Loading...
01-30-12 Joint CC, PC, EC, OSRC Agenda Packet (entire) AGENDA Joint Meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, Environmental Commission and Open Space and Recreation Commission Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Monday, January 30, 2012 6:30 pm Pages 1. Bottineau Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Comment 2-8 Formulation Exercise Special Council/Manager Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room Monday, January 30, 2012 6:30 pm or immediately following Joint Meeting 1. Proposed 2012 Legislative Priorities 9-19 2. Honors/Recognitions 20 Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by invitation of the City Council. TtiisNdr�c�im�r�t i�a�ai�a�i6e i��It�rn�te f€�rm��u��r�a 7�=1ic�ur r��c��s�..P(e�se c��l 7�3=��3-8f��16�`�':���-�9�����8�tt�,rr�ak����t�c�est. Exampl�s�if�I��rr�at�f�rr��ts �, m�j��r��l�d�t���e�rint,''el��tt�s�r�ic, �r��11e,audi�c�ssette;�tc. �Am �. > �� �s'�� Planning O �, e 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Joint Meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, Environmental Commission and Open Space and Recreation Commission January 30, 2012 Agenda Item 1. Bottineau Transitway Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Comment Formulation Exercise Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is currently being done to study the possible impacts associated with the proposed Bottineau Transitway alignment. A primary part of the DEIS analysis is the "scoping process." The scoping process is the method used to determine what content should be a part of the DEIS and further study. As part of the DEIS scoping process, Hennepin County is collecting comments from impacted government agencies along the corridor as well as from the general public. For this process, all comments are due to Hennepin County on or before February 17, 2012. The County would like a resolution from the City Council stating whether or not it supports further study of the Bottineau Transitway D-1 Alternative. The resolution may go on to provide more specific comments or direction to the County. To aid in developing comments, the City Council has requested that the Planning Commission, Environmental Commission and Open Space and Recreation Commission provide input on the Bottineau Transitway. More information about the Transitway, including possible alignments, can be found in the "Scoping Booklet", located online at www.bottineautransitway.orq. At the meeting, staff will present a short video that highlights the Bottineau Transifinray project and next steps, walk Council Members and Commissioners through the Scoping Booklet and guide a discussion that wi{I aid in developing formal comments on the Bottineau Transitway DEIS. Attachments Memo from the Public Works Department dated January 23, 2012 (6 pages) . • � �� � � o �� �� :Yh � e Pubfic Works �� 763.593.8030/763.593.3988 (fax) Date: January 26, 2012 To: Tom Burt, City Manager Through: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer From: Mark Ray, PE, Engineer Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Subject: Bottineau Transitway - Initial Staff Comments The Bottineau Transifinray is a proposed high frequency transit service that could include bus rapid transit (BRT) or light rail transit (LRT) to serve the northwest area of the Twin Cities. Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) has requested that communities potentially impacted by the proposed Bottineau Transitway submit comments as part of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) scoping process. The scoping process allows communities to provide input on preferred alignment and station location, and identify local issues that require further study. Alignments LRT Alignments involving the City of Golden Valley include the D1 (BNSF Railway-Olson Memorial Highway) which travels through the northeast portion of Golden Valley, and the D2 (West Broadway-Penn Avenue) which travels through North Minneapolis, bypassing Golden Valley. If selected, the D2 alignment has very little, if any, effect on Golden Valley. BRT HCRRA indicated that the D1 alignment would be the preferred route, should BRT be chosen for the transitway. Station Location If the D1 alignment through Golden Valley is selected to be evaluated in the DEIS, one station location must be chosen. The potential station locations for the D1 are Golden Valley Road near Wirth Parkway and Plymouth Avenue near Wirth Parkway. Both potential stations are located in the City of Golden Valley and require the acquisition of property owned by the City of Minneapolis (Wirth Regional Park managed by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board). HCRRA studies show that the Golden Valley Road station would serve mostly Golden Valley residents and businesses and the Plymouth Avenue station would serve mostly Minneapolis residents, businesses, and Wirth Park facilities. Businesses served in Golden Valley include regional destinations (Courage Center, Minneapolis Clinic of Neurology) and local destinations (Church of St. Margaret Mary, Unity Christ Church). No matter where the transit station is sited, the neighborhood impacts of the freight rail and transifinray would be unchanged. While a station located at Plymouth Avenue would likely have less effect on Golden Valley neighborhoods and community resources, the Golden Valley Road station would provide more direct benefit to Golden Valley residents and businesses. In addition, the Golden Valley Road location is on an existing bus line with potential feeder bus connections, and has planned regional trail connections, giving it a significant advantage over the Plymouth Avenue location. Following are staff's recommendation along with initial comments regarding