not Attending: Elissa Heilicher, Craig McDaniels, Jennifer Rudolph
Call to Order: Wold called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m.
Agenda Changes or Additions: Welcome New members was added to the agenda.
February 9 Minutes: Erickson moved and Vodovoz seconded the motion to approve the
minutes from February 9. The motion passed unanimously
New Member Introductions: The members welcomed Denise LaMere-Anderson and
Andrea MacArthur to the GVHSF.
Run the Valley:
Sponsor Update: Information has been sent to Gurstel Chargo and Herring Legal PLLP.
Frito Lay will be providing product for the event.
Volunteers: Fackler passed out the volunteer sheet. Vodovoz has contacted funded
agencies to provide volunteers.
Marketing/Publicity: Information has been sent to the SunPost, Channel 12, Golden Valley
City newsletter and the Park and Recreation brochure.
Registration: Fackler reported that there are 81 registered for the 5K Run, 63 registered for
the 10K Run, and 18 registered for the 5K Walk. This is slightly lower than last year at this
time.
Calendar Review:
April 11th - Run the Valley.
The Golf Classic and Lawn Bowling Tournament date will be set in March.
Other Business:
Run the Valley promotion:Wold agreed to speak on the Channel 12 promotion.
Future Event:Wold brought the idea of a disc golf Tournament in the fall to the members.
There are disc golf courses in Bassett Creek Park, Crystal and Theodore Wirth Park,
Minneapolis. Members asked for more information at the May meeting.
Adjournment: Sandler moved to adjourn the meeting, Erickson seconded the motion. The
meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Wold, GVHSF Chair Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Minutes
March 23, 2015
Present: Commissioners, Lynn Gitelis, Dawn Hill, Larry Johnson, Jim Stremel, Debra
Yahle, Council Member Larry Fonnest; Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist;
and Lisa Nesbitt, Administrative Assistant
Absent: Commissioner: Tracy Anderson and Tonia Galonska
Call to Order
Stremel called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
Approval of Regular and Joint Meeting Minutes — February 23, 2015
MOVED by Hill, seconded by Gitelis, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the
minutes of the February 23, 2015 regular and joint meetings.
Annual Report Review
MOVED by Hill, seconded by Yahle, and the motion carried unanimously to approve the
draft of the annual report. The report will be presented at a Council work session in April.
Staff will let the commission know the date of the work session.
By-Law Review
MOVED by Gitelis, seconded by Johnson, and the motion carried unanimously to approve
the updated commission by-laws to reflect the changes to the Guidelines for Advisory
Commissions, Committees, Boards and Councils, put out by Council. Gitelis believes that
the Open Meeting Law was changed to allow for electronic attendance. She requested that
staff research the law.
Chair and Vice-Chair Elections
This agenda item will be put on the April agenda, due to the absence of two
commissioners.
Program/Prouect Updates
The complete program/project summary is on file.
Additionally, Eckman reported on the following Water Resource update:
De-Cola Ponds Study— There will be a neighborhood meeting on March 30, 2015 at 6:30
pm in City Hall. Hill expressed a concern that the State is looking at bonding for that area,
which indicated to her that a solution has already been decided. Council Member Fonnest
explained that the bonding figure is more of a placeholder in the Governor's budget.
Stormwater Management— The Stormwater Management Ordinance has been adopted.
Staff will forward a copy to the commissioners.
Private Developments — Fonnest gave further explanation of the height and side set-back
interpretation.
Metro Blue Line Extension — Fonnest reported that the Council has expressed a desire for
both stations to remain under consideration. Additionally there is conversation within the
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
March 23, 2015
Page 2 of 2
railroad community to add another freight line to the existing corridor. If that were to happen
it would bump the LRT out of the corridor.
Recycling — Gitelis requested that residents be reminded that if they are having large
events, they can request recycling containers to be dropped off through Hennepin County.
It is a free service through the county. Gitelis also reported that she contacted the City of
Minneapolis to find out where they bring their organics but was unsuccessful in getting that
information.
A copy of the annual B3 Benchmarking report was handed out. A copy is on-file.
Commission Member Council Reports
None.
Other Business
Johnson reported that he has been visiting every nature area outlined in the Natural
Resources Management Plan.
Adiourn
MOVED by Gitelis, seconded by Hill, and the motion carried to adjourn.
Lisa Nesbitt
Administrative Assistant
JOINT WATER COMMISSION MINUTES
Golden Valley - Crystal - New Hope
Meeting of January 7, 2015
The Golden Valley — Crystal — New Hope Joint Water Commission meeting was called to
order at 1:37 p.m. in the City of Golden Valley Council Conference Room.
Commissioners Present
Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal
Kirk McDonald, City Manager, New Hope
Staff Present
Wayne Houle, Acting City Engineer, Crystal
Randy Kloepper, Utilities Superintendent, Crystal
Bob Paschke, Director of Public Works, New Hope
Bernie Weber, Operations Manager, New Hope
Dave Lemke, Utilities Supervisor, New Hope
Sue Virnig, Finance Director, Golden Valley
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director, Golden Valley
Jeff Oliver, City Engineer, Golden Valley
Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Supervisor, Golden Valley
Kelley Janes, Utilities Supervisor, Golden Valley
R.J. Kakach, Utility Engineer, Golden Valley
Pat Schutrop, Administrative Assistant, Golden Valley
Others Present
Steve Nelson, Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Minutes of December 3, 2014 Meeting
MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to approve the minutes of the December 3,
2014 meeting as presented. Motion carried.
Resolution 15-01 — Designating Depositories for Joint Water Commission Funds
Commissioner McDonald introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 15-01
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES FOR JOINT WATER FUNDS
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner
Norris and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Norris and
McDonald; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was
declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Vice Chair and her signature attested by
the Commissioner. Chair Tom Burt was not present.
Approve Audit Contract with MMKR
The contract was not received in time for this meeting. Deferred to the February meeting.
36-Inch Watermain Emergency Repair Update
Steve Nelson gave an update to the Commission on all of the JWC water supply projects.
Beginning with the 36-inch watermain, he said the preliminary design report for the 36-inch
Joint Water Commission
January 7, 2015
Page 2 of 3
watermain emergency repair will be ready for the JWC to review at its February meeting.
After the JWC has reviewed the report, a Tri-City Council meeting will be scheduled to
present the findings, most likely in March or April. The report will recommend what will be
needed to repair areas of the pipe that were compromised by the failure in September
2014. A conservative schedule and cost will be included in the report. This report will
address the recent watermain repair only. At some point, Norris noted the JWC will need a
report on the overall system so they can communicate the condition and impacts of the
system to the three city councils.
The February JWC meeting will be moved to February 11 to allow time for the TAC and
Bolton & Menk to review the report prior to presenting to the JWC.
Emergency Backup Water Supply Proiect Update
The Crystal wells are completed and the project came in below budget. The water line
portion of the well project was let and bids came in 100% over the project cost. The TAC
made the decision to delay reposting the supply line project to avoid risks to the JWC water
distribution due to a potential power outage that would take the Golden Valley generator
offline while the County Road 9 project is completed. Furthering the delay, there was
another break in the 36-inch watermain, which took the Crystal pump station and reservoir
offline. Therefore all the water distribution for the JWC water system will need to be
pumped from the Golden Valley reservoir pump station. Nelson talked with the well
contractor, Mark J. Traut Wells, and they will honor their bid amount for the Golden Valley
well through the delay.
Since the County Road 9 project affecting the JWC water supply is now completed, the
water supply line advertisement for bids is now ready to be reposted in the communities'
newspapers on January 15 and 22, with a bid opening scheduled for January 27.
In addition, an advertisement for bids for the high service pump and motor replacements at
the Golden Valley pump station will run concurrently with the water supply line ad for bids
with a bid opening also on January 27. The construction cost for the pump and motor
replacement project will be approximately $97,000. It was determined that the pump and
motor at the Golden Valley station needed to be replaced to optimize the reliability of the
emergency water supply during the 36-inch main replacement project.
MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to approve publishing the advertisement for
bids for the high service pump and motor replacements portion of the project and to add the
cost to the water supply line portion in the capital improvements program. Motion carried.
Replacement of the Golden Valley Generator Radiator and Generator Monitoring
Contract
Titan Energy Systems has the maintenance and generator monitoring contract with the
JWC. Titan Energy Systems found leaks in the generator radiator during the routine
scheduled maintenance. Titan's quote to replace the leaking radiator at the generator was
in excess of $20,000, therefore a quote was requested from Ziegler Power Systems to
replace the generator radiator. Ziegler submitted a quote in the amount of$18,321. Staff is
requesting approval to contract with Ziegler to replace the generator radiator.
MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to contract with Ziegler in the amount of
$18,321 to replace the Golden Valley generator radiator. Motion carried.
Joint Water Commission
January 7, 2015
Page 3 of 3
Monitoring of the generator was part of the contract with Titan, but Titan has not started
monitoring and have been unresponsive. Staff approached Ziegler for a quote, but Ziegler
said because of the remote start system, it is difficult to get parts. Bert Tracy said staff then
approached Total Controls to see if they could do the monitoring and service the remote
start system. If Total Controls can manage both monitoring and service, staff will bring the
proposal to the February JWC meeting for approval.
County Road 9 Project Update
Nothing new to report at this time.
Sprint Spectrum Second Amendment to Site Lease Agreement
Sprint has transmitters on the South Tower in New Hope. They are proposing a contract
extension and an increase in the annual rent of 3%.
MOVED by McDonald and seconded by Norris to accept the Second Amendment to Site
Lease Agreement between the Joint Water Commission and Sprint Spectrum. Motion
carried.
Other Business
Bob Paschke received the inspection report from KLM Engineering.
Next Meeting
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 11, 2015, at 1:30 p.m.
Adjournment
Vice Chair Norris adjourned the meeting at 2:09 p.m.
Anne Norris, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Pat Schutrop, Recording Secretary
SSW Cryo
'� e� ]tem 4A
BCWMC 4-16-15
Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
Minutes of Regular Meeting
March 19,2015
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 Alternate Commissioner Patty Acomb Engineer Karen Chandler, Barr Engineering
Co.
New Hope Commissioner John Elder Recorder Amy Herbert
Plymouth Alternate Commissioner David
Tobelmann
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)Members/Other Attendees Present:
Derek Asche,TAC,City of Plymouth Linda Loomis, Chair, Plan Steering Committee
Sandy Bainey, Friends of Northwood Lake Assoc. Richard McCoy, TAC, City of Robbinsdale
Steve Christopher, BWSR Jane McDonald Black,Alternate Commissioner, City of
Golden Valley
Pat Crough,Alternate Commissioner, City of New Patrick Noon, Alternate Commissioner, City of St. Louis
Hope Park
Eric Eckman, TAC, City of Golden Valley Bob Paschke,TAC, City of New Hope
Erick Francis,TAC,City of St. Louis Park Jim Prom, Councilmember, City of Plymouth
Christopher Gise, Golden Valley Resident Liz Stout,TAC, City of Minnetonka
Jere Gwin-Lenth, Friends of Northwood Lake Robert White,New Hope Resident
Mary Gwin-Lenth, Friends of Northwood Lake Pete Willenbring, WSB &Associates
Gary Holter, Alternate Commissioner, City of
Doug Williams, Friends of Northwood Lake
Medicine Lake
1
BCWMC March 19, 2015, Meeting Minutes
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
On Thursday, March 19, 2015, at 8:39 a.m. in the Council Conference room at Golden Valley City }fall, Chair de
Lambert called to order the meeting of the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC)and
asked for roll call to be taken.
2. CITIZEN FORUM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No items were raised.
3.AGENDA
Chair de Lambert announced that item 6B-Consider Approval of 50%Design Plans for 2015 Main Stem
Restoration Project(CR2015)-would be moved to later in the agenda. Commissioner Mueller moved to approve
the agenda as amended. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. (Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Administrator Jester added to the agenda payment of the invoice to Finance&Commerce in the amount of$94.15
for publication of the BCWMC's public hearing notice. She also noted the revised financial statement to include
the invoice. Chair de Lambert noted that the minutes of the February 19, 2015, BCWMC meeting should be
corrected to indicate that Alternate Commissioner Tobelmann was not present. Commissioner Goddard moved to
approve the consent agenda as amended. Alternate Commissioner Tobelmann seconded the motion. Upon a vote,
the motion carried 9-0. [The following items were approved as part of the Consent Agenda: the February 19,
2015, Commission Meeting minutes,the monthly financial report,the payment of the invoices, Approval to
Execute Agreement with Hennepin County for 2015 River Watch Program Pending Approval by Commission
Legal Counsel, Appointment of Commissioner Ginny Black to Budget Committee and Administrative Services
Committee, Set Public Hearing on 2015 BCWMC Watershed Management Plan for May 21,2015, and Set TAC
Meeting for April 2, 2015]. The general and construction account balances reported in the Fiscal Year 2015
Financial Report prepared for the March 19, 2015,meeting are as follows:
Checking Account Balance $841,880.89
TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE $841,880.89
TOTAL CASH& INVESTMENTS ON-HAND (3/11/15) $3,408,178.97
CIP Projects Levied—Budget Remaining ($2,674,767.87)
Closed Projects Remaining Balance $733,411.10
2013 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $1,465.41
2014 Anticipated Tax Levy Revenue $7,886.48
2
BCWMC March 19, 2015, Meeting Minutes
Anticipated Closed Project Balance $742,762.99
5. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Receive Comments from Public on Proposed Major Plan Amendment
• Revising the Northwood Lake Water Quality Improvement Project(NL-1) in the Capital
Improvement Program(CIP)from the construction of two stormwater ponds(NB-35A, B, C and NB-
29A, B)to the construction of one pond just upstream (west)of Northwood Lake and the construction
of a stormwater reuse system with bioretention basins in Northwood Park near the east end of the
lake).
• Adding to the CIP the Honeywell Pond Expansion Project(BC-4)to provide stormwater quantity and
water quality improvements,divert currently untreated stormwater to the pond,and provide
opportunities for reuse of water from the pond.
Administrator Jester summarized the proposed Major Plan Amendment. Chair de Lambert opened the public
hearing and called for comments. Jere Gwin-Lenth of the Friends of Northwood Lake stated that the group
has been meeting with the City of New Hope for a long time and there is lots of neighborhood involvement
with the proposed Northwood Lake Water Quality Improvement Project. He said that the Friends of
Northwood Lake is very supportive of the project.
Administrator Jester reported that staff submitted a Clean Water Partnership grant application to the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) for this project for the maximum grant amount of$300,000.
She said that the Commission will hear the MPCA's grant award decision by the end of April.
Chair de Lambert called for comments two more times. Upon hearing no additional comments, Chair de
Lambert closed the public hearing.
6. BUSINESS
A. Receive Update on Comments and Responses for Draft Watershed Management Plan
Administrator Jester reminded the Commission that the 60-day review of the BCWMC's draft Watershed
Management Plan ended in the end of January. She said that the Commission received comments from all of
the reviewing state agencies and others,and that staff and the BCWMC Plan Steering Committee are working
through the comments and drafting responses. Administrator Jester announced that the Plan Steering
Committee's next meeting is Monday, March 23 at 4:30 p.m. She said that the draft responses to comments
should be ready for the Commission's review at its April meeting.
B. Consider Approval of 50% Design Plans for 2015 Main Stem Restoration Project (CR2015)
This item was deferred to later in the meeting.
C. Consider Approval of Twin Lake In-Lake Alum Treatment Project Plans
Administrator Jester stated that last November the Commission approved an agreement with the City of
Golden Valley to implement this project. She announced that tonight the City of Golden Valley is holding a
public information meeting about this project. Administrator Jester explained that staff is looking for
Commission approval to implement the project as specified in the plans presented in the meeting packet.
3
BCWMC March 19, ' 01b, Meeting Minutes
Engineer Chandler provided details about the alum application. She said that a barge is used to apply the alum
to the lake,and the application needs to be done when the water is within a certain temperature range. She
said that permitting is a pretty simple process through the MPCA, and the permitting should be done in time
for the alum application to be done in April. Engineer Chandler explained that one of the key factors that
needs to be monitored as part of the alum application process is the lake water's pH level,which needs to be
within the range of 6.5 and 9. She reminded the Commission that one of the reasons that the application is
recommended to be done in two parts,two to three years apart, is because it is difficult to apply the full
dosage of alum without causing the pH level to drop too low and adversely affect aquatic life. She noted the
pH will be continually measured in the lake during the treatment. She provided more details about the weather
conditions that could affect the timing of the application including wind and rain. She responded to questions.
