2018-09-24 EC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
September 24, 2018, Monday @ 6:30pm
Council Conference Room (across from Council Chambers)
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Rd
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of August 27, 2018 (5 min)
3. Solid Waste and Recycling discussion (20 min)
4. Emerald Ash Borer Management (15 min)
5. GreenStep Cities Steps 4 Metrics - Land Use (15 min)
6. Commission sponsored workshop (10 min)
7. Participation in Closed Social Media Groups (5 min)
8. Program/Project Updates (10 min)
9. Council Updates (5 min)
10. Other Business
11. Adjourn
1
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2018\9-September\2 - 08-27-18 EC Minutes.doc
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting, Minutes
August 27, 2018
Commissioners Present: Tracy Anderson, Tonia Galonska, Dawn Hill, Joseph Ramlet,
Scott Seys and Debra Yahle
Staff Present: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Supervisor and Claire Huisman,
Administrative Assistant
Absent: Commissioners Lynn Gitelis and Jim Stremel
Call to Order
Chair Hill called the meeting to order at 6:28 pm.
Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes
MOVED by Galonska, SECONDED by Anderson, and the motion carried
unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 23, 2018 regular meeting.
Energy Consumption Update
Eckman presented data on the City’s energy consumption for buildings and facilities as
well as traffic and street lights. Since 2008, the City has been collecting and tracking its
energy consumption data. Due to the implementation of energy-saving projects in
recent years, such as building remodels, addition of solar arrays and the switch to LED
lighting, the City has noticed a reduction in its energy cost and carbon emissions.
These projects were done by using a combination of City funds, state and federal grant
money, and public and private partnerships.
GreenStep Cities - Step 4 – Buildings and Lighting
After discussion of Step 4 core topic Buildings and Lighting, the Commission made the
following motion.
MOVED by Seys, SECONDED by Yahle and the motion carried unanimously to
approve the entry for Step 4 Buildings and Lighting into the GreenSteps Cities
website at the time when all core topic areas and optional topic areas are
completed.
GreenStep Cities – Step 4 – Renewable Energy
After discussion of Step 4 core topic Renewable Energy, the Commission made the
following motion.
MOVED by Galonska, SECONDED by Yahle and the motion carried unanimously
to approve the entry for Step 4 Renewable Energy into the GreenSteps Cities
website at the time when all core topic areas and optional topic areas are
completed.
Program/Project Updates
In discussion, Commission members were encouraged to volunteer to help collect data
at the Third Annual Countywide Bicyclist and Pedestrian Count put on by Hennepin
County and the City of Minneapolis.
The Recycling and Solid Waste items were also discussed. Commission comments
included:
2
Minutes of the Environmental Commission
August 27, 2018
Page 2 of 2
G:\Environmental Commission\Agendas\2018\9-September\2 - 08-27-18 EC Minutes.doc
• Rebroadcasting the panel discussion through a video on the City website.
• Provide a way on the City website that residents can give feedback after
attending or listening to the Panel Discussion event.
• Conduct an online survey of the residents’ comments and concerns regarding the
City’s solid waste issue
• The Panel Discussion should not be the residents’ only source of information.
In regards to the recycling contract extension, negotiations will include: fixed rate
structure; 50/50 revenue share; three year extension with provision to negotiate
curbside organics collection before the end of the contract if necessary. Commission
members would also like to add a requirement that the recycling provider makes tours
available to the public of the recycling facility (MRF). Commission members would also
like to add to the contract negotiations that the recycling facility would offer tours to the
public.
It was also noted that the list of what can and cannot be recycled through Republic
Services needs to be updated on the City website.
The complete Program/Project Update is on file.
Other Business
Joe Ramlet stated that with the help of the City, he and his Eagle Scout friend were able
to complete an erosion control project on Bassett Creek which included installing and
burying bio-logs and planting native vegetation.
Adjourn
MOVED by Ramlet, SECONDED by Anderson, and the motion carried to adjourn
the meeting at 8:07 pm.
Claire Huisman
Administrative Assistant
3
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Supervisor
Subject: Update on Solid Waste and Recycling Discussion
Physical Development Director Marc Nevinski will be in attendance to provide information on the
City’s recycling contract and the upcoming solid waste panel discussion scheduled for October 29,
2018. For more information on the waste hauling forum go to:
http://www.goldenvalleymn.gov/recycling/residential-waste-hauling.php
4
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Eric Eckman, Development and Assets Supervisor
Subject: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Management
The invasive Asian beetle known as the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) was discovered in an ash tree in
Golden Valley’s Stockman Park in summer 2018. The City developed an EAB management plan in
2010 with the goal of removing City-owned ash trees and replanting them with a variety of tree
species over the course of two decades.