the potential impacts and benefits of the Bottineau Transitway project. Staff Recommendation Staff acknowledges that a bus rapid transit (BRT) or light rail transit (LRT) facility located in Golden Valley would have a significant impact on the community. After preliminary review of the project scoping information, it appears that a transitway line and station would bring forth opportunities for multi-modal transportation and redevelopment that may otherwise not exist in this area of Golden Valley. Based upon the information available at this time, staff believes that the D1 alignment (through Golden Valley) with a station location at Golden Valley Road be evaluated in the DEIS. The comments below reflect this recommendation. Comment on Project Impacts At this stage in the scoping process, HCRRA desires feedback on the potential project impacts to be addressed in the DEIS. Following are staff comments on key issues identified by HCRRA and the City. Noise and Vibration The proposed D1 alignment through Golden Valley will pass through a residential neighborhood and a regional park. The potential noise and vibration impacts from the transitway and the freight track are a significant concern. If a transit station is located at Golden Valley Road, there may be additional noise and disruption that has not yet been studied or anticipated. Staff understands that BRT and LRT may yield different noise and vibration levels in surrounding neighborhoods. These effects should be studied in greater detail. 2 Visual and Aesthetics With high frequency transit service, the potential transitway and transit station will have a visual impact on surrounding properties. Most notably will be the addition of lights and lighting that does not exist with the current freight rail. The effects of lighting should be studied and the screening of adjacent neighborhoods and park areas should be considered as part of this project. Neiqhborhood and Community Resources The proposed transitway and transit station would likely require an increase in community resources such as police, fire, public works maintenance, and traffic management. In addition, neighborhood groups may be affected. A benefit of the project is that the residential neighborhoods do not appear to be permanently fragmented, divided, or disconnected. Safety and Security Both of the proposed transit stations are located in the City of Golden Valley. Since the proposed transit system is managed by the Metropolitan Council, it is anticipated that Metro Transit Police will be the primary law enforcement agency at the station. Parks and Public Land The existing rail line runs along the edge of Theodore Wirth Regional Park, Mary Hills Nature Area, and Glenview Terrace Park. These parks and the experience of park users are extremely important to the community. It is anticipated that any impacts to the parks will be mitigated to the satisfaction of the park owner. Golden Valley requests that it be involved in any planning or decision that affects its parks. Historic and Cultural Resources As the proposed project would impact fringe areas of large parks and natural areas, and Bassett Creek, the area would need to be studied for the presence of historic and cultural resources. Transportation There are two proposed locations for a station in Golden Valley. Based on the analysis of the area served by either location, the Golden Valley Road station would provide better access to Golden Valley residents. Existing bus service and existing and planned pedestrian facilities also make this station location attractive. Providing and maintaining good access, via multiple modes of transportation, is essential in realizing the full benefits of a transit station in Golden Valley. In order to fit into the community, additional transportation improvements and enhancements may be needed. Other transportation considerations include: 1. Construction Impacts - During construction, there may be additional wear and tear on the surrounding transportation network, it is expected that construction- related impacts would be addressed as part of the project. 3 2. Parking - In the event that transit riders park on the surrounding streets to access the new transifinray, a traffic management plan should be considered to outline the procedure for communication befinreen agencies to respond concerns. Currently, there are no plans for a park and ride facility as part of this project. However, this should be considered if a station is planned for Golden Valley Road. Surrounding businesses have voiced concerns about their existing parking conditions. The integration of public and private parking improvements coupled with redevelopment should be further studied. 3. Traffic - The trip generation from the proposed station or a future park and ride facility may result in the need to modify, enhance, or expand the nearby transportation system. It is expected that HCRRA would partner with the appropriate road authority to address and mitigate any traffic concerns. 