Administrator Jester noted that she would inform Commissioners and TAC members the date and time
planned for the application as some may want to observe. (Although it was also noted there may not be a
good viewing area.)
Alternate Commissioner Goddard moved to approve the Twin Lake alum treatment plans as presented.
Commissioner Hoschka seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
D. Consider Approval of Technical Advisory Committee Recommendations
Erick Francis reported that the TAC recommends that the Commission approve the Commission's 2017-2021
CIP as presented in the attachment to the TAC memo. Additionally, he reported that the TAC recommends
the Commission begin the XP-SWMM Phase II project in 2015 using Flood Control Long-term Maintenance
Funds and to seek additional funding for the project from other sources, and to complete the project in as
short a time frame as possible. Mr. Francis reported that the TAC also recommends that staff continue
working to develop a flow chart and frequently asked questions sheet to streamline the communication
process between cities,developers, and the Commission. The Commission discussed each recommendation
separately:
2017-2021 CIP
Alternate Commissioner Goddard raised the issue of flooding that has occurred in Wirth Park and along Wirth
Lake Parkway and the possibility that accumulated sediment in the channel could have contributed to the
flooding. She asked why that project is listed in the CIP as so many years out. Mr. Francis said it may have to
do with the expected timeframe for permitting the project and the anticipated issues with contaminated soils.
Administrator Jester noted that no TAC members had raised that particular issue in relation to that project.
Administrator Jester pointed out an error in the CIP table and said that the final cell should total $7,699,000.
There was discussion about the proposed increase in the Commission's annual levy request to more than
$1,000,000 for many of the upcoming years as listed in the 2017-2021 CIP table. Administrator Jester
reminded the group that Commission fiscal policies were recently revised to indicate a desire to maintain a
relatively stable level of levy request, but that the Commission understood that a$1 million levy was unlikely
to suffice for the large projects needed in the watershed.
Chair de Lambert said that he would like to see the table corrected for math errors and that he is a little
concerned about the proposed levy for 2017 as listed. "There was discussion about possibly splitting some of
the proposed projects over two years. Chair de Lambert recommended that staff correct the errors in the table,
that the TAC look at this proposed table again at its next meeting and bring options back to the Commission
at their April meeting, with the goal of keeping the total levy amount more uniform across years. The
Commission agreed.
4
BCWMC March 19, 2015, Meeting Minutes
XP-SWMM Model
Administrator Jester provided a history of the Commission and TAC's discussions of this item. She reported
that the TAC recommends that the Commission move forward with the XP-SWMM Phase ll, and she
reminded the Commission that it did not budget for this work in its 2015 administrative budget.
Mr. Asche said that he knows that some cities want this next phase of the XP-SWMM model and that those
cities would find value in it,but he does not support it. He said that a$250,000 model update is a significant
project needing thoughtful consideration. Mr. Asche noted how in 2011 the Commission discussed the idea
that cities and others could update the model and that the Commission wouldn't need to update the model.
Mr. Asche also commented that the$250,000 proposed to be spent on this project will not reduce
phosphorous in the cities. Mr. Asche stated that the decision today is not whether the model should be
updated but whether the model should be updated through the Commission or updated as originally discussed
through the cities and other projects in the watershed.
Ms. Stout said that she recalls that the Commission discussed the Commission Engineer being the keeper of
the model so that there would be continuity within the model, which cities and developers would be welcome
to use. She reminded the Commission that it was founded as a flood management organization,and flooding
still impacts downstream communities. Ms. Stout said that she thinks it would be wrong for the Commission
not to undertake the modeling update.
There was discussion. Engineer Chandler noted that the original cost of converting the two existing models
into the XP-SWMM model was$70,000. She explained that back in 2011 Barr Engineering had stated that
cities could update the model and then turn the work back in to the Commission Engineer to review and
ensure the quality of the model.
Mr. Eckman stated that flooding is an important issue for the City of Golden Valley and that it sounds like
from what Lois Eberhart said at the TAC meeting that it is an important issue for the City of Minneapolis as
well. He described how there are homes in the City that are at risk of flooding. Mr. Eckman provided some
real-world examples of work proposed in the City of Golden Valley that could have flooding impacts, and he
described the value of being able to use a model in determining the specifications for such projects. Fie said
that the City of Golden Valley thinks it is important to have an XP-SWMM model that's updated and
coordinated with the Commission Engineer. Commissioners Hoschka and Goddard spoke in favor of the
Commission completing the model update noting the difficulties with multiple firms or cities updating
different portions of the model and the coarseness of the current model.
Mr. LeFevere said that it seems if the Commission is going to do this model update it will have to front-end
the cost. He added that to the extent that this model would be useful in Commission project reviews for its
own capital projects,the Commission could charge the cost back to the CIP projects and could charge
developers through fees.
Chair de Lambert commented that he thinks it is time for the Commission to figure out what additional
information, if any, is needed in order to make a decision. He said he thinks the staff's recommendation to
develop a scope and timeline is a good start. Commissioner Tobelmann said that he would like to understand
the pros and cons of this project. Engineer Chandler said that in order to develop a project timeline, the
Commission would need to decide if the project would start this year or next year. Chair de Lambert
recommended developing the timeline as if the project would start this year.
Commissioner Hoschka moved to approve staffs recommendation to begin the XP-SWMM Phase II process
with staff developing a project scope and timeline for the project to start this year. Alternate Commissioner
5
BCWMC March 19, 2015, Meeting Minutes
Scanlan seconded the motion. Mr.Asche asked if the Commission is only asking the Commission Engineer
for this scope or if the Commission is going to get something for comparison. Chair de Lambert indicated that
this was not a proposal from the Commission Engineer but simply more information about the potential
project needed for the Commission to make a more informed decision. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
Ms. Chandler clarified that the Commission also wants information on pros and cons, and the Commission
indicated yes.
Communication Protocols Among Cities,Developers,and Commission
Administrator Jester said that the TAC recommends staff create a communication flow chart and a frequently
asked questions document. She described the protocols that have been put in place including that contractors
and developers are first directed by Commission staff to the appropriate city staff person.
E. Consider Approval of Education Committee Recommendations
i. Approval of 2015 Education and Outreach Budget and Work Plan; Approval to Execute
Contract with University of Minnesota to Participate in 2015 Non-point Education for
Municipal Officials (NEMO) Program Pending Approval by Commission Legal Counsel
Administrator Jester reported that the Education Committee met on March 9th and recommended for
approval the 2015 Education and Outreach Budget and Work Plan as presented in the meeting materials.
She noted that this budget is in line with the education/outreach budget included in the 2015
Administrative Budget. She highlighted new items and stated that the Committee decided not to fund
Blue Thumb for 2015 because Blue Thumb and Metro Blooms are merging and the Commission already
provides funds to Metro Blooms. She said that the funds budgeted for Blue Thumb have been taken out of
the presented budget.
Administrator Jester communicated that the Committee recommends funding the Children's Water
Festival in the amount of$350 and the Freshwater Society's Water Stewardship Program in the amount of
$1,000. She reported that the Committee recommends budgeting$1,000 for reimbursing Commissioners
for training. She said for example reimbursing Commissioners for registration fees, not travel expenses,
on a pre-approval basis. She explained that the Committee recommends supporting NEMO at a funding
level of$750 plus her time to help plan the workshops. Administrator Jester said that if the Commission
approves this funding,the Commission will need to execute an agreement with the University of
Minnesota for the NEMO program,and the draft contract is in the meeting packet. She said that the
Commission's Legal Counsel requested a change to that contract and is working it out with the
University.
Alternate Commissioner Scanlan moved to approve the 2015 Education and Outreach Budget and Work
Plan and the contract with the University of Minnesota for the NEMO program with the Commission's
Legal Counsel's review. Commissioner Elder seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
ii. Approval to Develop and Execute Contract with HDR for Website Redesign Project
Administrator Jester described the Education Committee's proposal review process, and she presented the
Committee's recommendation to contract with HDR for the website redesign project. Alternate
Commissioner Tobelmann moved to approve staff working with HDR, and the Commission's Legal
Counsel to develop a contract to bring in front of the Commission at its April meeting. Commissioner
6
SCWMC March 19, 2015, Meeting Minutes
Elder seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
6B. Consider Approval of 50% Design Plans for 2015 Main Stem Restoration Project(CR2015)
Commissioner Hoschka announced that she now works for WSB&Associates, and she described her discussion
with the Commission's legal counsel on how to avoid possible conflict of interest issues. She said that she won't
work on Commission projects at WSB and she won't vote on WSB projects as a Commissioner.
Mr. Eckman said that the 2015 Main Stem Restoration Project comprises almost two miles of streambank
restoration. He stated that the project is estimated to reduce total phosphorous by 61 pounds per year and to
reduce total suspended sediment loading by 140-200 pounds per year. Mr. Eckman explained that the project's
approach is a combination of bioengineering and hard armoring. He noted that the City has received input from
residents through two open houses and direct contact. He said that the majority of the project work will be on
private property.
Mr. Eckman explained that these 50%design plans reflect information from the feasibility study, input from
residents,and further field evaluation.
Engineer Chandler asked why these design plans didn't include more of the bioengineering methods mentioned in
the feasibility study, such as root wads, rock vanes, and VRSS (Vegetated Reinforced Soil Slope). Mr. Eckman
said that these items will be further evaluated to see if they could be incorporated into the project. Pete
Willenbring of WSB & Associates described some of the considerations that go into the decisions of what method
to use in each location, such as effects the methods would have on the cross section of the channel and impacts to
the flood stage.
Engineer Chandler asked about areas C and D, which were identified in the feasibility study as having continuous
riprap installed as part of the project. She pointed out that these design plans call for intermittent riprap in these
areas. She asked for an explanation for the change and voiced concerns that intermittent riprap could lead to
future problems,such as erosion. Mr. Willenbring said that soft armoring is a focus for the City of Golden Valley
with this project,but he agrees that these areas need to be reviewed. Engineer Chandler also asked about a change
from the feasibility study regarding stabilizing a bank. She noted that the feasibility study showed either VRSS or
a nine-foot tall boulder wall,and now the plans show something much less. Engineer Chandler said that the
concern is whether the new proposed technique for this area provides enough stabilization. Mr. Willenbring said
that they can look into it. Engineer Chandler summarized the rest of the Commission Engineer's comments.
Administrator Jester asked what kind of feedback the City received at the public open houses. Mr. Eckman
described the feedback received, noting that staff continue to work with individual landowners regarding their
thoughts and desire for the project.
Commissioner Muller moved to approve the Commission Engineer's recommendation of approving the 50%
design plans conditionally and to authorize the City of Golden Valley to move ahead with final design plans and
contract documents. Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion. Upon a vote,the motion carried 9-0.
7. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Administrator:
i. Administrator Jester noted that her report is in the meeting packet.
B. Chair:
7
BCWMC March 19, 2015, Meetinq Minutes
i. Chair de Lambert announced that the Commission will be participating in the Plymouth Home
Expo and asked for volunteers for the event.
C. Commissioners:
i. Commissioner Tobelmann reported that he recently attended a road salt symposium,and he
provided insights about chloride. He provided information and his thoughts regarding
implications for the Commission including the need for a watershed strategy.
D. TAC Members: No TAC Communications
E. Committees: No Committee Communications
F. Legal Counsel: No Legal Communications
G. Engineer: No Engineer Communications
8. INFORMATION ONLY (Available at
h ttp://www.bassettcreekwmo.org/Meetings/2015/2015-
March/2015MarchMeetin gPacket.htm)
A. CIP Project Update Chart
B. Grant Tracking Summary and Spreadsheet
C. Metro Watershed Partners and Clean Water MN 2014 Report
9. ADJOURNMENT
Chair de Lambert adjourned the meeting at 10:48 a.m.
Amy Herbert, Recorder Date
Secretary Date
8
city U
goldcn MEMORANDUM
V ll Administrative Services De artment
a e� _ _ p
763 593 8013/763-593-3969(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. D. Resolution Amending Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-Law Changes
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
John Crelly, Fire Chief
Summary
The Golden Valley Fire Relief Association (GVFRA) by-law changes were approved by Council on
February 17, 2015. At the March GVFRA meeting, all changes were approved except for the
deferred interest benefit. The GVFRA would like you to amend the previous request and approve
the current language to coincide with the GVFRA current by-laws.
By-law changes are the following:
Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit would be set at 5%.
Attachments
• Resolution Amending Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-Law Article XI Section I - Service
Pension Interest (1 page)
• Article XI - Service Pension Interest on Deferred Retirement Benefit (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Approving Golden Valley Fire Relief Association By-Law Article XI
Section I -Service Pension Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit.
Resolution 15-41 May 19, 2015
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AMENDING GOLDEN VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT
RELIEF ASSOCIATION BY-LAW ARTICLE XI DEFERRED INTEREST
PAYMENT AND SERVICE PENSION INTEREST
WHEREAS, the Golden Valley Fire Department Relief Association has by-laws
governing their process for active duty; and
WHEREAS, an active member of the Golden Valley Fire Department Relief
Association is eligible to collect a lump sum service pension subject to Article XI of the by-
laws; and
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley may be required to approve a relief
association's pension benefit level, and also may be required to make contributions to fund
relief association pension benefits; and
WHEREAS, the Article XI relates to a section of the by-laws; and
WHEREAS, the amendment will change the Deferred Interest Payment as originally
approved with Resolution 15-16; and
WHEREAS, the Deferred Interest Payment is defined in Attachment A and the
Golden Valley Fire Relief approved the language of the change on March 4, 2015.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley, Minnesota, as follows:
Interest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit defined.
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine 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.
Attachment A
ARTICLE XI.
RETIREMENT BENEFIT
Section 1: Service Pension - An active member of the Association who leaves active duty with the Fire
Department is eligible to collect a lump sum service pension subject to the following:
a.lnterest on the Deferred Retirement Benefit — Interest shall be added to the deferred benefit
amount, compounded annually, at a rate equal to the actual time weighted total rate of return
of the fund as set by the board of trustees under Minn. Stat. § 356.219, up to 5%, and
applied consistently for all deferred service pensioners. Minn. Stat. § 424A.02, subd. 10(b),
requires municipal ratification of the rate set by the board of trustees in years in which the
relief association does not have a surplus over full funding under Minn. Stat. § 69.772, subd
3, paragraph (c), clause (5), or 69.773, subd 4, and if the municipality is required to provide
financial support to the special fund of the relief association under Minn. Stat. § 69.772 or
69.773. As of the date of this amendment, the following rates have been set by the board:
2006 = 5%, 2007 = 5%, 2008 = 0%, 2009 = 0%, 2010 = 5%, 2011=0%, 2012=5%. The
deferred interest rate as set by the board of trustees under Minn. Stat. § 356.219, is 5%
unless and until otherwise changed by amending these bylaws. Interest will not accrue for
any year in which the member reaches the eligible to be paid out.
I
golden MEMORANDUM
vallCity 0� ey Physical Development Department
763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. E. 1. Award Contract for TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue Intersection Improvement Project No.
12-03
Prepared By
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer
Summary
At its April 7, 2015, meeting, the Council authorized a cooperative agreement with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for the jointly funded TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue Intersection
Improvement Project. The City-led project is being performed to alleviate congestion on
Winnetka Avenue and streamline access to TH 55. Other ancillary improvements, included in the
project after original project scoping, include water main replacement, trail and pedestrian ramp
upgrades, and replacement of the traffic signal at the intersection. The bid opening was on May
1, 2015, and the following bids were received:
Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. $1,743,415.81
Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $2,129,251.35
Staff has reviewed the bids and found them to be accurate and in order.
There are numerous funding sources for this project. Original funding source estimates, as
identified in the 2015-2019 Capital Improvement Program (5-031) are shown below. As additional
work was added to the project by MnDOT and Hennepin County, their associated funding
obligations increased. An agreement with Hennepin County for their increased funding will be
brought to Council in the near future.
Original CIP Current Funding
MnDOT Cooperative Agreement: $588,500.00 $656,137.00
MnDOT $ 85,000.00 $ 0.00
Hennepin County: $ 71,750.00 $ 93,111.50
City Municipal State Aid $675,000.00 $803,820.18
City Water and Sewer CIP (W&55-051) $525,000.00 $190,347.13
The City has adequate funding available in both its Municipal State Aid Construction account and
Water and Sewer fund.