The full story can be found in the September/October issue of “City News” which can be found on
our website: http://www.goldenvalleymn.gov/news/publications/citynews/index.php .
Forestry staff will be on hand to discuss EAB disease and the City’s EAB Management Plan with
the Commission.
5
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Drew Chirpich, Environmental Specialist
Subject: GreenStep Cities Step 4 – Land Use
The City is working toward Step 4 in the GreenStep Cities Program which involves the
documentation of metric measurements in seven core topic areas and five optional topic areas.
Measuring for Step 4 is important as the City must show improvements in each topic area to
advance to Step 5. Improvements within these topic areas will help the community reduce
energy and carbon emissions, save money, and increase resilience to short and long term shocks
and stressors.
Core topic areas
Open Space, Parks, and Trees
Stormwater
Wastewater
City Buildings and Lighting
Renewable Energy
• Land Use
• Transportation Modes and Miles
Optional topic areas (in priority order)
• City Fleets
• Infrastructure for Biking and Walking
• Car, Transit, and Bike Options
• Surface Water
• Green Buildings
• Local Food (only if green buildings
does not prove to be workable)
The next core topic area that the City is completing is Land Use. The performance metrics are
attached to this memorandum and are mostly derived from criteria created by the Great Plains
Institute. Attached is the guidance document for completion of this action. Staff is awaiting data
from Hennepin County to complete metric 7.1. After discussion, and assuming receipt of the
data from Hennepin County for metric 7.1, staff requests that the Commission consider making a
motion to approve the entry for Step 4 Land Use into the GreenSteps Cities website.
6
7
Minnesota GreenStep Cities
Performance Metrics for Recognition at Steps 4 and 5
#7: LAND USE
CORE METRIC FOR CATEGORY A & B & C CITIES
Bold, green font indicates data elements that are eligible to be recognized at Step 5 if
improvement is demonstrated.
DATA ELEMENTS
7.1 % of land within commercial/mixed zoning districts built with a FAR at/above 1.0
7.2 % of land within residential/mixed zoning districts with dwelling units per acre (DUA) at/above 7.0
7.3 Market value per acre
7.4 Location Affordability Index numbers (three)
7.5 Acres of new development on previously developed land
7.6 New affordable housing units as a percent of all new housing units
DEFINITION
• FAR (Floor area ratio) is a common “building intensity” measure: gross floor area in a building divided by the lot or
parcel size. For example, a structure with two floors of equal size that has a footprint that covers 50% of the lot will
have an FAR of 1.0 Add a third floor and the FAR increases to 1.5 (Element 7.1)
• Dwelling units per acre (DUA), similar to FAR, is a measure of rental and ownership housing intensity and
specifically density. For this GreenStep Element, total only the housing units within residential (and mixed-use:
residential plus commercial) districts that are zoned for a DUA of 1.0 or more, and divide by the net acreage. Exclude
those city lands zoned for fewer than one house per acre so as to focus on the core city residential area served by
city services such as a sewer collection system. Net acreage excludes undevelopable acres within the
residential/mixed-use zoning districts. (Element 7.2)
• Market value per acre is a city-wide measure of development “efficiency” and an indicator of the economic
sustainability / tax productivity of land use. Total acreage in a city rarely changes, but the total dollar value of the total
acreage and buildings does. If a city has many parcels with a low market and taxable value (for example, many
parking lots, a high proportion of single family houses on large lots) on which taxes are levied, this results – if the tax
rate is not increased or if few nodes of dense development exist - in fewer tax dollars per acre with which to maintain
and improve and add infrastructure and with which to provide city services. Total market value, however, is also
affected by other factors beyond a city’s control (including building use, parcel ownership by non-profit organizations
and inflation). (Element 7.3)
• Location Affordability Index estimates the percentage of a family's income dedicated to the combined cost of
housing and transportation in a given location – city, region, or neighborhood. Traditional measures of housing
affordability ignore transportation costs. Typically a household’s second-largest expenditure, transportation costs are
largely a function of the characteristics of the neighborhood in which a household chooses to live. Compact and
dynamic neighborhoods with walkable streets and high access to jobs, transit, and a wide variety of businesses allow
a household to afford more expensive housing because transportation costs can be cut dramatically. However, in
greater Minnesota, the transportation percentage may be larger than the housing percentage and reporting the
combined percentage and the two separate percentages can be very useful to a city. (Element 7.4)
• Acres of new development on previously developed land is an “in-fill” measure that should track increases in
city-wide market value per acre and yet should change more dramatically each year. It focuses attention on
developments that, rather than requiring more costly extension of city services as does “greenfield” development,
better utilize existing infrastructure, make an area more viable for improved transit service, and enhance the
economic and social viability of an area. (Element 7.5)
8
Minnesota GreenStep Cities
Performance Metrics for Recognition at Steps 4 and 5
• Affordable housing uses a federal definition and is a serious issue for many Minnesota cities, resulting, for
example, in the inability for basic workers such as teachers to live close to where they work. As acres of infill
development is to market value per acre, new affordable housing tracks the Location Affordability Index number,
changing more dramatically each year and counts both the addition of new rental and ownership housing units and
conversions of units into affordable units. (Element 7.6)
• Alternative data elements: If you have been gathering different data or want to gather different data, report those
and explain how they are a better fit for your city.