4. Trails and Sidewalks - Sidewalks currently serve both proposed station locations. The existing sidewalk system may need to be upgraded or expanded to meet accessibility design requirements and the needs of the community. It is expected that this would be done as part of any site access evaluation and implementation. The City of Golden Valley owns and maintains concrete sidewalks on both sides of Golden Valley Road (CSAH 66) at the intersection of the proposed transitway. In addition, Three Rivers Park District has identified the Golden Valley Road corridor for the proposed Bassett Creek Regional Trail which would connect French Regional Park and the Medicine Lake Regional Trail to Wirth Regional Park and the trails along the Grand Rounds National Scenic Byway. This network of trails and sidewalks would complement LRT or BRT to improve the multimodal transportation in the area. The City owns and maintains an asphalt trail near the BNSF railway in the Mary Hills Nature Area. This trail provides an important north-south connection from Golden Valley Road north to Robbinsdale via Sochacki Park. It is anticipated that a new transitway may impact this trail and staff requests that it be actively involved with any reconstruction or realignment of this trail. The costs to reconstruct Golden Valley Road and the existing multi-modal facilities discussed above, in addition to any facilities deemed necessary to fully meet the anticipated needs, must be considered in evaluation of the potential station location. Water Resources, Wetlands, and Habitat 1. Flood Storage -Any impacts to the floodway or floodplain must be mitigated in accordance with the laws and policies of the regulating agencies. Staff recognizes that mitigation within the existing railroad corridor will be challenging, and it encourages HCRRA to work closely with the Bassett Creek Watershed 4 Management Commission (BCWMC) and its member cities to identify potential flood storage areas outside of the railroad rights-of-way. 2. Wetlands -Wetland impacts will need to be mitigated in accordance with the laws and policies of the regulating agencies. The City of Golden Valley is the local government unit responsible for administration of the Wetland Conservation Act. HCRRA is encouraged to work with its local partners to identify potential mitigation solutions outside the railroad right-of-way, if needed. 3. Stormwater Management - The transifinray project will need permits or approvals from all agencies regulating stormwater, including but not limited to the City, BCWMC, and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. At a minimum, best management practices addressing erosion and sediment control will need to be implemented during construction. It is possible that rate control and stormwater treatment that reduces pollutants and runoff will be required, especially with the development of a transit station, park and ride facility, or other impervious surface. 4. Endangered Species - Care should be taken to avoid impacts to the habitat and travel ways of endangered, threatened, or special concern species. Utilities 1. City-owned - The City of Golden Valley owns watermain, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer facilities in the area of the proposed route. Some of these facilities cross under the existing BNSF railway. Record drawings and other information are available in the City's engineering office. The City requests that it be consulted on all design and construction considerations, and field decisions involving City-owned utilities. 2. Other Public Utilities - The City of Minneapolis owns a 48-inch watermain which passes under the BNSF railway north of Golden Valley Road; and Metropolitan Council Environmental Services owns a large sanitary sewer interceptor which parallels the BNSF railway in Wirth Park. The City requests that it be consulted along with the custodial agency if any changes are proposed or issues arise as a result of the proposed project. 3. Xcel Energy - HCRRA's project consultant estimated that as many as 15 Xcel Energy transmission line towers may need to be relocated as a result of the proposed transitway. The City's Right-of-Way Management Ordinance currently requires that any proposed reconstruction, relocation, or replacement of overhead utility lines over 300 feet be buried underground. This code requirement may apply to this situation. 5 Soil Conditions ' Many areas of Golden Valley have substandard soils which are unsuitable for construction without proper correction or engineering. A good portion of the transitway corridor through Golden Valley is located within floodplain, lowland, or wetland areas. In addition, staff has witnessed the excavation of areas in Golden Valley that were filled with construction debris or hazardou5 materials in the past. Staff recommends a careful and detailed analysis of the soils as part of the project. 6 i � �. City Administration/Council O ` � �, e 763-593-3989/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Special Council/Manager Meeting January 30, 2012 Agenda Item 1. Proposed 2012 Legislative Policies Prepared By Chantell Knauss, Assistant City Manger Summary For a number of years the City Council has adopted Legislative Policies in order to share local priorities with area legislators and seek their assistance in forwarding these priorities. Based on direction provided at the last Council/Manager Meeting, staff has drafted proposed 2012 Legislative Policies in eight (8) areas: Unfunded Mandates, Market Value Homestead Credit and Homestead Market Value Exclusion, Voter ldentification, Inflow and Infiltration (I/I), Impaired Waters, Organized Solid Waste Collection, Complete Streets, and City Speed Limit Control. Copies of the proposed policies are attached. Attachments City of Golden Valley 2012 Proposed Legislative Policies (10 pages) Discussion Issues The Council should discuss the proposed 2012 policies and determine whether they wish to make any changes. city�f � v�. le � 2012 Le islative Policies g Presented to the City Council February 7,2012 Policy 1. Unfunded Mandates Issue The cost of federal and state mandated programs substitute the judgment of Congress,the presi- � dent,the Minnesota Legislature,and the governor for local budget priorities.These mandates force cities to reduce funding for other basic services or to increase taxes and service charges.The passage by the Legislature of reporting requirements for new state mandates,the Office of the State Auditor program for local governments to register