Attachments
• Location Map (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to award a contract for the TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue Intersection Improvement
Project to the lowest responsible bidder, Forest Lake Contracting, Inc., in the amount of
$1,743,415.81.
V 1� f 1 r f
M°
.o
+f REVISE SIGNAL SYSTEM FOR
DUAL LEFT TURN 8 PHASE
OPERATION AND ACCESSIBLE
a PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS.
lit
3a.
r :
�a
�o
i
�r
N
LEGEND
6 PAVEMENT WIDENING
RAISEDBMEDIAN /
�llllld MILL AND OVERLAY
- MEDIAN LANDSCAPING
a
WINNETKA AVE.IMPROVEMENTS
SEH OOIDEN VALLEY,MN a. _
ci tl� o
golden!-A
valley Physical Development Department
763-593-8030 1763-593-3988(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. F. Authorize Maintenance Agreement with MnDOT for Traffic Signal at TH 55 and Winnetka
Avenue
Prepared By
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer
Summary
As part of the TH 55 and Winnetka Intersection Improvement Project, the existing traffic signal at
the intersection will be replaced. The existing signal is being replaced due to its age and the
proposed new intersection geometry. As such, the City must enter into an agreement with the
Minnesota Department of Transportation for long-term maintenance and operation of the signal.
Staff has reviewed the maintenance agreement and has found it to be consistent with other
traffic signal maintenance agreements throughout the City.
Attachments
• Resolution Authorizing Traffic Control Signal Maintenance Agreement with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (1 page)
• Traffic Control Signal Maintenance Agreement (5 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Maintenance Agreement with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for the proposed traffic signal at TH 55 and Winnetka Avenue.
Resolution 15-42 May 19, 2015
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WHEREAS, funding is available from the Minnesota Department of Transportation
and Hennepin County for the replacement of the traffic signal at TH 55 and Winnetka
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is committed to partnering with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for long-term maintenance and operation of the traffic signal.
IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Golden Valley enter into MnDOT agreement No.
1000531 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following
purposes:
To provide for the power, operation, and maintenance of the new Traffic Control
Signal and Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption System on Trunk Highway No. 55
(Olson Memorial Highway) and County State Aid No. 156 (Winnetka Avenue); and
the existing Interconnect on Trunk Highway No. 55 from County State Aid Highway
No. 156 (Winnetka Avenue) to Boone Avenue and Rhode Island Avenue North in the
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and the City Manager are
authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement.
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
ame:whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
MnDOT Contract No: 1000531
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
And
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
Control Section(C.S.): 2723
Trunk Highway Number(T.H.): 55=188
Signal System 1D 20863
This Agreement is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation("State")and
City of Golden Valley acting through its City Council("City").
Recitals
1. The City and State have found it in the best interest of the Public to remove the existing Traffic Control
Signal and install a new Traffic Control Signal("Signal System")and Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption
System('EVP System"), at the intersection of Trunk Highway No. 55 (Olson Memorial Highway)and
County State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka Avenue),in the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota;and
2. The City and the State wish to define their respective power,operation,and maintenance responsibilities for
the new Signal System and EVP System on Trunk Highway No. 55(Olson Memorial Highway)and County
State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka Avenue); and the existing Interconnect on Trunk Highway No.55
from County State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka Avenue)to Boone Avenue and Rhode Island Avenue N.
in the City of Golden Valley,Minnesota;and
3. The City and the State will participate in the power,operation,and maintenance of the new Signal System,
EVP System, and existing Interconnect.
4. Cooperative Agreement No.04853 between the State and City will address the construction cost of this
Project;and
5. Minnesota Statutes § 161.20,subdivision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make
arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing,
maintaining and improving the trunk highway system.
Agreement
1. Term of Agreement; Survival of Terms;
1.1. Effective date. This Agreement will be effective on the date the State obtains all signatures required by
Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05,subdivision 2.
1.2. Expiration date.This Agreement will expire when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled.
1.3. Survival of terms. All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive
in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement,
including,without limitation,the following clauses: 5.Liability; Worker Compensation Claims;Insurance;
7. State Audits; 8. Government Data Practices;9. Governing Law;Jurisdiction;Venue;and 11.Force
Majeure. The terms and conditions set forth in Article 2. Signal System,F,VP System,and Interconnect-
Power,Operation,and Maintenance may be terminated by another Agreement between the parties.
2. Signal System,EVP System,and Interconnect-Power,Operation,and Maintenance
Power, operation,and maintenance responsibilities will be as follows for the new Signal System and EVP System
on Trunk Highway No. 55(Olson Memorial Highway)and County State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka
-1-
MnDOT Contract No: 1000531
Avenue);and the existing Interconnect on Trunk Highway No.55 from County State Aid Highway No. 156
(Winnetka Avenue)to Boone Avenue and Rhode Island Avenue N.
2.1. City Responsibilities
A. Power.The City will be responsible for the hook-up cost and application to secure an adequate power
supply to the service pad or pole and will pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to
operate the new Signal System,EVP System,and existing Interconnect.
B. Minor Signal System Maintenance. The City will provide for the following at its own cost.
i. Maintain the signal pole mounted LED luminaires, including replacing the luminaires when
necessary.The LED luminaire must be replaced when it fails or when light levels drop below
recommended AASHTO levels for the installation.
ii. Replace the Signal System LED indications. Replacing LED indications consists of replacing each
LED indication when it reaches end of life per the MnDOT Traffic Engineering Manual,fails,or no
longer meets Institute of Traffic Engineers(ITE)standards for light output.
iii. Clean the Signal System controller cabinet and service cabinet exteriors.
iv. Clean and paint the Signal System and luminaire mast arm extensions.
2.2. State Responsibilities
A. Interconnect, Other Maintenance,and Timing. The State will maintain the existing Interconnect[on
Trunk Highway No.55 from County State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka Avenue)to Boone Avenue
and Rhode Island Avenue N.]and signing,and perform all other Signal System and signal pole
luminaire circuit maintenance at its own cost. All Signal System timing will be determined by the State
and no changes will be made without the State's approval.
B. EVPSystem Operation. The EVP System will be installed, operated,maintained,and removed
according to the following conditions and requirements:
i. All maintenance of the EVP System must be done by State forces.
ii. Emitter units may be installed only on authorized emergency vehicles,as defined in Minnesota
Statutes§ 169.011,Subdivision 3. Authorized emergency vehicles may use emitter units only when
responding to an emergency. The City will provide the State's District Engineer or designated
representative a list of all vehicles with emitter units, if requested by the State.
W. Malfunction of the EVP System must be reported to the State immediately.
iv. In the event the EVP System or its components are,in the opinion of the State, being misused or the
conditions set forth in Paragraph ii.above are violated,and such misuse or violation continues after
the City receives written notice from the State,the State may remove the EVP System. Upon
removal of the EVP System pursuant to this Paragraph,all of its parts and components become the
property of the State.
v. All timing of the EVP System will be determined by the State
C. Locating and Ownership.
As owner,the State will perform the Gopher State One Call locating for the Signal System and the
existing Interconnect on Trunk Highway No.55 from County State Aid Highway No. 156(Winnetka
Avenue)to Boone Avenue and Rhode Island Avenue N. The State reserves the right for future signal
system replacement or relocation.
2.3. Right of Way Access.Each party authorizes the other party to enter upon their respective public right of way
to perform the maintenance activities described in this Agreement.
-2-
MnDOT Contract No: 1000531
2.4. Related Agreements This agreement will supersede and terminate the operation and maintenance terms of
Agreement No. 58350 dated November 17, 1976 between the City, State,and Hennepin County for the
intersection of Trunk Highway No. 55(Olson Memorial Highway)and County State Aid Highway No. 156
(Winnetka Avenue). Agreement No. 58350 will remain in full force and effect for the remaining
intersections of Trunk Highway No.55 at Glenwood Avenue(County State Aid Highway No.40),Boone
Avenue,and Douglas Drive(County State Aid Highway No. 102)in Golden Valley,Hennepin County,
Minnesota.Hennepin County will be sent a letter informing it of said termination.
3. Authorized Representatives
Each party's Authorized Representative is responsible for administering this Agreement and is authorized to give
and receive any notice or demand required or permitted by this Agreement.
3.1. The State's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: Allan Espinoza, MnDOT Metro District Traffic Engineering, (or successor)
Address: 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113
Telephone: (651)234-7812
Fax: (651) 234-7850
E-Mail: allan.espinoza(&state.mn.us
3.2. The City's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: Jeffrey Oliver/City Engineer, (or successor)
Address: 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427
Telephone: (763)593-8034
Fax: (763)593-3988
E-Mail: JOliver@goldenvalley.gov
4. Assignment;Amendments;Waiver; Contract Complete
4.1. Assignment.Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the
prior consent of the other party and a written assignment agreement,executed and approved by the same
parties who executed and approved this Agreement,or their successors in office.
4.2. Amendments Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has
been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement,or
their successors in office.
4.3. Waiver. If a party fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement,that failure does not waive the provision
or the party's right to subsequently enforce it.
4.4. Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the State and
the City.No other understanding regarding this Agreement,whether written or oral,may be used to bind
either party.
5. Liability;Worker Compensation Claims; Insurance
5.1. Each party is responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law
and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes
§ 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability of the State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other
applicable law govern liability of the City.
5.2. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any ctaims arising under the Workers Compensation
Act.
-3-
MnDOT Contract No: 1000531
6. Nondiscrimination
Provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination are
considered part of this Agreement.
7. State Audits
Under Minnesota Statutes§ 16C.05, subdivision 5,the City's books,records,documents, and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State Auditor
or Legislative Auditor,as appropriate,for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement.
S. Government Data Practices
The City and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,Minnesota Statutes Chapter
13,as it applies to all data provided by the State under this Agreement,and as it applies to all data created,
collected,received,stored,used,maintained,or disseminated by the City under this Agreement. The civil
remedies of Minnesota Statutes§13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the City
or the State.
9. Governing Law;Jurisdiction;Venue
Minnesota law governs the validity,interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. Venue for all legal
proceedings arising out of this Agreement,or its breach,must be in the appropriate state or federal court with
competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County,Minnesota.
10. Termination by Mutual Agreement
This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties.
11. Force Majeure
Neither party will be responsible to the other for a failure to perform under this Agreement(or a delay in
performance),if such failure or delay is due to a force majeure event. A force majeure event is an event beyond a
party's reasonable control,including but not limited to,unusually severe weather, fire, floods,other acts of God,
labor disputes,acts of war or terrorism,or public health emergencies.
(The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank)
-4-
NinDOT Contract No: 1000531
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The undersigned certify that they have lawfully Recommended for Approval:
executed this contract on behalf of the Governmental
Unit as required by applicable charter provisions,
resolutions or ordinances. By:
(District Traffic Engineer)
By: Date:
Title:
Approved:
Date: By:
(District Engineer)
By: Date:
Title:
Date: COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
By:
(With delegated authority)
Date:
INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS
EXECUTION.
-5-
city 0goldeni*,,
=k*x r
aY Physical Development Department
763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. G. Authorize Agreement with WSB &Associates, Inc. for Surveying and Private Utility
Inspections Services for the Douglas Drive (CSAH 102) Reconstruction Project
Prepared By
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer
Summary
The City, in partnership with Hennepin County, is the leading agency for the Douglas Drive (CSAH
102) Reconstruction Project. The project has been in the planning stages since 2009 and
reconstruction is scheduled to begin in the spring of 2016. During the planning phases, numerous
private utility companies have identified underground and overhead facilities that they own and
operate that are either in conflict with the project or in need of rehabilitation. As such,
approximately six private utility companies will be performing extensive relocation and
rehabilitation work on their systems this summer and fall. These companies include Xcel Energy,
CenterPoint Energy, CenturyLink Communications, Comcast Cable, Zayo Communications, and
AT&T. Private utility work includes burial of 1.75 miles of overhead utilities, replacement of 2
miles of gas main, and relocation of approximately 1.75 miles of already-buried utilities.
Private utility relocation is a common piece of large road construction projects. Construction
delays caused by utility issues are a common cause for litigation between a roadway contractor
and the contracting agency. By having the utility companies relocate and rehabilitate their
facilities ahead of the project,the project team hopes to eliminate delay claims by the contractor,
as well as accelerate the timeframe for completion of the project.
In order to accurately and efficiently have the private utility companies perform their relocations
and rehabilitations, the project team needs to have a high level of interaction with each of the
utility companies' contractors and engineers. In addition, in an effort to keep the corridor
organized, staff recommends that a surveyor be hired to stake locations and final grades for the
private utilities. This will ensure that each of the utilities installs in the correct location and will
minimize future conflicts.
Staff has obtained a proposal from WSB & Associates, Inc., the design consultant for the
reconstruction project, to provide private utility coordination and surveying work in connection
with the private utility coordination. The proposal includes the following services:
• Weekly Construction Coordination Meetings
• Document Private Utility Construction Progress
• Prepare As-Built Drawings and Surveys
• Tie Utility Relocation Information into Final Douglas Construction Plans
• Provide Staking Services for Utility Installations
• Observe and Manage Private Utility Contractors
Staff has coordinated this proposal with both the Hennepin County Permitting Department and
Hennepin County Transportation Department. WSB will communicate all essential construction
updates and necessary decisions to the City and County for review.
The City, responsible for the pre-engineering work on this project, will fund the work done by
WSB. The proposal submitted by WSB is in the amount not to exceed $96,956. There is available
funding in the 2015-2019 Douglas Drive Capital Improvement Program (DD-001, page 104).
Hennepin County will be responsible for all field inspection and project administration during the
two year roadway construction project.
Attachments
• Location map (4 pages)
• Professional Services Scope of Work for Douglas Drive Private Utility Relocation (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. for professional services on the
Douglas Drive Private Utility Relocation Work in the amount not to exceed $96,956.
r
A ,. N.� � y`
125 ft
I
Flick
rr!
Union Pacific Railroad z
M Amne
Regional Trailfi i
r io
t Mer ttt. r ,r
!'rtf:MNt
to AMttirthMritrt!NN r
,,mw-r'R77 TM MF+lN1 C c �`t
1Rit1111:Al ttT !}Ittn�R b4MVt11t1�KYl(V r st t�f1
M6'trp{triFitpy'nM'fHhr r'A'11�1 Mir' ITIt IM�►rr/tltllbNt:'1 ► .-„fig __�.�.iL
'NiMtrt+rteF�enrlM�� N " K�Nt� Mt>dhlltrtHlf
Art►f'-' inryla..,'tf! .t, M� ~ tR'MMStr1►r th,t. ' .. ..
•-' `;:prnepetrh' �re�tr�►tr b TIY1••-Frlr
to
t ,. p hbNtAM�w'IFtt N'tl! .. t
Ib-
.2tx
IJ
Iz
� IM
� ti
o ti.
a Country Club Dr Service Road
M ,........ ...
'� �MINNESOTA� '
o r • ►
O
�O
No
city ofJ Project Layout
goCSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) S.P. 128-091-004
valley City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
o;
'4 • "_�" N
Olympia Street
.. R )PI'
Y- ,a
a
' I
IN ti Winsdale Street
tip•.! r
, y
�,-
Knoll.8 t.
o
td
X t
Bassett^Cee r' 0
r ilk
�;T
Phoenix Streets
rw
IleV
P �
I a.
� � S
'^o
Y city of Project Layout
mE CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) S.P. 128-091-004
Valley City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
a;
J� 191
r. 4
-• .•� - � Vim,
0 125 ft 250 f I
t dWITI'M/hfltMtlt ht ar `-�i ;—k Irk.—
- - - '
w.:. •" .
: , It i
4M
Duluth Street
Af
ip
m _ ji—
r
tf' r M f _
x,U.' ..
ol
ooaacc. �
1Ai
Heglp'
. r
IA
0
Y city of Project Layout
a;Tvalle
CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) S.P. 128-091-004
8� y City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
o;
3'
Medicine Lake Road
r
-f-T,
r
J
i
Wynnwood Road -
-
jt a
.: Sandburg Road � O r ►1 �� - �� • '4
ff
', i
CIL
o i
✓ �*1kt
Elf
It
0
�o
P X
city of Project Layout
go
valley CSAH 102 (Douglas Drive) S.P. 128-091-004
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
o;
Douglas Drive Private Utility Relocation
Construction Oversight
Engineering Services
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1 —Project Coordination
1.1 Weekly Meetings: This task will include weekly meetings with all the utility owners,
City and County officials and other affected stakeholders (as needed). WSB will lead the
meetings and document the meetings with official meeting minutes.