DATA SOURCES
• City records, zoning and plat maps, and if available, your Geographic Information System.
• City, County property assessor’s records.
• Annual LMC report at http://www.lmc.org/page/1/property-tax-reports.jsp
• Building permit records.
• http://www.locationaffordability.info/lai.aspx (Element 7.4)
CALCULATION AND PUBLIC REPORTING
• Annual measurement and reporting for these data elements is based upon 12 months as of December 31st before
the reporting year. Acres of infill development and of new affordable housing will likely change significantly each year.
The other elements will likely change slowly and so cities may choose to re-measure them every 2-3 years. In years
when no re-measurement is done, simply repeat the previously years' measure and report this in the notes section of
the GreenStep reporting form. (Elements 7.1-7.6)
• % of land within commercial/mixed zoning districts built with a FAR at/above 1.0: Ideally, use a spreadsheet of
property tax records to total gross floor area of all buildings within city land zoned for commercial and mixed use, and
divide that total by the total footage of all parcels in those zoning districts. Use permit records to update the data
annually. See more details on calculating FARs under Land Use
at http://www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Resources.aspx (Element 7.1)
• % of land within residential/mixed zoning districts with dwelling units per acre at/above 7.0: First, take data
only from residential and mixed-use (residential plus commercial) districts that are zoned for a DUA of 1.0 or more.
Ideally, use a spreadsheet of property tax records to total housing units within those relevant zoning districts and
divide that total by the net acreage of all land in those zoning districts. Use permit records to update the data
annually. See more details on calculating net residential density under Land Use
at http://www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Resources.aspx
Net acreage excludes undevelopable acres within the residential/mixed-use zoning districts: land covered by arterial
road rights-of-way, wetlands, water bodies, public parks and trails, public open space, and other land protected by
local ordinances such as steep slopes. (Element 7.2)
• Market value per acre: Total the market value in dollars of all parcels (land plus buildings) in the city, and divide by
the total land acres within city limits. (Element 7.3)
• Enter your city name into the Location Affordability Index web site and report (1) the resulting percentage of a
family's income dedicated to the combined cost of housing and transportation in the city, (2) the percent of income
going to housing, and (3) the percent going to transportation. Use the default values on the web site – median-
income family, combined rental/ownership – but change them if the resulting calculation if more relevant and report
this in the notes section of the GreenStep reporting form.
• Because what is affordable is different for everyone, users can choose among eight different family profiles--defined
by household income, size, and number of commuters--and see the affordability landscape for each one. (Element
7.4)
• Acres of new development on previously developed land: Consider as “previously developed” those parcels
where the built (improved) value of the parcel was at least 10% of total parcel value (land plus building value) prior to
the new development. Therefore do not count empty lots on the edge of, or within, the city that have never been built
9
Minnesota GreenStep Cities
Performance Metrics for Recognition at Steps 4 and 5
on. Count the gross footage (converted to acres) of construction on: parcels where an empty building is demolished;
on brownfields (unused, abandoned parcels); on parcels where the building is more than 50% reconstructed; on
parcels where a vacant/abandoned building is rehabilitated.
If counting empty lots never built on makes this measure much more relevant for your city, do so and report this in
the notes section of the GreenStep reporting form. (Element 7.5)
• New affordable housing units: According to US Housing and Urban Development, housing is affordable “when the
occupant(s) is/are paying no more than 30% of their income for gross housing costs, including utilities. Some cities
may define affordable housing based on other, locally (for example, county) determined criteria and should note that
criteria in the notes section of the GreenStep reporting form. For each GreenStep reporting year, total the number of
affordable housing rental and ownership units created within the city – either new construction, or reconstruction, or
financially restructured units. Divide that total by the total number of all new housing (rental and ownership) created in
the city during the year and report the percentage.