their ideas for mandates reform,and the passage by Congress of legislation restraining new federal mandates,should help address the problem,but other steps are necessary. Although the Legislature discussed mandate relief during the 2011 legislative session,the final resolution yielded very little in actual mandate relief.In recent years,the focus ha.s switched from mandate relief to government redesign,and in 2010 legislation ultimately passed creating the Commission on Service Innovation,and the Collaborative Governance Council. Response The City of Golden Valley recommends its legislative representatives seek flexibility for local agen- cies to establish policies and priorities based on local needs as the most effective way to be fiscally responsible and accountable,including the following: • Existing unfunded mandates should be reviewed and modified,or repealed where possible. • No additional statewide mandates should be enacted unless full funding for the mandate is provided by the level of government imposing it or a permanent stable revenue source is es- tablished. • Cities should not be forced to comply with unfunded mandates. • Cities should be given the greatest flexibility possible in implementing mandates to ensure their cost is minimized. • The different government redesign groups should consider the various unfunded mandates as they look at local government reform and redesign and make recommendations for the next session. 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427 763-593-8006 Page 1 Policy 2. Market Value Homestead Credit and Homestead Market Value Exclusion Issue The 2011 Legislature and governor passed a law that repealed the existing market value home- stead credit effective for taxes payable in 2012.To buffer the effects of this change on homeown- ers,the Legislature enacted a new homestead market value exclusion system that reduces the value on which qualifying homeowners pay property taxes.This new exclusion system will shift tax burdens to other property types including businesses and apartments that do not receive the value exclusion.These property tax shifts have raised concerns and suggestions that the former system should be restored. Response The City of Golden Valley supports the the League of Minnesota Cities position of providing ad- ditional property tax relief directly to homeowners through an expansion of the property tax relief (PTR) program.The City opposes the restoration of the market value homestead credit(MVHC) and encourages the elimination of the new homestead market value exclusion (HMVE).The City further opposes more complex and cumbersome additions to the property tax system. Page 2 City of Golden Valley 2012 Legislative Policies Policy 3. Voter ldentification Issue The Legislature has discussed requiring all voters to present identification cards at the polls. Response The City of Golden Valley supports this legislation only if the cost of providing identification cards to voters does not become the responsibility of cities and yet another unfunded mandate. 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427 763-593-8006 Page 3 Policy 4. Metropolitan Council Inflow/Infiltration Issue The Metropolitan Council Environmental Service's(MCES)Water Resources Management Plan es- tablished an I/I surcharge in 2007 on cities determined by MCES to be contributing unacceptable amounts of storm water to the MCES wastewater treatment system.Since the inception of the sur- charge program,46 cities have been identified as excessive I/I contributors.This number is subject to change,depending on rain events,and any city in the metropolitan area could be affected. While Metro Cities recognizes the importance of controlling I/I because it affects the size,and therefore the cost,of wastewater treatment systems and because excessive I/I in one city can affect development capacity of another,we are concerned about the potential for cities to incur increasingly exorbitant costs,and decreasing benefits,in their on-going efforts to mitigate exces- sive I/L Metro Cities supported the recommendations of the 2010 I/I Demand Charge Task Force for a second phase,on-going surcharge program to address I/I mitigation in the region.Metro Cities further supported adjustments to the flow methodology used to measure excess I/I that allow for the normalizing of precipitation variability.Metro Cities also encourages the Council to work with cities on community-specific issues that fall outside the scope of the task force report and recom- mendations. Metro Cities continues to monitor the surcharge program,and encourages the Metropolitan Council to support state financial assistance for Metro Area I/I mitigation through future Clean Water Legacy Act appropriations or similar legislation. Metro Cities supports continued state capital assistance to provide grants to metro area cities for the purpose of mitigating inflow and infiltration problems into municipal wastewater collection systems. Response The City of Golden Valley is a leader in the metropolitan area in addressing inflow and infiltration from public and private sources.The City has spent millions of dollars to address I/I issues in the municipal system.In addition,through the City's Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance,significant investment has been made by property owners to reduce I/I from sewer services. Because I/I reduction efforts benefit the entire metropolitan area,the City of Golden Valley sup- ports the Metro Cities position that the state provide financial assistance through future Clean Water Legacy Act appropriations or similar education. Pag2 4 City of Golden Valley� 2012 Legislative Policies Policy 5. Impaired Waters Issue Despite the billions of dollars that Minnesota municipalities have