1.2 Documentation: This task will include documenting the locations the utilities plan to
relocate to, and where the relocations will land in relation to the Douglas Drive project in
2016. Any location identified as being in conflict will be documented and alerted to the
Douglas Drive design team. WSB will also complete daily logs which identify the work
that was completed each day. WSB will review the traffic control logs and any other
requirements required as part of the City and County permits applicable to the project.
1.3 Prepare Detailed Construction Drawings: WSB will distribute appropriate design
plans from the 2016 Douglas Drive Roadway Project. This may include elevations and
offsets. WSB will use the information from the plans to stake future curb lines, storm
sewer structures and right of way lines.
1.4 Update Douglas Drive Plans with Relocated Utility Locations: WSB will compile the
information from the relocation process and update the Douglas Drive plans as
appropriate.
Task 2 —Construction Staking
Staking: WSB will stake proposed running lines for the new utilities that provide us their
proposed locations and have been compared to other utilities and/or future roadway
construction. The stakes will provided stakes every 100' (at a minimum). The stakes
will provide the offset to the running line and any time the utilities will need overdepth.
It is anticipated the utility companies will provide data after the utility has been installed
regarding x,y,z location. WSB will survey this information and provide to the design
staff to attempt to minimize conflicts with next year's project.
Task 3—Construction Observation
WSB will provide an inspector no more than 20 hours per week. Often this will be 4 hours per
day, to answer questions and help schedule staking. The observer will also communicate with
City and County staff on a regular basis. It is anticipated the relocations will last 16 weeks
throughout the summer.
Proposal-Douglas Drive Private Utility Relocations Page I
Construction Oversight
Hennepin County/City of Golden Valley
ESTIMATED COST
The table below shows a summary of WSB's estimate of the cost for the work described above.
The estimated cost is $96,956. This includes WSB's labor at our standard hourly billing rates.
WSB will bill the City for the actual hours worked up to the maximum of$96,956. A detailed
breakdown of the hours can be found on the following page.
Tasks Project Cost
Task 1 —Project Coordination $29,808
Task 2 —Construction Staking $35,180
Task 3 — Business and Resident Liaison $31,968
Total Cost $96,956
Accepted:
City of Golden Valley, MN
By:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager Date:
City of Golden Valley, MN
By:
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor Date:
City of Golden Valley, MN
Proposal- Douglas Drive Private Utility Relocations Page 2
Construction Oversight
Hennepin County/City of Golden Valley
C i t1 Q�golden!'-40'
yvalle Administrative Services Department
763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. H. Approve Requests for Beer and/or Wine at Brookview Park
Prepared By
Kris Luedke, City Clerk
Summary
As per City Code Section 10.83, Subd. 2 I. "No person shall possess, display, consume or use
alcoholic beverages on any City park property, unless permission is granted by the Council." As
part of the application process for a Facilities Use Permit to use the large and small picnic shelters
at Brookview Park the applicant has the option to pay an additional $25 to be able to serve beer
and/or wine. Attached is a list of the individuals and/or organizations who have requested that
option.
Attachments
• Beer and/or wine request list (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the requests for beer and/or wine at Brookview Park as recommended by
staff.
BEER AND/OR WINE REQUEST LIST
INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION CC DATE
DATE TIME SHELTER APPROVED
Precious Zelee 07-19 5 pm - 10 pm Large 05-19-15
Karen Gureghian 08-11 5 pm - 10 pm Large 05-19-15
Heidi Dolan 06-14 11 am - 4 pm Small 05-19-15
Halleand Habicht 07-22 11 am - 4 pm Large 05-19-15
Sandy Jakubowsky 06-17 11 am - 4 pm Large 05-19-15
Carlos Demiranda 05-25 11 am - 4 pm Large 05-19-15
Jessica Arteaga 07-18 5 pm - 10 pm Small 05-19-15
Kelly Page 05-23 11 am -4 pm Small 05-19-15
Natasha Roberts 05-24 5 pm - 10 pm Large 05-19-15
Natasha Roberts 05-24 11 am - 4 pm Large 05-19-15
Julie Monette 09-20 11 am - 4 pm Small 05-19-15
city 0
go1dcn1VkAr M E M 0 R A N D U M
l Physical Development Department
artment Y P �'
763-593-8090/763-593-3997(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 5, 2015
Agenda Item
3. I. Second Consideration - Adoption of Chapters 1305 and 1323 of the 2015 State Building Code
Prepared By
Jerry Frevel, Building Official
Summary
The State of Minnesota will adopt the following Chapters of the 2015 State Building Code on
June 2, 2015. These relate to commercial properties or residential properties that are comprised of
three or more units.
1305 Minnesota Building Code (amended 2012 IBC)
1323 Minnesota (Commercial) Energy Code
The first consideration of this ordinance was presented at the May 5, 2015, City Council meeting. If
Council adopts the ordinance on second consideration, it will be effective upon publication.
Attachments
Ordinance#557, Amending the City Code, Adopting the Chapters 1305 and 1323 of the 2015
State Building Code (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt upon second consideration Ordinance #557, adopting Chapters 1305 and 1323 of
the 2015 State Building Code.
ORDINANCE NO. 557, 2 ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Adopting the 2015 State Building Code
Chapters 1305 and 1323
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:
E. 1305 - Minnesota Building Code (amended 2012 International Building Code)
V. 1323 - Minnesota (Commercial) Energy Code
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 4.99 entitled
"Violation A Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by
reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage
and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this 19th day of May, 2015.
/s/Shepard M. Harris
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/Kristine A. Luedke
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
city 0
golden
valley Physical Development Department
763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. J. Approval of Plat - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 and Authorization to Sign PUD Permit and
PUD Development Agreement - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117
Prepared By
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Summary
At the January 20, 2015, City Council meeting,the Council held a public hearing on the Final PUD
Plan for Laurel Ponds. After the hearing the Council approved the Final Plan. The Final Plat, PUD
Permit and PUD Development Agreement have been prepared for consideration. City staff has
reviewed the documents and finds them to be consistent with the approved Final PUD Plan and
the requirements of City Code.
Attachments
• PUD Permit - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 (5 pages)
• PUD Development Agreement - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 (15 pages)
• Resolution for Approval of Plat - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 (2 pages)
• Final Plat - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 (1 page)
• Resolution for Approval of Plat - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 2nd Addition (1 page)
• Final Plat- Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 2nd Addition (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat- Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117.
Motion to adopt Resolution for Approval of Plat - Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 2nd Addition.
Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the PUD Permit and Development
Agreement for Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117.
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117
City Council Approval: January 20, 2015
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
Use Permit
for
Planned Unit Development
Project Name: Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117
Location: 305 and 345 Pennsylvania Avenue South Golden Valley,
Minnesota
Legal Description: That part of the NE % of the NW % of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point
on the East Line of said NE % of the NW % distant 778.58 feet South of the
NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of
the NW % to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant
250.3 feet East of the West line of said NE % of the NW % as measured
along a line parallel with the North line of said NE % of the NW %a, said
point being the actual point of beginning of the tract to be described;
thence North parallel with the West line of the NE % of the NW %4 a
distance of 84.72 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said NE
% of the NW % a distance of 250.3 feet to the West line of said Quarter-
Quarter; thence South along the West line of said Quarter-Quarter a
distance of 407.915 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said
Quarter-Quarter a distance of 250.3 feet; thence North Parallel with the
West line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 323.195 feet to the actual
point of beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet thereof, according to the
United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
And
That part of the NE Y4 of the NW % of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point
on the East Line of said NE % of the NW %4, distant 778.58 feet South of
the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the North line of said NE
'/4 of the NW % to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and distant
250.3 feet East of the West line of NE '/4 of the NW % as measured along
a line parallel with the North line of said NE % of the NW Y4; thence South
parallel with said West line of the NE % of the NW % a distance of 323.195
to the actual point of beginning of the land to be herein described; thence
South on said parallel line 199.10 feet, more or less, to the South line of
said NE % of the NW %; thence West along said South line to the West
line of said NE % of the NW %; thence North along said West line to its
intersection with a line drawn parallel with the North line of the NE %4 of the
NW 1/4 from the actual point of beginning; thence East to the actual point of
beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet and the Southerly 50 feet thereof,
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 Page 2
according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in
Hennepin County, Minnesota
And
That part of the NE Y4 of the NW Y4 of Section 5-117-21, Hennepin County,
Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of
said NE Y4 of the NW % distant 648.0 feet South of the NE corner thereof;
thence West parallel with the North line of said NE Y4 of the NW Y4 a
distance of 1100 feet, more or less to a point distant 250.30 feet East from
the West line of said NE % of the NW Ya as measured along said parallel
line, said point being the actual point of beginning of the tract to be hereby
described; thence North parallel with the West line of said NE Y4 of the NW
Y4 a distance of 54.14 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said
NE Y4 of the NW Ya a distance of 250.3 feet to the West line of said NE %
of the NW %; thence South along the West line of said NE Y4 of the NW Y4
a distance of 100 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said NE %
of the NW Y4 a distance of 250.30 feet; thence North parallel with the West
line of said NE Y4 of the NW Y4 a distance of 45.86 feet to the actual point
of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Except: The westerly 30.00 feet thereof.
And
Outlot A, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
AND
Outlot B, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Applicant: Lake West Development, LLC
Address: 14525 Highway 7, Suite 102, Minnetonka, MN 55345
Owner: Speak the Word Church
Address: 515 Jersey Avenue, Golden Valley, MN 55426
Zoning District: Medium Density Residential (R-3)
Permitted Uses: The PUD Permit allows for the construction of 24 detached
townhome units.
Components:
A. Land Use
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 Page 3
1. The plans prepared by EVS, received December 17, 2014, submitted with the
Final PUD Plan application shall become a part of this approval. .
2. Prior to issuance of any building permits for construction within PUD No. 117, the
applicant shall submit a Final Plat to the City for approval.
3. A Park Dedication Fee of $17,400 shall be paid by the developer prior to release
of the Final Plat.
B. Construction
1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from Deputy Fire
Chief John Crelly to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated July 7, 2014,
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 December
16, 2014, shall become a part of this approval.
3. The design specifications, including building location, facade treatment and
materials, and site design, as submitted by the applicant as part of the
homeowners association governing documents, shall become part of this
approval.
4. All principal buildings shall conform to the rear and side yard property setbacks
when adjacent to a single family zoning district outlined in Section 11.55, Subd.
3(C)(1).
5. No buildings shall be located less than 15 feet from the back of the curb line for
roads that are part of the internal road system as outlined in Section 11.55,
Subd. 3(C)(2) unless adequate separation is provided through additional
landscaping, berming or similar means.
6. The installation of fences within the development is prohibited. Privacy screens
around conforming decks and patios are allowed.
7. Permits to construct parking bays on the property at 7400 Laurel shall be
obtained by that property owner and shall not be located closer than 15 feet to
the side yard property line, as required in Section 11.47, Subd. 6(B), unless a
variance is obtained.
8. Easement agreements with the property at 7400 Laurel related to parking,
access, drainage, and the retaining wall shall be recorded with the Final Plat.
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 Page 4
9. The maximum building height, as defined by City Code, shall be 28 feet for the
homes on Lots 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, and 35 feet for the homes on Lots 5-8, 13-
16, and 21-24.
10. There shall be no structures located outside the building envelope area and no
variances granted for structures to be located outside of the building envelope
area.
11. A Development Agreement signed by the Applicant will outline the timing and
terms associated with the demolition of the existing buildings, including the
related funds to be held in escrow by the City.
12. All signs on the property must meet the requirements of the City's sign code.
C. Grading, Utilities, Access and Other Engineering Issues
1. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the
Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated December
16, 2014, shall become a part of this approval.
2. The common area elements, including the open space, streets, sidewalks, storm
sewer facilities, and stormwater basin, will be owned and maintained by the
Developer or future homeowners association.
3. The public sidewalk along Pennsylvania Avenue from Laurel Avenue to the north
boundary of the PUD will be owned and maintained by the City following
construction by the Developer.
4. All improvements and amenities proposed within the 55-foot public easement
area (south portion of PUD) will be constructed and maintained by the Developer
or future homeowners association.
5. The sanitary sewer, water mains, and street lighting will be owned and
maintained by the City following construction by the Developer.
D. Subdivision
1. Proof of filing of the plat shall take the form of a certified copy of the fully
recorded plat, or a receipt from the County specifically noting that the applicant
has paid for such a copy to be sent to the City when it becomes available.
2. The name of the final plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 117" in its title.
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 Page 5
It is hereby understood and agreed that this P.U.D. Permit is a part of the City Council
approval granted on January 20, 2015. Any changes to the PUD Permit for Laurel Ponds
One P.U.D. No. 117 shall require an amendment.
Lake West Development
Witness: By:
Title:
Date:
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Witness: By:
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
Date:
Witness: By:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
Date:
Warning: This permit is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances,
regulations, or laws with authority over this development.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. #117
AGREEMENT dated this day of , 2015, by and between the City of Golden
Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City'), and Laurel Ponds, LLC, a Minnesota
limited liability company (the "Developer").
1. Planned Unit Development Approval. The City has approved a Planned Unit
Development (PUD 117) known as Laurel Ponds One, pursuant to Ordinance No. 541,
adopted by the Golden Valley City Council on January 20, 2015, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Attachment One (the "Ordinance"), for the property which is legally
described on Attachment Two, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof
(hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property").
2. Conditions of PUD Approval. The City has approved the PUD 117 subject to the
following conditions:
a. Conformance to, and inclusion of, all provisions of the Final Plans for Laurel Ponds
One dated December 17, 2014, and revised plans dated April 13, 2015, prepared by
EVS, INC. on file with the City (hereinafter referred to as "Final Plans").
b. The plans prepared by EVS, received December 17, 2014, shall become a part of this
approval.
c. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the
Engineering Division to Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, dated December 16,
2014, shall become a part of this approval.
d. All principal buildings shall conform to the rear and side property setbacks when
adjacent to a single family zoning district as outlined in Section 11.55, Subd. 3(C)(1).
e. No buildings shall be located less than fifteen feet from the back of the curb line for
roads that are part of the internal road system as outlined in Section 11.55, Subd.
3(C)(2) unless adequate separation is provided through additional landscaping,
berming or similar means.
f. The Developer shall prohibit the installation of fences within the development.
g. Homeowners Association covenants regarding design and building materials shall be
reviewed by the City prior to Final Plan approval.
h. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20).
i. Permits to construct parking bays on the property at 7400 Laurel Avenue shall be
obtained by that property owner and shall not be located closer than fifteen feet to
the side property line, as required in Section 11.47, Subd. 6(B), unless a variance is
obtained.
j. Easement agreements related to parking and the retaining wall shall be reviewed by
the City and shall be recorded with the Final Plat.
k. A park dedication fee of$17,400, or 2% of the land value, shall be paid in full prior to
release for recording of the Final Plat.
1. The maximum building height, as defined by City Code, shall be 28 feet for the
homes on Lots 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, and 35 feet for the homes on Lots 5-8, 13-16,
and 21-24.
m. There shall be no structures located outside of the building envelope area and no
variances granted for structures to be located outside of the building envelope area.
n. The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 117" in its title.
o. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations,
or laws with authority over this development.