The Twin Cities Metropolitan Council has established new affordable housing targets for all metro cities for the period
2020 – 2040. GreenStep cities may report as an alternative data element (and note this on the GreenStep reporting
form) new affordable units each year as a percent of their 2040 target. (Element 7.6)
RATIONALE
Land use exceeding FAR and DUA thresholds. Cities have authority over the two interrelated factors with the greatest long-
term potential to increase energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and buttress financial security: land use
(through comprehensive planning) and transportation, especially public transportation. By choosing a mix of allowing,
encouraging, facilitating, incentivizing and requiring a higher commercial and residential intensity and density (and mixed-use
development) in already developed areas, cities can help create compact, human-scaled communities that are walkable and
transit friendly, and that offer a more complete mix of uses, services, and housing options for families at all income levels. A
FAR above 1.0 generally results in buildings with two or more floors – an historically durable and financially productive building
form in Minnesota – and thus 1.0 is set as a GreenStep threshold measure. A DUA at/above 7.0 is the threshold established
by the national STAR Community and LEED for Neighborhood Development rating systems - largely because long-term
viability of transit and infrastructure replacement becomes difficult below 7.0. In state policy, as a condition for funding,
Minnesota Housing requires 6+ DUA for single-family projects.
Market value per acre. As the adage goes - “land: they ain’t makin it anymore” – and so it makes sense to make existing
acres more productive in terms of taxes. A narrower and related measure that has been explored in the rural Twin Cities
exurban areas is property taxes collected per linear foot of road, a key indicator for tracking and answering the basic question
of whether enough tax money is being saved so that roads can be repaired/rebuilt as their useful life ends. New development
on previously developed land is the major way to increase market and taxable value per acre and has been chosen as a
Metropolitan Council measure in its Thrive MSP 2040 plan, which has a focus on growth in infill areas and on redevelopment
that does not require the extension of water, sewer, and road infrastructure.
The Location Affordability numbers help the city, businesses and residents get a more complete understanding of the
costs of living in the city, pointing to aspects of housing and transportation where changes can result in financial savings to
individuals.
New affordable housing. A mix of housing opportunities is valued by all cities and cities typically measure a number of data
points: median or average rents; rental vacancy rates; home sale numbers and median price; number of houses on the
market; percent housing affordable [to some defined subset of the population]; mix of rental, ownership and senior housing;
mix of single-family housing and 2-4-plexes and multi-family housing. An argument can be made for the preeminent value of
any one measure for a specific city. That said, affordability and the need to add more affordable housing is a widely shared
need among Minnesota cities and thus GreenStep has chosen this measure.
• Being mindful however of the Location Affordability Index, this data element is not to be construed as simply “the
more the better.” Building affordable units in locations that lack the public transportation infrastructure and social
10
Minnesota GreenStep Cities
Performance Metrics for Recognition at Steps 4 and 5
service networks that lower-income households so importantly benefit from is not necessarily good public policy; nor
is over-concentrating affordable housing, for example, in a central city location.
STEP 5 GOALS
There are no state-wide goals for this metric nor any guidance useful at this point in time for all cities in Minnesota. Therefore
individual cities are best equipped to set realistic goals for improvement, and any improvement in the metric has multiple clear,
quantifiable benefits.
The national STAR Community Rating System does set these two relevant targets:
• Aim for at least 75% of new housing units in each 3 year period to utilize existing water and sewer mains and existing
roads without widening them.
• Aim for households, in at least 80% of those Census block groups that earn at or below the Area Median Income, to
spend less than 45% on housing and transportation costs combined.
NEED HELP? CONTACT
Brian Ross, land use planner, Great Plains Institute: bross@gpisd.net , 612-767-7296
February 2017
11
G:\Environmental Commission\Memos
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Environmental Commission
From: Drew Chirpich, Environmental Specialist
Subject: Low Maintenance Lawn/Turf Alternatives Workshop
The City of Golden Valley in collaboration with Metro Blooms will be hosting a Low Maintenance
Lawn/Turf Alternatives workshop at Brookview Community Center in the Bassett Creek North
Room from 6:30-8pm on Tuesday, October 16th. The workshop will discuss alternative lawn
species that require less inputs and maintenance than traditional Kentucky bluegrass, and are
more drought tolerant.
This is the first workshop sponsored by the City’s Environmental Commission and addresses the
topic “sustainable yards and gardens” chosen by the Commission as part of its 2018 work plan.
12
13
14
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Tim Cruikshank, City Manager
From: Maria Cisneros, City Attorney
Subject: Participation in Closed Social Media Groups
ISSUE
Is participation in a closed social media group by a quorum of a public body a violation of the
Minnesota Open Meeting Law?