invested and continue to invest in wastewater and stormwater management systems and best management practices to protect, preserve,and restore the quality of Minnesota's surface waters,the quality of some of Minnesota's surface waters does not meet federal water quality requirements.The federal Clean Water Act requires that further efforts be made by the state to reduce human impacts on surface waters that are determined to be impaired due to high pollutant loads of nutrients,bacteria,sediment, mercury,and other contaminants. Scientific studies of these waters must be conducted to determine how much pollution they can handle(Total Maximum Daily Loads,orTMDLs).The pollutant load reduction requirements will af- fect municipal,industrial,and agricultural practices and operations along any river,stream or lake determined to be impaired. While the source of 86 percent of the pollutants affecting Minnesota waters are non-point sourc- es,there will also be new costs and requirements for point-source dischargers,like municipal wastewater treatment facilities.Municipal stormwater systems will also face increased protective requirements and regulation as part of the state's impaired waters program. Response The City of Golden Valley is committed to protecting its natural water features.The City supports the League on Minnesota Cities'efforts in addressing impaired waters,including increased state funding for projects and programs intended to protect and improve water quality state-wide and the design and implementation of Minnesota's impaired waters program to: • Ensure equitable funding solutions are found,such as the state general fund or bonding,that broadly collect revenue to address this statewide problem. • Support legislative appropriation of constitutionally dedicated clean water revenues that supplement traditional sources of funding for these purposes,not be used to cover budget cuts,backfill past program reductions,or to otherwise supplant normal state spending on wa- ter programs. • Direct the majority of funds collected by the state for impaired waters into programs that fund municipal wastewater and stormwater projects,and for state programs needed for munici- pal wastewater and stormwater permitting and technical support,including the Clean Water Revolving Loan Fund,Wastewater Infrastructure Fund,Phosphorus Reduction Grant Program, TMDL Grants Program,Small Community WastewaterTreatment Grant and Loan Program,and other state programs that provide financial resources for city wastewater treatment facilities, septic tank replacement,stormwater management projects,and other city water quality im- provement and protection projects. • More adequately cover the current five-year wastewater infrastructure funding need projection of more than $2.1 billion. • Recognize and address the upcoming costs of stormwater management infrastructure and operation on municipalities from new regulatory mandates and load reduction requirements. 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427 763-593-8006 Page 5 • Allow flexibility in achieving pollutant load reductions and limitations through ofFsets or trad- ing of pollutant load reduction credits for both point and nonpoint load reduction require- ments within watersheds. • Recognize and credit the work underway and already completed by local units of government to limit point and non-point source water pollutant discharges. • Recognize the diversity of efforts and needs that exists across the state. • Ensure the best science available is used to accurately determine the sources of pollutant load in order to maximize positive environmental outcomes and minimize unnecessary regulatory and financial burdens for cities by correctly accounting for and addressing agricultural and other non-point pollutant sources. • Ensure the state requires that the MPCA retain control of the TMDL development process and that all scientific research related toTMDLs is conducted by the MPCA or qualified,objective parties pursuant to state contracting,procurement,and conflict of interest laws. • Clarify state water quality mandates so cities know specifically what they are required to do and what methods of achieving those outcomes are acceptable to state and federal regulators. Page 6 City of Golden Valley� 2012 Legislative Policies Policy 6. Organized Solid Waste Collection Issue "Organized collection"is the term used to refer to a situation where a local unit of government,for any of a variety of reasons,decides that there is a public interest served by limiting the number of solid waste and recycling collection services available in the area.The reasons for implementing organized collection can vary but include: • public safety concerns caused by the number and frequency of large trucks moving quickly through residential neighborhoods • reducing wear on public infrastructure from heavy truck traffic • improving the efficiency,cost and quality of garbage and recycling service provided to local residents • cooperating with other local governments to best meet solid waste management and recycling objectives • taking local steps to reduce energy impacts of public services • meeting the requirements of county ordinances and solid waste management plans as re- quired under Minn.Stat.