3. Additional Obligations of Developer.
a. Granting of any easements necessary to accommodate trails and walkways, open
space, drainage, streets and utilities as per approved plans on file in the City's
Physical Development Department.
b. The Developer must submit the homeowners association governing documents
(including the declaration of covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements) to
the City for review and approval prior to recording, and must submit copies of final
documents upon recording.
c. Copies of the recorded reciprocal easement agreements between the Developer and
WorkAbilities for off-site parking, access and signage, retaining wall maintenance,
and surface water drainage must be provided to the City, prior to the issuance of
building or site permits.
d. The Developer must submit final construction drawing plans for review and approval
by the City Engineer before any site permits can be issued.
e. The Developer must provide a construction phasing plan as part of the final
construction plan submittal, for the review and approval of the Physical
Development Department. This plan must show and describe the temporary parking,
staging, access, and any other proposed activities relating to the phased
construction of this PUD.
f. The Developer shall construct the development in one construction phase based
upon the construction phasing plan approved by the City which generally consists of
the following activities:
i. Demolition of the house at 305 Pennsylvania Avenue and the building at
345 Pennsylvania Avenue, and all associated infrastructure, and perform
all asbestos and hazardous materials abatement in accordance with
federal, state, and local laws.
ii. Site preparation, construction of temporary sediment basin, installation
of utilities, construction of private streets and walkways.
iii. Repair and replace structural retaining wall along east property line as
shown on Final Plans.
iv. Construction of public sidewalk on Pennsylvania Avenue South.
v. Construction of biofiltration basin.
vi. Installation of trees and landscaping.
vii. Construction of 24 homes.
g. The development consists of two final plats, Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 and
Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 2nd Addition. Release of the plats and issuance of
building permits shall be in accordance with the following:
i. The plat of Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 will be released by the City for
recording with Hennepin County upon approval by City Council and
payment of all fees and securities required under this agreement.
ii. The plat of Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 2nd Addition will be released
for recording with Hennepin County once item 3.f.i. above is completed
and approved by the City.
iii. The City will not issue building permits for individual lots in either plat
until the corresponding plat is recorded and the utilities and streets are
constructed and that construction is approved by the City's Physical
Development Department. The exception being that a building permit
may be issued for Lot 1, Block 1 of Laurel Ponds One PUD No. 117 once
the plat is recorded and the existing house at 305 Pennsylvania Avenue
South is demolished.
h. The Developer is allowed up to three (3) model homes within the development at
any one time, with one (1) model home containing the temporary construction sales
office for the development.
i. The Developer must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City, before the
issuance of building permits, setting forth the responsibilities of the Developer or
future homeowners association for the following:
i. Maintenance of the private streets and sidewalks, including regular street
sweeping.
ii. Maintenance of the storm sewer and storm water quality treatment
facilities.
iii. Maintenance of certain natural and structural amenities within the 55-
foot public drainage, open space, and walkway easement area
(hereinafter referred to as "Open Space Easement"), including but not
limited to, turf, landscaping, trees, walls, benches, and signs.
j. The Developer must enter into a Sanitary Sewer Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Deposit
Agreement with the City to ensure that repairs to existing sanitary sewer services
are completed.
k. The Developer, or its agent, shall obtain a Certificate of Compliance for each new
home prior to occupancy.
I. The Developer must obtain Tree Preservation permits, as required by the City
Forester.
m. The Developer shall provide the City satisfactory evidence that it is the fee owner of
the Subject Property.
n. Any agreements or other documentation required hereunder to be submitted by the
Developer to the City or approved by the City (including without limitation any
easements) shall be acceptable to the City in form and substance.
o. The Developer shall obtain any other required permits from the City and other
governmental authorities as required for the construction of the development.
4. Development Plans. The Subject Property shall be developed in accordance with the
approved plans, original copies of which are on file with the City's Physical Development
Department.
5. Installation by Developer.
a. Site Improvements. The Developer shall install or cause to be installed and pay for
the following, hereinafter referred to as "Site Improvements." The security required
for Site Improvements is discussed later in this Agreement.
i. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments
ii. Surveying and staking of work required to be performed by the
Developer.
iii. Installation of gas, electric, communications, and cable lines prior to
building occupancy. Developer must place these facilities underground
and utilize joint trench construction for all private utilities and
communications facilities serving the development.
iv. Installation of all sanitary sewer services and water services to the
buildings as shown on the Final Plans or as amended in final construction
plans approved by the City.
v. Installation of all storm sewer and storm water quality treatment
facilities as shown on the Final Plans and on plans approved by Bassett
Creek Watershed dated February 12, 2015, and as may be amended in
final construction plans approved by the City.
vi. Construction of private streets.
vii. Installation of sidewalk and pedestrian facilities as shown on the Final
Plans.
viii. Installation of commercial driveway entrances and residential driveway
aprons that meet City standards.
ix. Installation of street lighting serving the development.
x. Construction of structural retaining walls and non-structural, decorative
and landscape walls on the Subject Property, as shown on the Final Plans.
xi. The grading, erosion control and landscaping, all of which shall be made
in accordance with Final Plans.
b. Public Improvements Constructed by Developer. The Developer shall install or
cause to be installed and pay for the following, hereinafter referred to as "Public
Improvements Constructed by Developer." The security required for Public
Improvements Constructed by Developer are discussed later in this Agreement.
i. The Developer must construct the sanitary sewer mains and manholes
which extend from Pennsylvania Avenue South into the Subject Property
and generally follow the alignment of the private streets. Upon
construction and acceptance by the City, the City will own and maintain
the sanitary sewer mains and manholes.
ii. The Developer must construct the watermains which extend from
Pennsylvania Avenue South into the Subject Property and generally
follow the alignment of the private streets. Upon construction and
acceptance by the City, the City will own and maintain the watermains,
valves, hydrants, and the portion of the water services from the mains to
the curb stop valves, including the curb stop valves.
iii. Construction of the public sidewalk, to be owned and maintained by the
City, located along Pennsylvania Avenue South from Laurel Avenue to the
north boundary of the PUD. The public sidewalk must meet City and ADA
accessibility standards.
iv. The Developer must construct and install all natural and structural
amenities located within the Open Space Easement in the south portion
of the PUD, as shown in the approved Final Plans, with the following
revisions:
1. One of the two proposed benches must be installed in a location
acceptable to the City that is accessible to the public and meets
ADA standards. The bench must meet City design standards and
include a concrete pad that meets City and ADA standards.
2. An entrance sign for the Laurel Avenue Greenbelt must be
installed within the Open Space Easement near the corner of
Laurel Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue South, in a location
approved by the City.
Upon installation, and acceptance by the City, the bench and entrance
sign will be owned and maintained by the City. All other natural and
structural amenities will be owned and maintained by the Developer or
future homeowners association.
v. Preparation and submittal of construction record drawings for all public
improvements, to be reviewed and approved by the Physical
Development Department.
vi. Other items as necessary to complete the development as described
herein and the Final Plans, including without limitation, the City's written
engineering comments on the Final PUD dated December 19, 2014,
which comments have been delivered to the Developer.
6. License. The Developer, and its successors and assigns, hereby grant the City, its agents,
employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Subject Property during the
site development including construction, and all times thereafter, to perform all work
and inspections applicable thereto and contemplated under this Agreement.
7. Securities.The Developer is responsible for the following security and shall submit a Cash
Deposit or Stand-by Irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable and issued by a local
banking institution acceptable to the City Attorney for the following:
Securities for Site Improvements.
a. 125% of the estimated cost for abatement/removal of asbestos and hazardous
materials and demolition of the office building located at 345 Pennsylvania
Avenue South (calculated at $95,000 x 125% = $118,750). The entire security
shall be released upon completion of work and approval of final inspections by
the City's Physical Development Department.
b. 125% of the estimated cost to furnish and install all materials identified in the
Landscape Plan (calculated at $63,500 x 125% = $79,375) on file in the Physical
Development Department. The landscape portion of the security required herein
may be reduced by 66%following installation of landscape materials per the
approved plan and upon acceptance by the City. The remaining balance of the
landscape costs will be retained by the City for a warranty period of two years
following installation and acceptance by the City to ensure survival of the plant
materials. The remaining balance of the landscape costs will be released
following the City's acceptance of the two-year warranty inspection. Within
thirty days after the notice by Developer of conclusion of the warranty period,
City agrees to perform the warranty inspection. Within ten additional days City
will provide Developer with either a list of corrections or final release
documentation (provided by Developer) suitable for releasing the deposit. If
corrections are required and upon notice by Developer that the corrections have
been made, the ten day inspection and ten day notification or release will be
followed.
Securities for Public Improvements Constructed by Developer.
c. 150% of the estimated construction costs (calculated at $205,130 x 150% _
$307,695) for the public improvements constructed by Developer, including
sanitary sewer and water systems, and sidewalks as described in this Agreement
and the Engineering review of the final PUD. The letter of credit or cash deposit
may be reduced no more than four times annually until completion of the public
improvements. Five percent (5%) of the security required herein will be retained
by the City until a one-year warranty period following final acceptance of the
public improvements has been completed. Within thirty days after the notice by
Developer of conclusion of the warranty period, City agrees to perform a
warranty inspection of the subject construction. Within ten additional days City
will provide Developer with either a list of corrections or final release
documentation (provided by Developer) suitable for releasing the deposit. If
corrections are required and upon notice by Developer that the corrections have
been made, the ten day inspection and ten day notification or release will be
followed. The breakdown of the estimated costs submitted by the Developer are
as follows:
Sewer $97,750
Water $83,620
Sidewalk $23,760
Subtotal $205,130
x 150%
Total $307,695
d. Developer shall submit a Cash Deposit (escrow) for construction observation
services in the amount of$24,615.60 (calculated at 12%of the estimated cost to
construct the public improvements). The City shall treat the deposit as a separate
account on its books. All interest earned on the deposit shall accrue to the City.
When any amount becomes due and payable for construction observation services,
the City shall deduct the amount from the deposit upon the City's receipt of invoices
for the same. After the payment of all such amounts, the City shall refund to the
Developer the balance of the deposit, if any, without interest.
e. Cash Deposit or Stand-by Irrevocable Letter of Credit in a form acceptable to the City
Attorney for purchase and installation of City-owned Open Space Amenities (bench
with concrete pad, sign with posts) in the amount of$4,500. The entire security will
be released upon completion of work and acceptance by the City's Physical
Development Department.
In the event the Developer provides a letter-of-credit pursuant to any of the
foregoing provisions, it shall concurrently therewith deliver to the City an executed
letter-of-credit deposit agreement in form and substance acceptable to the City.
8. Developer's Default. Upon an Event of Default (defined below), the City shall be entitled
to all the remedies permitted by law or equity. Without limiting the foregoing, with
respect to an Event of Default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed
by it hereunder,the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall
promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the
Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance.
The Developer grants the City full authority and a license to act as set forth in the
previous sentence following an Event of Default, and it shall not be necessary for the
City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such
work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy the cost in whole or in part as
a special assessment against the Subject Property. The Developer waives its right to
notice of hearing and hearing on such assessments and waives the right to appeal such
assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. The following shall be an
"Event of Default" under this Agreement: (i)the failure by the Developer to pay when
due and invoiced the amounts required to be paid by Developer under any provision of
this Agreement; or (ii) failure by the Developer to observe and perform any covenant,
condition or obligation on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement.
9. Responsibility for Costs.
a. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all documented costs
incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the approval of the PUD and ensuring
compliance with the Final Plans, including but not limited to reasonable legal,
planning, engineering and inspection fees and expenses incurred in connection with
approval and acceptance of the PUD, the preparation of this Agreement and other
legal documents, and all reasonable costs, expenses, legal, engineering and planning
fees incurred by the City in reviewing the application and related documents, and in
monitoring and inspecting the progress of the Project.
b. The Developer shall indemnify and hold the City and its officers, employees and
agents harmless from claims made by Developer for damages sustained or costs
directly incurred resulting from development of the Project, construction and
operation, except for such damages or costs resulting from the gross negligence,
intentional misconduct or intentional violation of this Agreement or applicable laws
and ordinance by the City, or its officers or employees.
c. The Developer shall reimburse the City for reasonable costs incurred in the
enforcement of Developer's obligations under this Agreement, including
engineering, building official, planning and attorney's fees, and for the City's
performance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement in the event that the
Developer fails to commence or complete such obligations on a timely basis.
d. The Developer shall pay in full all documented bills submitted to it by the City for
obligations properly incurred under this Agreement within sixty(60) days after
receipt; if the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all development work and
construction on the Property until the bills are paid in full, and may draw on any of
the security deposited hereunder to discharge such obligations. Bills not paid within
sixty (60) days shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per year.
e. In addition to any other remedies permitted by law, in the event the Developer fails
to pay any amount payable to the City hereunder when due, the City may charge
such amount, in whole or in part, as a special assessment against the Subject
Property.
10. Miscellaneous.
a. The Developer represents to the City that the development of the Subject Property
complies with all City, county, metropolitan, state and federal laws and regulations
including, but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and
environmental regulations.
b. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement.
c. In addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity to the City, a breach
of any terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of
building permits, including lots sold to third parties.
d. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phase of this
Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portion of this Agreement.
e. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the
provisions of this Agreement. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in
writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council.
The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not
be a waiver or release.
f. This Agreement, any amendments hereto, and conditions of the Ordinance are
binding on all successors and assigns of the Developer, shall run with the land and
shall be recorded against the title to the property. This Agreement must be recorded
in the appropriate Hennepin County land records at the expense of the Developer
and a copy of the recorded executed Agreement provided by the Developer to the
City. Developer, its successors and assigns, agree to provide the execution of
amendments to this Agreement, as are necessary to effect the recording hereof.
g. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at
the Developer's request, the City will execute and deliver a release to the Developer
as to the obligations related to such work.
h. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in
addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter
arising, available to the City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and
each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing
may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed
expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time
thereafter any other right, power or remedy.
L Developer may not assign this Agreement without the written permission of the
City.
j. The Developer represents to the City that, with respect to itself (and with respect to
thirds parties, to its actual knowledge,) no material misrepresentations have been or
will be made, nor has any materially inaccurate information been provided to the
City by the Developer during the City's review process.
k. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent
permitted by law, any further development or construction of new improvements
and any additions or alterations to existing improvements not expressly approved
under this Agreement will require additional approvals from the City, as required by
City ordinances, and in full compliance with any amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance requirements enacted after the date of
this Agreement
11. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand
delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by
registered mail at the following addresses:
Laurel Ponds, LLC
14525 Highway 7
Suite 102
Minnetonka, MN 55345
Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City
Manager, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Manager at the
following address:
City Manager
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above
written.
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
By:
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
By:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
DEVELOPER
Laurel Ponds, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company
By:
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2015, by Shepard M. Harris, Mayor, and Thomas D. Burt, City Manager, of the City of Golden
Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the
authority granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
20_, by , the of Laurel Ponds, LLC, a
Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the said limited liability company.
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
BEST & FLANAGAN LLP (TGG)
225 South Sixth Street, Suite 4000
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
TEL 612.339.7121
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO. 541, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Approval of Final Plan of Development
Laurel Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117
Lake West Development, LLC, Applicant
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains as follows.-
Section
ollows: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.) 117 thereby allowing the applicant
to construct 24 detached townhome units at 305 & 345 Pennsylvania Avenue South.
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 EVS, received December 17, 2014, 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 December 16, 2014, shall
become a part of this approval.
3. All principal buildings shall conform to the rear and side property setbacks when
adjacent to a single family zoning district as outlined in Section 11.55, Subd. 3(C)(1).
4. No buildings shall be located less than fifteen feet from the back of the curb line for
roads that are part of the internal road system as outlined in Section 11.55, Subd.
3(C)(2) unless adequate separation is provided through additional landscaping,
berming or similar means.
5. The Applicant shall prohibit the installation of fences within the development.
6. Homeowners Association covenants regarding design and building materials shall
be reviewed by the City prior to Final Plan approval.
7. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20).
8. Permits to construct parking bays on the property at 7400 Laurel Avenue shall be
obtained by that property owner and shall not be located closer than fifteen feet to
the side property line, as required in Section 11.47, Subd. 6(B), unless a variance is
obtained.
9. Easement agreements related to parking and the retaining wall shall be reviewed by
the City and shall be recorded with the Final Plat.
10.A park dedication fee of $17,400, or 2% of the land value, shall be paid before Final
Plat approval.
11.The maximum building height, as defined by City Code, shall be 28 feet for the
homes on Lots 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, and 35 feet for the homes on Lots 5-8, 13-16,
and 21-24.
12.There shall be no structures located outside of the building envelope area and no
variances granted for structures to be located outside of the building envelope area.
13.A Development Agreement signed by the Applicant will outline the timing and terms
associated with the demolition of the existing buildings, including the related funds to
be held in escrow by the City.
14.The Final Plat shall include "P.U.D. No. 117" in its title.
15.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:
Parcel A: That part of the NE Y4 of the NW '/4 of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East
Line of said NE % of the NW % distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof;
thence West parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW 1/4 to its intersection
with a line drawn parallel with and distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of said NE '/4
of the NW % as measured along a line parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the
NW '/4, said point being the actual point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence
North parallel with the West line of the NE '/4 of the NW °/a a distance of 84.72 feet;
thence West parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/a a distance of 250.3
feet to the West line of said Quarter-Quarter; thence South along the West line of said
Quarter-Quarter a distance of 407.915 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of
said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 250.3 feet; thence North Parallel with the West line
of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 323.195 feet to the actual point of beginning.