ANSWER & ANALYSIS
It is my opinion that participation by a quorum of a public body in a closed social media group that
discusses public matters over which the public body has authority is a violation of Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 13D (the “Open Meeting Law”). For purposes of the Open Meeting Law, a
meeting is any gathering of a quorum of public officials to discuss, decide or receive information
on official public matters over which they have authority. Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336
N.W.2d 510, 518 (Minn. 1983). Where three or more council members or a quorum of
commissioners are members of an online discussion group in which members discuss public
matters over which the public representatives have authority, that discussion board constitutes a
public meeting under the Open Meeting Law that must be noticed and open to the public.
In 2014, the Minnesota Legislature amended the Open Meeting Law to provide that “the use of
social media by members of a public body does not violate the Open Meeting Law so long as the
social media use is limited to exchanges with all members of the general public.” Minn. Stat. §
13D.065. As long as social media groups are open to the general public, council members and
commissioners may participate in the groups without violating the Open Meeting Law.
Additionally, public officials are not prohibited from participating in closed social media groups that
discuss public matters over which the public official has no authority.
15
PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES – September 2018
NATURAL RESOURCES
The City of Golden Valley is developing a Goose Management Plan (GMP) and a Turkey management Plan (TMP) to focus
on public safety and community nuisance. The initial draft of both plans will be available for review at the Open Space
and Rec Commission meeting on Oct. 22 at 630pm at Brookview. The full story can be found in the September/October
issue of “City News”: http://www.goldenvalleymn.gov/news/publications/citynews/index.php .
The City of Golden Valley in collaboration with Metro Blooms will be hosting a Low Maintenance Lawn/ Turf Alternatives
workshop at Brookview Community Center in the Bassett Creek North Room from 6:30-8pm on Tuesday, October 16th.
The workshop will discuss alternative lawn species that require less inputs and maintenance than traditional Kentucky
bluegrass, and are more drought tolerant. See attached PDF for more information. The link to the Facebook Event Page
is here: https://www.facebook.com/events/486794855122857/
ENERGY
The City of Golden Valley is planning to install the first of two Electric Vehicle Dual-Charging stations this Fall. The station
has the ability to charge two vehicles simultaneously, and will be located Southwest of the water tower on City Hall
Campus. This location was chosen due to existing infrastructure in this location making the installation costs significantly
lower than other proposed locations, and to minimize congestion near the station. The Station will be available to the
public and will be a pay per use station.
RECYCLING/SOLID WASTE
Staff is working with Republic Services to set up a tour of their recycling facility for Environmental Commission members.
If an October/November tour date is possible, it might take the place of a Commission meeting. This will be discussed
further at the September Commission meeting as more details become available.
PLANNING AND ZONING AND DEVELOPMENTS
Three Rivers Park District is creating a 2040 System Plan, and we need your help. From now through
September 30, we’re seeking input from the people, communities and partner agencies we serve.
We’ve developed an online engagement website, LetsTalkThreeRivers.org, that includes a survey to find
out where we’re doing well and where we could improve. Here’s how you can help us:
•First, we hope you’ll take the survey.
•We also hope you’ll pass along the link to your colleagues within your organization so they can
give us their perspectives, too.
•Also, please share the link with your Communications staff and ask them to share it through city
communication channels — city newsletter, website, social media, and any other ways your staff
communicates with residents.
•We’re also planning to attend community events in the next few weeks to gather public
feedback. We’ll be at the Golden Valley Arts and Music Fest on September 15, so please stop by
and see us if you get a chance.
We’re really looking forward to getting great ideas and insight from our partners, communities and
residents, and I hope you’ll take a few moments to complete the survey and share the link. If you have
any questions or would like additional information, please feel free to contact Jason McGrew-King
at Jason.McGrew-King@threeriversparks.org or 763-559-6779. Thank you for your time and
partnership.
Sincerely, Daniel Freeman, Vice Chair, District 3
16
!R!(!(
")VE")VE
!4
!4
0 10 205Feet
I
Sources: Print Date: 8/22/2018-Hennepin County Surveyors Office for Property Lines (2018) & Aerial Photography (2015).-MnDNR for 2-Foot Contours (2011)-City of Golden Valley for all other layers.
EV Site
!R Charging Station
!(Bollards
")VE EV Dedicated Parking
!4 Existing Electric Meter
Parking Lines
Proposed Electric Connection
Existing Electric Line
1 inch = 15 feet
EV Charging, City Hall7800 Golden Valley RdGolden Valley, MN 17