§ 115.94 Organized collection is also encouraged in state solid waste policies as a means of improving the efficiency and coordination of solid waste management between local units of government.There are very specific public procedures laid out in statute defining how such a decision must be pub- licly vetted and approved and over what time period that can occur. Despite all of these important and valid reasons for using organized collection,legislation has been discussed in several recent sessions that would allow special takings claims by the solid waste industry if local governments make decisions that limit the number of companies that can collect garbage in a community in a manner that prevents a company currently operating in the community from continuing to do so through the implementation of organized collection.The unspecified and ongoing liability this change would create would have the effect of eliminating organized collection as a waste management option. This change would also create a virtual monopoly situation for any company awarded a solid waste contract under organized collection.The local unit of government would have to"buy out" a contractor in the future to change providers,even if their services were no longer the lowest bid.Furthermore,this is a precedent that,if applied to other government purchasing and service contracting decisions,would clearly run counter to the public purpose of government providing services at the lowest feasible cost to taxpayers. This issue has generated sufficient controversy that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is currently conducting a study to attempt to determine whether efficiency benefits of organized collection can be documented. Response The City of Golden Valley supports the League of Minnesota Cities in opposing efforts to apply inverse condemnation claims to city solid waste contracting decisions. 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427 763-593-8006 PdgC' 7 Further,the City supports the current state policy that organized collection is a valuable tool as part of a comprehensive solid waste and recycling management program and recognizes the need to protect and preserve the authority of cities to adopt solid waste service contracts that protect public safety,the environment and public infrastructure. Pa�e$ City of Golden Valley 2072 Legislative Policies Policy 7. Complete Streets Issue A comptete street may include:sidewalks,bike lanes(or wide paved shoulders),special bus lanes, comfortable and accessible public transportation stops,frequent and safe crossing opportunities, median islands,accessible pedestrian signals,curb extensions,narrower travel lanes,and more. There is increasing public support for the reform of local street design policies to make streets safer for pedestrians,cyclists,and neighborhood residents. Response The City of Golden Valley has adopted a complete streets policy and has demonstrated its com- mitment to providing transportation options for both motorized and non-motorized users. The City supports the Metro Cities position that design guidelines include adequate flexibility to exercise local decisions to provide safe and effective transportation for all modes of transporta- tion,including walking and biking.The state should also provide incentives such as grants to local units of government working to advance complete street projects. The City suports the League of Minnesota Cities'opposition to state-imposed unfunded mandates that would increase the costs of building streets in contexts where facilities for cyclists and pedes- trians are unnecessary or inappropriate. 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Vailey,MPl 55427 763-593-8006 Page 9 Policy 8. City Speed Limit Control Issue Toward Zero Deaths is a nationally recognized Minnesota program initiative with a mission to create a culture for which traffic fatalities and serious injuries are no longer acceptable through the integrated application of education,engineering,enforcement,and emergency medical and trauma services. There has been significant discussion,and legislative action,over recent years to reduce the default speed fimit on residential streets within the state from 30 mph to 25 mph.On residential roads,where traffic safety also affects pedestrians and users of alternative transportation modes, Metro Cities supports a reduction in the state-wide default speed limit from 30 to 25 mph.Metro Cities also supports design standards that result in slower speeds on local roads.In the event of a uniform speed limit reduction,Metro Cities supports increased state funding for education and enforcement. At cities'or counties'discretion,Metro Cities also supports a year round reduction of speed limits within 500 feet of any city or county parks and schools. Response The City of Golden Valley does not necessarily believe that a new maximum speed limit on resi- dential streets will result in enough change in driver behavior to significantly reduce accidents. However,a state-wide speed limit of 25 mph on residential streets can be effective with sufficient education and enforcement. The City supports the Metro Cities position that if there is a reduction in speed limits on residential streets,a state-wide default speed limit of 25 miles per hour be adopted,provided there are no requirements to install speed limit signs on each block.Furthermore,the City supports the posi- tion that increased state funding be provided for education and enforcement of a new residential speed limit. Pa�e 1� City of Golden Valley 201 Z Legislative Policies . m. �. � � � ° � O � City Administration/Council 3 ��� �, e 763-593-8003/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Special Council/Manager Meeting January 30, 2012 Agenda Item 2. Honors/Recognitions Prepared By Thomas Burt, City Manager Summary Mayor Harris requested this item be placed on the agenda. Mayor Harris has suggested the Council honor and/or recognize local schools, organizations and/or businesses. Suggested possibilities for recognition would be Armstrong High School Band for winning Outback Bowl competition, Armstrong Debate Team (placed second in the state) and Courage Center presented with the Circle of Excellence Award by the Minnesota Department Human Services.