Except the Westerly 30 feet thereof, according to the United States Government Survey
thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel B: That part of the NE Y4 of the NW % of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East
Line of said NE Y4 of the NW Y4, distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof;
thence West parallel with the North line of said NE % of the NW % to its intersection
with a line drawn parallel with and distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of the NE '/4
of the NW % as measured along a line parallel with the North line of said NE % of the
NW '/4;
thence South parallel with said West line of the NE % of the NW % a distance of
323.195 to the actual point of beginning of the land to be herein described; thence
South on said parallel Iine199.10 feet, more or less, to the South line of said NE '/4 of
the NW '/; thence West along said South line to the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW
'/4; thence North along said West line to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with
the North line of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 from the actual point of beginning; thence East
to the actual point of beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet and the Southerly 50 feet
thereof, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Parcel C: The West 250.3 feet of the South 100.0 feet of the North 693.86 feet of the
Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter. Except the Westerly 30 feet thereof,
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 20th day of January, 2015.
/s/Shepard M. Harris
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/Kristine A. Luedke
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 2
That part of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21 Hennepin County,
Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East Line of said NE 1/4 of
the NW % distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the
North line of said NE '/4 of the NW 114 to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and
distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 as measured along a line
parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW 1/4, said point being the actual point of
beginning of the tract to be described; thence North parallel with the West line of the NE 1/4
of the NW '/4 a distance of 84.72 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of said NE Y4
of the NW '/4 a distance of 250.3 feet to the West line of said Quarter-Quarter; thence South
along the West line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 407.915 feet; thence East parallel
with the North line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 250.3 feet; thence North Parallel
with the West line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 323.195 feet to the actual point of
beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet thereof, according to the United States Government
Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And
That part of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21 Hennepin County,
Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East Line of said NE Y4 of
the NW %, distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the
North line of said NE '/4 of the NW 1/4 to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and
distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of NE '/4 of the NW '/4 as measured along a line
parallel with the North line of said NE % of the NW '/4; thence South parallel with said West
line of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 a distance of 323.195 to the actual point of beginning of the
land to be herein described; thence South on said parallel line 199.10 feet, more or less, to
the South line of said NE '/4 of the NW 1/4; thence West along said South line to the West
line of said NE % of the NW 1/4; thence North along said West line to its intersection with a
line drawn parallel with the North line of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 from the actual point of
beginning; thence East to the actual point of beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet and the
Southerly 50 feet thereof, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and
situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota
And
That part of the NE '/4 of the NW % of Section 5-117-21, Hennepin County, Minnesota
described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4
distant 648.0 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the North line of
said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 a distance of 1100 feet, more or less to a point distant 250.30 feet
East from the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 as measured along said parallel line,
said point being the actual point of beginning of the tract to be hereby described; thence
North parallel with the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 a distance of 54.14 feet, thence
West parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 a distance of 250.3 feet to the
West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4; thence South along the West line of said NE '/4 of the
NW '/4 a distance of 100 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the
NW % a distance of 250.30 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said NE '/a of
the NW Y4 a distance of 45.86 feet to the actual point of beginning, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Except: The westerly 30.00 feet thereof.
And
Outlot A, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
AND
Outlot B, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Resolution 15-43 May 19, 2015
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT - LAUREL PONDS ONE P.U.D. NO. 117
WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, pursuant to due notice,
has heretofore conducted a public hearing on the proposed plat to be known as Laurel
Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 covering the following described tracts of land:
That part of the NE % of the NW % of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21 Hennepin
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East Line of said
NE % of the NW % distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel
with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 to its intersection with a line drawn parallel
with and distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of said NE % of the NW '/4 as measured
along a line parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4, said point being the
actual point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence North parallel with the West
line of the NE '/4 of the NW % a distance of 84.72 feet; thence West parallel with the North
line of said NE % of the NW % a distance of 250.3 feet to the West line of said Quarter-
Quarter; thence South along the West line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 407.915
feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 250.3
feet; thence North Parallel with the West line of said Quarter-Quarter a distance of 323.195
feet to the actual point of beginning. Except the Westerly 30 feet thereof, according to the
United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And
That part of the NE % of the NW '/4 of Section 5, Township 117 Range 21 Hennepin
County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East Line of said
NE % of the NW '/4, distant 778.58 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West
parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW Y4 to its intersection with a line drawn
parallel with and distant 250.3 feet East of the West line of NE % of the NW % as measured
along a line parallel with the North line of said NE % of the NW Y4; thence South parallel
with said West line of the NE % of the NW % a distance of 323.195 to the actual point of
beginning of the land to be herein described; thence South on said parallel Iine199.10 feet,
more or less, to the South line of said NE '/4 of the NW %; thence West along said South
line to the West line of said NE % of the NW %; thence North along said West line to its
intersection with a line drawn parallel with the North line of the NE % of the NW '/4 from the
actual point of beginning; thence East to the actual point of beginning. Except the Westerly
30 feet and the Southerly 50 feet thereof, according to the United States Government
Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota
And
That part of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 of Section 5-117-21, Hennepin County, Minnesota
described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said NE % of the NW
distant 648.0 feet South of the NE corner thereof; thence West parallel with the North line
of said NE % of the NW % a distance of 1100 feet, more or less to a point distant 250.30
feet East from the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 as measured along said parallel
Resolution 15-43 - continued
line, said point being the actual point of beginning of the tract to be hereby described;
thence North parallel with the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW '/4 a distance of 54.14 feet;
thence West parallel with the North line of said NE '/4 of the NW % a distance of 250.3 feet
to the West line of said NE '/4 of the NW 1/4; thence South along the West line of said NE 1/4
of the NW '/4 a distance of 100 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said NE 1/4 of
the NW '/4 a distance of 250.30 feet; thence North parallel with the West line of said NE 1/4
of the NW % a distance of 45.86 feet to the actual point of beginning, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Except: The westerly 30.00 feet thereof.
WHEREAS, all persons present were given the opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, and
the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized and instructed to sign the original of
said plat and to do all other things necessary and proper in the premises.
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
z
z� — —.�.._� ; - z
? w
z
o g NT a
w
p _ 3 Z and
NM 1- 2i�� w Otn z ° F
zImN to ¢�a ti �3wz c7zx y z z _ _
o
'.60'ZI9Z m� �F� <LL>y v v w1-3 go z - - >
Z I bL'bl£I a w
�Jt 10'BSSZ cp v' ` 'nww" zv'
U w A 3,r14,££,ZN ac Z O O h o O x u x z U" O z - o i
() p� v'••t N ;d oxo 3�1-w p, 0 1'�Qo f¢ _°ts 3` q o
S I- zmz (5x� 0. 'zz Zo m w
O o Nb Nr(j °' W a V SSI F W QU 7 V �° Zw94 . ^Q .0 d0- 2 U ion c C " Q
¢ __�_ I ,N Ci (� Wm O rl 0;^w Q Ni: w W
z w Z 2� Q S m Z tio F
9 N ¢ g a< 1' OF �.(.I Z m O O L p
z N o ,n03 wz"'o w< zo z =. a Of z
�z z?aw Qowf LIJ ❑U W ❑ n - z w
3„SZ,1 69'IbpBN 8£'££9Z '7-1j\.``Yh�lLS m J o w ow,
m, O • ® o p
` ❑ w
M„94,Z4,ZN O w z
a�
�m�a w.2 i
c o w
oa
z
U ml m 0 m
--9NO1103S406/IMN3H1JOb%t3NAMIA03Nn H1nos w o c o
� Q I v
n 1--1 A\_/ -I-�\I('l\_i-i _ > ` m N Q c c
O. I _J 1 II V_J/ \v _J�, lv I I W _ o z y
a Q U O m U Q r
_¢ NNOI1ddOXd z - - _ .E
oO W F v O > ¢U - U
OZ•OZZ M..61,99°68N z - ”
w w = n f
o r > y z m
0101inOJOIIV 83AO -,O
1N3 W3SV3 A11ILLn ONV 30VNItlHO Q m N d U m OU2 f m
/3nN3AYl3HnVl
U ry 1 L-3NIl'M'O'11 H1HON EIWIb 000 H31S3S.&Md AYMNIVM --/ OE I
ONY'3OVdS N3dO'30YNIW0 HOA 1N3W3'
a .imino I
o I
o +- OZ'OZZ M.,61.99°68N
h l5'SG o ZZ'96 ZZ'91 , SZ'ZS o I tY =c n
o-w
z goa; o t S
w I ,r 1N3W35Y3 Ot I > - y g
r8� - ham_ Z�w I I Z-A1lllln ONtl
~t) yI � �w I (nI M 30YNIYtl01 I i�W` ��'
�I I o<w II v = a ”
I ml
I I al w�
S.
9 < n
srGs L J C] qo N
oo'sn L_ — — 9 of <z U C __
�I Bl'EZl ,9l.lZ..bBS 06'6! _ w X E a U y o
_I 01011nO 83AO 0 00 2 W I c v t o m m
T °I AlMin 1N3W3SY3 8• OE o_ c m
ONY 3OYNIYHO '9p`b.
6l'EZI OE'OSZ e / 9 m a " ?y y>, O
I 6Z 6E 3.91,t2,b9S - - ' L] 3 a m r `m n _ m
3.W.9b.IbS _ a Z
r _
O6'6E l6'e1<___ , I C� L N m E Z O y E$ z
O I el >r'" .9S.ZEz'-v I \ _ o; m I O
- I I .^. SB'bi=lam \f06 ,�,c c J
W
z I �'al E 5 _ F p E >
p = w
ro> N °E=E
' Z Z o' 0
- o' I �� I� I M I I mN N I3 I �� 2°r°�erzE L •_,nu $�E>",oa - J �a ug z_ aA' o
o $ v COY 1 ,fZ' I tv At " .Z V.Z w ES m t7
j E lye m ° °m
? Z I li L-__� .L0,6LS /J�,_JnV - >;O-c N" zpO;uc O
I I I'� _
z I *-�a 3,6 -m of _m 3J f>o E Qa:N z
BI I /11 i n I m��9
.2s
3rce
E w AaAc
se J
oo'se `-- A o o
Q 2 I M.91,12>bBN 9t'CS `' 3.90.OZ.DBS E6'bb - a s m o O Z� c07 H>n S m U m m
M.EZ,Z?-9BN 00'bL J I
LLJ I M.ZO IZ IN
I �
zz
Z 0E F'
O I 1 IE LI I 3 _ v P E cc-
t `z„ ti
I < tr
Z I I o zdrmdz
M^ I 20 3Ez�ris3a A oz
� `.
nO Z = I r« - _ o z= o
0.1
I m Iw I « °o "3A 9zc az.mIE
z
J o I zo-t m3 or o _ aIc
om I Z I= (;) =3 a�a� d 5E -
W � F- O I - ° "°;dAAA
v�
¢� I O yr„-t=r;qz=� J� _ ��
_� v I :r �
uu coz a=zcz°zd«zc v,o od Uc,
o z m j V
aw I I z� $'a <
o
coda adoc«? - Aa _ e A 'a
e A u .roq"r-cA « ; aha
zn Etz°z°z°O' o
OE'OSZ 3.EC.OS 69S I 'o Zr`�U
OLL� I Q S a3 f N U �li N Z�
n0
\` '1'
10 H '
�i3 33 I
� I z
oe__
io o.
o" I e A
z' z _ �-
0 3 N ° I I o; c 3 `;Z° E 3 m 3 3°
wz w I z �_ =`ecd°300_
I ¢„ dzpo'z«pcm z°v
A a 'Orr
00,099
91'ozz
_ ( m 3.EE.0$69S z J.
m O
Ir iot ' va3o'm'a _Az" c
C),C] I I oZ� o q 3 0 c;,z v g a °3 co_S r r m o r q '=
Q Ji 0 0z°= « A i5 o'v Az°zaE„zo
A --ozadt=E A
1 z s
F OOOI — m a Z 2!T c GI W L .u. `m«z d CI : y « a
C] O I I OU�L RU v,., ziozc Sm op i u,.. 2rv- ` m
I �0o LU -= 33 - _=a`Uto 33 - to
_ Lq« c
o CJ F- Jw SLLwu I J ° - « dz-8 _ evs
�aml oonX OE z° `oan`o z°�a",r`o z°� uz3” "35
y c3 1 ¢awl -IoE-W� z o i'rn�z� =odYr� AoLv°
O - w 3"'3Gz ° - a 33; -'-�v 3z
o' cz°z.t. -°3t z°z
Z Z l6'l9l SZ'95 V E.
'" m - -- 1p c o
j i 9l'OZZ M„E£,04°68N p „
—® W<<�avgq�a
t 5qd rf q�md��go«q�
l9"Ol9Z 3.EE.OS>69S -9%t MN A09/13N I I z z>' --L'3'0^ m m z>z
JO 99'E69'N 3H1 JO 0'001'$ O ,� c«O mo m $_ c i E«
9'09S bl t MN JO b%I 3N 3H1 JO E'0SZ M 3H1 AO 3NII'N I I I w° n m m; u°m O u o u m n u m Z°".. d
3H1 A03NIl'N d° r c o m C ry O•• c a.n v o"�''C L°”n n`"`+C z`u y
nlnlllnnU Vnl/1^-1 ao n nzv Et7 n�v�Od�u ❑ ni-6EOct —S o
w Ivvlil�,u Ivv./_7 I 3- t` z r
m vinln-ln^ c\n II\I I O
IVIIVV IL/�/ �,�/IVI(] I I z
O
i
I r I 6
Resolution 15-44 May 19, 2015
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT - LAUREL PONDS ONE
P.U.D. NO. 117 2ND ADDITION
WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Golden Valley, pursuant to due notice,
has heretofore conducted a public hearing on the proposed plat to be known as Laurel
Ponds One P.U.D. No. 117 2nd Addition covering the following described tracts of land:
Outlot A, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
AND
Outlot B, Laurel Ponds One P U D No 117, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, all persons present were given the opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, and
the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized and instructed to sign the original of
said plat and to do all other things necessary and proper in the premises.
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
(5
z
z
z
H N z a
O<
ja �w —
Oo woN a
w of �< 3 z
z¢ > U r W
D U m w z N 7 Z
OCC J(7ti� _S� au.uwiwm v d Qiw3z3�mw oFF
w
¢uu
4 2. z ww >
Z zzm
mo ��� i zoz Z-z 0 Ho
Ni o zI ¢ ¢ ¢
za oZC) wZ LLz >ao¢ wo Ozzw
z
O
ow E o w t W o u
K W
Z o o,n
K w � J w
wm .w 0 • z
m a a - z
S NOIlO3S 3O0/t MN 3HL 300/l 9N 3H13O 3NIl HtnOS e
I I o�
Z z (1AI
co5a I _�I it\l_J/ \V I_1(2) iV I I R u o
OQz
<
S
° 'o
Ow = n
3H N3AV 138f1Vl
'Nil"M"O'H H1NON c �'
d
o� a
I V 1U Ill IL/ I C N
1
_ o v
ca z
n
_ I > I t w
1 1Ni g
I J I
OE rn N m ¢= r
-- - I az
I I E
Z vl m p cl
I c� I I I I I CV
a
Z W I t U 0.
%> �
> N w z g
O= -
o=
_ y
ce 21
nn
-
_
Osd
a- I ` dam A-`nom
z wQa- _ rEa
cq� \\ I � �ry�a
Q wg io n
o� L E
N- - E Z o m°
soCl) � o�- I I a- t°a ° z tE Y
I n ° w m I T°
ao Z '6 a
J M„9l tZ°b8N 7 I� z IM„£Z,ZZ ,98N, M„S l,tZ ob8 ;`m.3' ?
g 5 L5 _ = £O'bb - N = =r n m s f E --= o
g 00'bL o A
Z° I W J z �I El 2016 _OOBI 9$ _ m q z p =; Z
E
2 v$= z
r I =�= _ mp��r�
I d Im I I al Im I j1z
I os nzm`Nm y o T I'� z
Z ^I I I C7 I nI Io I oaw I I toE�o3 _ �� Fa zz zo tom O
n N I v .°ro .3 w A
O 3 a IBI , I I� ll-I 411 I I r -3 ND>�C= Z Wz w �c� W� Fn= 0
aw0 I I I I I I °I I LIJ I ({"7 ovN - 3J EO E ?a°-.u�i
z< \ ° t 9 - v d - q o A
Q3� - - J L - - J I- - - J — J°` II n °A�9` = ag o og )o
CE',4 82'6,
9z 61 C
M.BE.LC,68S,6901 M.St482..-08 <( a m O O E U1 UU �5 N z f (7 F V U d.� U m [0
N EO'OS
mZ tl101if1Otl3AO tl3 -77 ° W I
AlIlI1NONtl 3OVN1VHtlNItltlO L-
O 0500 - M.EO.lE o6Bs l0'OZl - M.91.12.08N Bb <
t8'6Z SZ"„ 0b'00 m c m
I aymA I 1It
— el at
J I d a E
Ilp z -
W N � 00
I0 ory I I3 I�� i& I,� ti I$"I A g= 1.
-I I
- C� L oaw q ow _
R II O �i' M.2,. 918\� I L�- 00'ZS -I I m O E ° E
L3.91,tz>B6 u z
CID (/ r E-3.9t,tZ,pgS SIS, 3.9tjz,,S
crco
E s m -
JII
w v O o04
m J z
1
O
m a o
Ig > j _ J w b
3 b,Ssp Le'Lz tZ"99 12'9Y 0Z'ZS a w> m y g g �' v z _
I� 5 ne CFP - EO'ZLt 3.E .OS,6B$ -
l oN Tc' t O Ew
IV 1011flO tl3AO 1N3W3SV3 - _n a O E E a Alllilfl OW3OVNIWO I 3 y z j $ E c- v U w z .N
Yr~/l UU Hu
M.EE.OS.68N 90.0,t M.EE,0S,.6 N <�
986t< 29'8E EZ"OS EZ'lS - '
`C O �- I
o, ES
Ch ^ W N
N h I I m � — 0 I
LC)
v;c> $I zsw I� I Im I hJ I � °E I
I a<w h I h I CSIcn
c I
r ii L — -J L - - -J L-
6 osz
-E'O9Z tO
9009 Ez'OS ca L9 ,r
W[9l 3,.££.0S°68S
t MN 3O 0It 3N
iO.98'E69'N 3H1 JO.0'00 t'S I
3H13OVOSZM 3111303NIl'N I
I
I I I
R
city cif
vol M E M 0 RAN DU M
va
Ala%, Physical Development Department
763-593-8030/763-593-3988(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. K. Authorize Memorandums of Agreement (MOA) with Sundial Solar for 2015 Solar Panel Roof
Retrofitting Project No. 15-15.
Prepared By
Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer
Eric Seaburg, EIT, Engineer
Summary
With the help of Sundial Solar, staff submitted four applications to the Department of
Commerce's Made in Minnesota Solar Incentive Program for grant funding to install solar panels
on the roofs of City-owned buildings. Of the four applications submitted, two were selected for
funding:
Street Maintenance Building 40 kW System 52,000 kWh Annual Production
Utility Maintenance Building 40 kW System 52,000 kWh Annual Production
The City must initiate the projects by way of a Memorandum of Agreement with Sundial Solar for
the Department of Commerce to recognize the partnership and allocate funding. Financing,
ownership, and maintenance arrangements will be negotiated as part of the final Power Purchase
Agreements. Once prepared, the Power Purchase Agreements will be brought to the Council for
approval.
Attachments
• Resolution Authorizing Memorandums of Agreement (1 page)
• Memorandums of Agreement with Sundial Solar (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Memorandums of Agreement with Sundial Solar for the
2015 Solar Panel Roof Retrofitting Project No. 15-15.
Resolution 15-45 May 19, 2015
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MEMORANDUMS OF AGREEMENT FOR
THE 2015 SOLAR PANEL ROOF RETROFITTING PROJECT NO. 15-15
WHEREAS, The City of Golden Valley is committed to decreasing its environmental
footprint and fossil fuel consumption; and
WHEREAS, It is proposed to construct solar panels on the roofs of two municipal
buildings; and
WHEREAS, The City partnered with Sundial Solar to submit grant applications to the
Minnesota Department of Commerce Made In Minnesota Solar Incentives Program for the
projects; and
WHEREAS, The City was awarded grant funding from the Minnesota Department of
Commerce for the projects; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley to authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandums of Agreement with
Sundial Solar for the 2015 Solar Panel Rooftop Retrofitting Project No. 15-15.
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST.-
Kristine
TTEST: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.
Sundial Solar
A Brighter Idea
Memorandum of Agreement
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is entered into on May 7, 2015 between Sundial Solar
("Sundial") and the City of Golden Valley ("Client"). The parties hereby agree to work exclusively
together toward a final legal Agreement to install the solar PV project described below. This MOA
provides the necessary first step in Sundial solar site due diligence including system design, structural
analysis, electrical engineering, equipment procurement, etc
Array Size
Client will receive financial benefits from the system pursuant to a mutually agreed upon financial
structure based on the system size and output. Client has received MIM rebate approval for the
following site:
Address: Street Maint. 7710 Golden Valley Rd, Golden Valley, MN 55427
Project Size: 40 kw
PV Equipment
Only Made in Minnesota (MIM) approved solar PV equipment can be used in this system. Exact
equipment and amounts will be outlined as part of the final Agreement.
Annual Production
The annual production of this system is estimated at: 52,000 kwh.
Sale Price
The fully installed sale price of this system to Client is estimated at: $3.60 per watt. The particulars of
the final financial arrangements will be detailed in the final Agreement.
Final Agreement
Both Sundial Solar and Client shall execute a final Agreement between them within 30 days of signing
this MOA. Until that time both parties agree to work toward a final contract in good faith and
exclusively together. The intent is to reach a final agreement that allows for construction to begin in
August 2015 and to be completed on or before Oct. 31St 2015.
AGREED BY:
Sundial Solar City of Golden Valley
signature signature
Print name / Title Print name /Title
date date
3209 W 76`h St.#305, Edina, 'VIN 55432 sundialsolarenergy.com phone 612-926-8506
Sundial Solar
A Brighter Idea
Memorandum of Agreement
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is entered into on May 7, 2015 between Sundial Solar
("Sundial") and the City of Golden Valley ("Client"). The parties hereby agree to work exclusively
together toward a final legal Agreement to install the solar PV project described below. This MOA
provides the necessary first step in Sundial solar site due diligence including system design, structural
analysis, electrical engineering, equipment procurement, etc
Array Size
Client will receive financial benefits from the system pursuant to a mutually agreed upon financial
structure based on the system size and output. Client has received MIM rebate approval for the
following site:
Address: Utility Maint. 7720 Golden Valley Rd, Golden Valley, MN 55427
Project Size: 40 kw
PV Equipment
Only Made in Minnesota (MIM) approved solar PV equipment can be used in this system. Exact
equipment and amounts will be outlined as part of the final Agreement.
Annual Production
The annual production of this system is estimated at: 52,000 kwh.
Sale Price
The fully installed sale price of this system to Client is estimated at: $3.60 per watt. The particulars of
the final financial arrangements will be detailed in the final Agreement.
Final Agreement
Both Sundial Solar and Client shall execute a final Agreement between them within 30 days of signing
this MOA. Until that time both parties agree to work toward a final contract in good faith and
exclusively together. The intent is to reach a final agreement that allows for construction to begin in
August 2015 and to be completed on or before Oct. 3111 2015.
AGREED BY:
Sundial Solar City of Golden Valley
signature signature
Print name /Title Print name /Title
date date
3209 W 7611 St.#305, Edina,MN 55432 sundialsolarenergy.com phone 612-926-8506
Cit00 '
olden MEMORANDUM
valley Administrative Services Department
763-593-8013/763-593-3969(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
3. L. Authorizing Issuance and Sale of: $1,870,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A,
$800,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series 2015B, and $6,695,000
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015C.
Prepared By
Susan Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
The proceeds of the $1,870,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A will finance the non-MSA
street and driveway projects included in the 2015 Pavement Management Program. This project
was approved by the City Council in January 5, 2015. The special assessment hearing for this
project was March 17, 2015. The debt service on these bonds will be repaid from tax levies and
special assessments levied against benefitted properties.
The proceeds of the $800,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series
2015B will finance the equipment included in the 2015-2019 CIP. The debt service on the
certificates will be repaid from annual tax levies.
The proceeds of the $6,695,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2015C
will refinance the 2008A bonds that were originally issued for the 2008 PMP.
If approved, the bids will be received on June 16, 2015, and awarded after the Council
consideration.
Attachments
• Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$1,870,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A
(1 page)
• Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$800,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates
of Indebtedness Bonds, Series 2015B (1 page)
• Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$6,695,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2015C (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$1,870,000 General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2015A.
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$800,000 General Obligation
Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness Bonds, Series 2015B.
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Issuance and Sale of$6,695,000 General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2015C.
Resolution 15-46 May 19, 2014
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $1 ,870,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2015A
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the
City), as follows:
SECTION 1 . PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to
issue its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2015A, in the principal amount of
$1,870,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, to finance
various street improvement projects in the City.
SECTION 2. TERMS OF PROPOSAL. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the
City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds which is
attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all
of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions
of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), to solicit
proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a competitive basis without requirement of
published notice.
SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet on June 16, 2015, at 6:30 p.m. for
the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such
action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City.
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.
Resolution 15-47 May 19, 2014
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $800,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES OF INDEBTEDNESS, SERIES 2015B
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the
City), as follows:
SECTION 1 . PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to
issue its General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series 2015B, in the
principal amount of $800,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
412.301 and Chapter 475, to finance various items of capital equipment.
SECTION 2. TERMS OF PROPOSAL. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the
City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds which is
attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all
of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions
of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), to solicit
proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis.
SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet on June 16, 2015, at 6.30 p.m. for
the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such
action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City.
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.
Resolution 15-48 May 19, 2014
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $6,695,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2015C
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota (the
City), as follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to
issue its General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2015C, in the principal
amount of $6,695,000 (the Bonds), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to
provide funds to be used, along with other available funds, to refinance the 2018 through
2028 maturities of the City's General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2008A, dated,
as originally issued, as of June 15, 2008.
SECTION 2. TERMS OF PROPOSAL. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the
City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds which is
attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all
of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions
of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated is hereby authorized,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), to solicit
proposals for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a competitive basis without requirement of
published notice.
SECTION 3. SALE MEETING. This Council shall meet on June 16, 2015, at 6:30 p.m. for
the purpose of considering proposals for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such
action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City.
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
city 0�
golden!iV., """'
Administrative Services Department
alley _ _ p
763-593-8013/763 593 3969(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
4. A. First Consideration - Ordinance #588 -Amendment to the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for
Electrical Rates
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
The Electrical Contractor has suggested increases to the Master Fee Schedule for Electrical
Permits.
Attachments
• Master Fee Schedule for Electrical Permit underline/strikeout version (1 page)
• Ordinance#588, Amendments to the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for Electrical Permit Fees (1
page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt on first consideration, Ordinance #588, Amendments to the 2015 Master Fee
Schedule for Electrical Permits.
City of Golden Valley
2015 Proposed Master Fee Schedule-Exhibit A
2015 Adopted
Fee
Permits
if the work has been started the fee will double for all permits such as building,plumbing,mechanical,and electrical.
All building permit values will be based on the current Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry Building Valuation Data.
Electrical
Circuits and Feeders
The inspection fee for the installation,addition,alteration or repair of each circuit,
feeder,feeder tap or set of transformer secondary conductors:
0 to 30 Amp 8.00
31 to 100 Amp 10.00
101 to 200 Amp 15.00
300 Amp 20.00
400 Amp 25.00
500 Amp 30.00
600 Amp 35.00
700 Amp 40.00
Add$5.00 for each additional 100 Amps.
Minimum Fee
Minimum permit fee is$35.00$40.00 plus$5.00 State surcharge.This is for one inspection only.
Minimum fee for rough-in inspection and final is$70.00$80.00 plus$5.00 State surcharge.
Maximum Fee
Maximum fee for single family dwelling or townhouse not over 200 Amps is$150.09$175.00
plus$5.00 State surcharge. Maximum of D1 and ' final inspeetion. 3 inspections.
Apartment Buildings
Fee per unit of an apartment or condominium complex is$70.00.This does not cover
service and house wiring.
Swimming Pool $35.00$80.00 .This includes 2 inspections.
Additions,Remodels or $80.00 this includes up to 10 circuits and 2 inspections.
Basement Finishes
Accessory Structures $50.00 for panel plus$8 per circuit.
Traffic Signals $7.00 per each standard
Street Lights and parking lot lights $4.00 per each standard
Transformers and Generators $8.00 PeF UAit 4 $.49 f9F each KVA up to
100 KVA i $30 foF eaeh KVA above 100 KVA
$10 up to 10 KVA,$40-11 to 74 KVA,$60-75KVA to 299 KVA
$150 for over 300 KVA
Retro Fit Lighting $.65 per fixture
Sign Transformer $8.00 per transformer
Remote Control and Signal Circuits $.75 per device
Reinspection fee 35-$40.00
1
ORDINANCE NO. 588, 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE
Amending the 2015 Master Fee Schedule for
Permits - Electrical
The City Council for the City of Golden Valley hereby ordains:
Section 1. The Master Fee Schedule in Chapter 25 for Electrical Permits of the
City Code is hereby amended by revising the following:
Minimum Fee Minimum permit fee is $40.00 plus $5.00 State surcharge. This is
for one inspection only.
Minimum fee for rough-in inspection and final is $80.00 plus $5.00
State surcharge.
Maximum Fee Maximum fee for single family dwelling or townhouse not over 200
Amps is $175.00 plus $5.00 State surcharge. Maximum of 3
inspections.
Swimming Pool $80.00 This includes 2 inspections.
Transformers and $10 up to 10 KVA, $40 -11 to 74 KVA, $60-75KVA to 299 KVA
Generators $150 for over 300 KVA
Reinspection Fee $40.00
Section 2. The Master Fee Schedule in Chapter 25 for Electrical Permits of the
City Code is hereby amended by adding the following:
Additions, Remodels $80.00 this includes up to 10 circuits and 2 inspections.
or Basement Finishes
Accessory Structures $50.00 for panel plus $8 per circuit.
Section 3. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and
publication as required by law.
Adopted by the City Council this 19th day of May, 2015.
/s/Shepard M. Harris
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/Kristine A. Luedke
Kristine A. Luedke, City Clerk
Cit o f
IdenMEMORANDUM
C70 11 Physical Development
��. �� Department Y P
763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
60 day deadline:June 12, 2015
Agenda Item
6. A. Authorization to Sign Amended PUD Permit - RLT Second Addition PUD No. 91, Amendment
No. 3 - 8905 Wayzata Boulevard -The Luther Company, Applicant
Prepared By
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Summary
The Luther Company is seeking approval of a Minor PUD Amendment to allow for the construction
of an addition to the east side of the existing Jaguar Land Rover building. The addition, which would
create space for new car deliveries, would be 2,380 square feet and would replace an existing
paved area.
Because the Jaguar Land Rover dealership is located within a PUD, only those building and uses
approved by the City as part of the PUD permit are allowed. Therefore, any changes to the
footprint of the buildings require an amendment to the PUD permit.
The PUD was created in 2001 and contained only the Toyota building. In 2005, the PUD was
amended to include the Jaguar Land Rover building. In 2007, a minor amendment was approved for
the Toyota building in order to allow for the construction of an attached car wash bay.
Staff believes that the proposed Jaguar Land Rover amendment should also be considered as a
minor amendment to the PUD. In order to qualify as a minor amendment, the PUD ordinance
states that the proposed amendment shall not:
1. Eliminate, diminish, or be disruptive to the preservation and protection of sensitive site
features.
2. Eliminate, diminish, or compromise the high quality of site planning, design, landscaping or
building materials.
3. Alter significantly the location of buildings, parking areas, or roads.
4. Increase or decrease the number of residential dwelling units by more than five percent.
5. Increase the gross floor area of non-residential buildings by more than three percent or
increase the gross floor area of any individual building by more than five percent.
6. Increase the number of stories of any building.
7. Decrease the amount of open space by more than three percent or alter it in such a way as to
change its original design or intended function or use.
8. Create non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the Final PUD
Plan.
Since the existing building is 56,075 square feet, the size of the addition would remain below the
threshold of a five percent increase in the gross floor area.
If the City Council agrees that this amendment qualifies as a minor amendment, the Council has the
right to approve the amendment by a simple majority vote without a public hearing or to refer to
matter to the Planning Commission for their input and recommendation.
The plans have been reviewed by the Fire Department and the Engineering Division; neither have
comments or concerns about the proposal.
Attachments
• Location Map (1 page)
• Amended PUD Permit (3 pages)
• Plans from Baker Associates, Inc., Architects submitted April 14, 2015 (11 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the amended PUD Permit for RLT
Second Addition PUD No. 91, Amendment No. 3.
Subject Property
MWY 394�r�
interstateeM�r,...�+
8805
8905).
• 8685
9191• _ •
9393
9595 Wayzata Blvd
9393 westwoo"A$: 9?VtI ziental Edue Center 8300
v
UJ
�'-
(�' :yk, :"ate al.:arc
Q' ST. LOUIS PARK4t"ti_:'K
�Iv
Rudy Luther Toyota Campus P.U.D. No 91
Original City Council Approval: May 15, 2001
City Council Approval Amendment #1: June 21, 2005
City Council Approval Amendment #2: September 4, 2007
City Council Approval Amendment #3: May 19, 2015
City of Golden Valley, Minnesota
Use Permit for
Planned Unit Development
Project Name: RLT Second Addition P.U.D. No. 91
Location: 8801, 8909 and 8989 8805 and 8905 Wayzata Blvd.
Legal Description: RLT Second Addition P.U.D. No. 91
Applicant: The Luther Company, I .mated Partnership LLLP
Address: 701 Xenia Avenue South, Golden Valley, MN 55416
3701 Alabama Ave S, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Owner: Luther 3 Pte_-L-C --Q -Phe Luther GempaRY Limited
PaFtReFs The Luther Company LLLP
Address: 701 Xenia Avenue South—, G�G en Valley, MN 55416
3701 Alabama Ave S, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Zoning District: industrial Commercial
Permitted Uses: Auto Dealership (new and used car sales) with indoor and
outdoor display and auto service.
Components:
A. Land Use
1. The Final Plan of Development plans (17 sheets) prepared by Baker Associates
dated April 22, 2005, shall be made a part of this PUD Permit.
2. Permitted uses shall include auto sales and auto service with outdoor display and
indoor sales floor.
3. Allowed uses for the two buildings on the site shall be for auto sales and service.
Uses other than specified above shall not be allowed except by amendment of the
PUD permit.
4. The uses on the site shall meet all applicable City, State and Federal standards,
rules and law.
5. Amendment #2 allows for an additional car wash bay to be constructed at 8805
Wayzata Boulevard per the plans prepared by Baker Associates dated August 13,
2007.
6. Amendment #3 allows for the construction of an approximately 2,380 square foot
addition to the east side of the existing Jaguar Land Rover Building per the plans
prepared by Baker Associates dated April 14 2015.
B. Appearance
1. The Final Plan of Development plans include the landscape plan that is a part of
this PUD permit. This plan is subject to review of the Building Board of Review and
any additional revisions required by that Board. This Board shall also establish the
amount of a performance bond to be posted by the applicant to insure the
performance of the landscape material.
2. The floor plans and building elevations are a part of the Final Plan of Development
plans. Any new construction shall be consistent with those plans.
3. There shall be no exterior public address system for any uses on the site.
4. The Final Plan of Development plans dated April 22, 2005, regarding lightning are
made a part of this permit.
5. The existing cellular tower on the site may remain.
C. Construction
1. The construction shall be subject to all requirements of the City regarding the
issuance of building and construction permits.
D. Utilities and Grading
1 . The recommendations in the memo from Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer to Mark
Grimes, Director of Planning and Development dated May 9, 2005, shall become a
part of this permit.
2. The Final Plan of Development plans dated April 22, 2005, regarding grading and
utilities are made a part of this permit.
E. Circulation Component:
1. Access drives, parking and vehicle display areas shall be constructed per the site
plan prepared by Baker Associates dated April 22, 2005.
G. Subdivision
1. The name of the final plat shall be "RLT Second Addition P.U.D. No. 91"
It is hereby understood and agreed that this Use Permit is a part of the City Council
approval granted on May 15, 2001, June 21, 2005, September 4, 2007, and May 19,
2015. Any changes to the RLT Second Addition P.U.D. No. 91 shall require an
amendment.
THE LUTHER COMPANY LIMITED
PARTNERSHI LLLP
Witness: By:
Title:
Date:
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Witness: By:
Shepard M. Harris, Mayor
Date:
Witness: By:
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
Date:
Warning: This permit does not exempt you from all other City Code provisions,
regulations and ordinances.
p / N
�a ; LI K
M r F
2K,
K �3 pp � sa•1Clr. °6 lfig. 3
--==UW-wouacuwo�d0 WU41
1 1
1 ----------------- ----------------- 1
-- r
e
O
C II IEA
a lLo
0
o Q C
op d d ----1
o `
d C d d C U A A 1 1
L y c � a d N
CL e
X mW Ufnv
N �o (i0 `W
c )_ rn_ y y oc ] o
m F mm
O O 1 1
.9 me —o-
u)
pU 1
N _
C N > l0
UOWO �.—
WU' �U liW a 1
o
'CFO 8 -4M 0o1-- U ooN
U 0 Q JU C91
isam"1 aiavmuu
M
! . \
� | } 17
, , . � . •
\} .. . . \
` - \ +r
\ � tj | <%
r
HAS
. § / � » •
uk ��
\ .\y
a §;
• r " i ,
! D 14 § § :
\ 6
�' � O � ;o Y �IQQn d • � §�� 1 O
10
ta
Gh 2 m
O
W
LJ � � 4
LL W ^
r
Q
3
_ I ddT PS R
g
co A* , ���� s�+m�6s�•, � IBJ, � o•.tm joe(❑O a l d Xi � Om • ® ®eQ� -R7�
8
•Zz � 6 Z C� S6 6 � Y
Q 55 (a YE3�
s4 HaU 1a4��e�d�s>ed��ud����#aEt���€�R�JE�tf����
o �
ui
8
9.
HIM
�xFi��
9
sga ����� OOuuP. @E3 8'o �a €BdoWy.,yyS� ZEE .''.r�yq LL,'.'�59vi%�Jiit
• s �•• a$ o
•(a � s �in K
F � i,'�� � o° O �� W• fid# ��� � � •`k3 V' X� �� ,
a
x
•• �� z
c
$ - Q2I�'A� OOe�Lra) LA-
-V@
'I�lOg S'I- $
12
' 3„2Z OY.EON r
iyb
•
--- -- s
I I
9�
i f �L ELFL 1111 ;
/ 1 00o a
I & nl
1 � 1
e
11� i
� o
1
I � }
� cJ r S
O N
1 WD s
I i
I . I
Y I I
gg Ijj
11 I r I
1 I
I
� 3 I
I FgFgaa
1
w Q ,
,
,
,
cm-
/ - - t
M
I --
i I -
I --------------- >
�k� I
t Q 46 I �^
t
XT
RR
cab
� r
f
g 1 I
,
N — -
n n
� M 1
0
CI -r
r I i
y •B
,
�I
a I '
'I 11 A. 9f dC' J6
I y
-------------
-- + � �
1 a„zz ss ON
" �iSII) K • ¢� R R. i � -
i
�= 5���'N VV cd a' 7 k • Z � � 33 :� 6
8
�*3 UL
1114W z
gy•� ��
g 9 4� ggggga g# �� Ryyg _ g g c
3� dd ym m��
'M AR
4H M 5 11,g gw �x 4
wg� a oga � OPS 9
� pp
m � a H n ge ys go 0 s m g 3�17
4
\
I'
i
o W ^r
$ � vly
a z;q r.
X
5S W ^ ?
L g p p $ p 3m
ib b 3
Q �
4
4
4
O Ln
ULQ
n
g
0
4 �
�� 4��xN � e K NJ • z � � i 9g�E 'i ! 1°
v
116 cany
Nth
it
oil In Q<LJLJ 4 �.l o ill Mil 111s nil 10, bl; 811;
9E'L96 arAmn�c!nMnw R
$ 9„2Z,06.EON
i j8d �. e• �>
e
-- - -- --- ------------
I
I
y � N
i Ii
0 s �
e
I
i
° I
M ��W
I
s
d
r------ j
nip
i I
� i I
I
r I
r6� 6J I
L
r i
80'6Zf �- � �rvn ai3amo�
x __
�" C r F• g 64
to� gyp• ��� �'.��� � 3 ,,3, � �� d�
J q
oil
Ali
Z
FRY
r
s ig $ 5y� 4 90: PRO
�O
d
fo
a o • v �o
• v
tb Q O
1—
f Q N
a o •.f
R C,1.0
W th
O�
d II
p Q o
d
- Z
m�
CS�
Z
N II
X
W .ao
YR
V � �
a Q C LH
IUL
e �
• yh
w 'L 7,x Z,x _ s
a
It J3
8 a c
aha a g $ s j ao „ H 1
51 H
a
o "jol)
oI
,L
——
Li
a
4
D m
cD
U O
a GflA _ -
LL
a
§ ) \ � i ■ � §k �.` ,!! � � � \ ■ ] ! 6 ,
� � ® , ■- | ■ § ;
.§\ u
,\
2 § §
! ;
;
!|) 2
U)\ |
§ )\~ � - - § z * B
. , . § '
| �
) 2 2
§ •, §
LU
z 2
` z |
§ § §
LU
, § §\ �
0f | § § , , /\ƒ� \ /§ E
LU
co
z ) | ` 2 // § | Q
_ \ CL
|
2
o 1
IL 4
4 J4 � ii F
y ' 3
ell.l p
---- Y61---------------------------------
I ;1
I ,9-.6 A-q .O-,4 A-ml .O-.4 .m•ml .m-,4 A-Q .m-4 A-ml• .9-A
s t 9
1 49 I I- •I ✓ I. iv i of 'i a -9 1 � 6
t I I I I I I I I I t I I 1 LL
1 I I 1 I 1 I 141
i I 7 9 6 I [l
j ----°--°------°--°-----00-----G°------°0---- I 1
EAI
I
8® IaN as I I u
3 -----------------
-
- -------------- I Y
- --------------- -
————————————————————J
.|
\ ;
Q a Gf
as q| ,
A 2 \2) /4 « ■ • | )] ! � ! !!!
! �
�
� y !
-- - - -—
- | —
�} .
!
» «
!
Lu LU 2
\ z }¥
— |� ■!
�_
ee
|
TM
TTI
e�
e�
! ! !| | |
§ af H
� a f ■ |� �f �- �
/ � JIM]
� �
! | E !
| | !
|° ||
city of
M0RANDu
gold' ent4o�
Physical Development
valley Ph Department Y P
763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
May 19, 2015
Agenda Item
6. B. METRO Blue Line Extension Update
Prepared By
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Project Summary
Planning work continues in many areas:
• The Project Office continues to explore ways to provide parking in the Golden Valley Road
station area and has had conversations with St. Margaret Mary Church to look at potential
options on their property.
• Staff has been involved in IRT meetings with Minneapolis looking at the future design of
Highway 55 as it approaches Golden Valley from the east.
• Three Community Outreach Coordinators have been assigned to respond to questions and
concerns about the light rail project. David Davies will be representing Golden Valley, Crystal,
and Robbinsdale; his contact information is included on the attached handout.
• The Bottineau LRT Community Works Steering Committee met for the first time at the end of
April. It is made up of representatives from each of the five communities along the light rail
line and will, over the life of the project, be looking at ways to enhance the areas around the
stations and the rails through additional investments.
Station Area Planning Summary
An open house to present the final report for this phase of work will be held on Thursday, June 4,
at the Harrison Community Center in Minneapolis from 5:30 to 8 pm. Representatives from the
consulting team, Hennepin County, and the Project Office will be hand to talk about the contents
of the report.
Following the open house, the final report will be received and filed by the City Council and
utilized as a Planning Study that will help inform decisions during the upcoming Comprehensive
Plan update process.
West Broadway Transit Study Summary
The West Broadway Transit Study will conduct a collaborative planning process to identify and
evaluate potential transit improvements along Washington Avenue and West Broadway Avenue
in north Minneapolis. Currently, five options for bus rapid transit and streetcar lines are under
consideration for a portion of West Broadway Avenue that could extend from downtown
Minneapolis to downtown Robbinsdale or to Golden Valley. Three of the five options include a
stop at the Metro Blue Line's Golden Valley Road Station with the line terminating at Courage
Kenny Rehabilitation Institute. The two remaining options terminate at North Memorial Hospital
and Robbinsdale Transit Center in Downtown Robbinsdale.
Metro Transit will host an open house to go over the alignment options on Thursday, May 21 at
the North Community YMCA from 5 to 7 pm. It is being hosted in conjunction with YMCA Family
Night. Feedback from the open house will be brought to the Policy Advisory Committee in early
June and taken into consideration as committee members choose up to three options for more
detailed study.
Attachments
• Community Outreach Coordinator handout (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Receive and file METRO Blue Line Extension Update.
METRO ,!
Opening 2021
Project Facts
METRO Blue Line Extension
Route and Stations (BottineauLRT)
Oi 6,w►aYw�
Jarwary 2015
93d A— "I
The planned METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau)
light rail transit project will operate about 13 miles attnA....t.
northwest from downtown Minneapolis through north
Minneapolis, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal and
9,wwtyn 9.,�:..rC
Brooklyn Park, drawing riders northwest of Brooklyn ,
Park. The proposed alignment will have 10 or 11 new
LWd R.1
stations in addition to Target Field Station where it will
�Liillht Rail Stations
continue as the METRO Blue Line, providing one-seat ,
rides to Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and
8—Lwtt,,,e
the Mall of America. It will connect Minneapolis and the
region's northwest communities with existing LRT on
the METRO Green Line,future LRT on the METRO Green
Line Extension (Southwest LRT), bus rapid transit on the
METRO Red Line,the Northstar commuter rail line and
local and express bus routes.
N QI A
'P11mn.ln Av. ntf � pW\
pen y°n �s,q•,.
Budget M
The Blue Line Extension is estimated to cost$1 billion in CD t
year 2017 dollars. At this time, it is anticipated that 1
funds for capital costs will come from the Federal
Transit Administration (49 percent), Counties Transit Improvement Board (31 percent), Hennepin County
Regional Railroad Authority and state of Minnesota (10 percent each).
Timeline
• August 2014: The Federal Transit Administration approved the Blue Line Extension to enter the Project
Development phase.The Metropolitan Council became the project lead with the transfer of Responsible
Government Unit status from Hennepin County.
9 2016: Final Environmental Impact Statement is published (anticipated).
• 2018-2020: Heavy construction (anticipated).
• 2021: Blue Line Extension begins passenger service (anticipated).
www.BlueLineExt.org Metro Transit 21
METROPOLITAN
Twitter.com/BlueLineExt LJNCII
LINE
Oak Grove Parkway O
93rd O Avenue wu�r�.. ,�..
Ui
85th Avenue
nn eve
�ktHUuhl_l 1y PAKly
Brooklyn Boulevard
Ln
�A % j)S4 d0
L19M Rail
Alipanent
4e
BR('
ik('01,I S Edif�'9$Ytl0"
63rd Avenue c[\I T i R Light Rail Stations
e
L 1
0.5 1 2 w�
�'4js`gkc 20 I i 1 i e
Miles
Bass Lake Road
0
u
60
'.a1;Rt�4 umnvr
Robbinsdale
i 94
i
'Selection ora station at ryn
Golden Valley Road and/or 'Golden Valley Road rM1 r ,,,, a aa'd
Plymouth Avenue will be �;ctU eov�e
made in the future based on t". r ke `end
inrormation from environ- 'Plymouth Ave- Qeoo Jao
mental impact review,
engineering and public i t I _D I 0 ' ,
5
involvement a�eewooe 4,�E X15,
394
Al
Community Outreach Coordinators
Brooklyn Park Crystal, Robbinsdale, Minneapolis
Golden Valley
. PiAW ow
Juan Rangel David Davies Sophia Ginis
612-373-5338 612-373-5336 612-373-3895
Juan.Rangel@metrotransit.org David.Davies@metrotransit.org Sophia.Ginis@metrotransit.org
www.BlueLineExt.org BlueLineExt@metrotransit.org 612-373-5301 METROPOLITAN
C 0 U N 0 1 L