Loading...
04-09-19 Council/Manager Agenda Packet         REGULAR MEETING AGENDA      Pages      1.  Commission 2018 Annual Report and 2019 Work Plan:          a.  Planning Commission   2‐13       b.  Board of Zoning Appeals    14‐25      2.  Downtown Study Scope/Update  26‐34      3.  Residential Waste Collection Options and Decision  35‐43      4.  2018 Positive Performance‐General Fund Transfer and Assignment of Fund Balance  44‐47      5.  Council Review of Future Draft Agendas: Housing and Redevelopment Authority April  16, City Council April 16, City Council May 7 and Council/Manager May 14, 2019  48‐51                  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.            Apr 9, 2019 – 6:30 pm  Council Conference Room  Golden Valley City Hall  7800 Golden Valley Road  Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting April 9, 2018 Agenda Item 1. a. Planning Commission – 2018 Annual Report Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary The Planning Commission Chair, Rich Baker, will be in attendance to provide a review of the work completed by the Commission in 2018 and to discuss issues related to planning for 2019 and beyond. Attachment Planning Commission – 2018 Annual Report (11 pages) p, 9280 Cornerstone ' Creek i a a PLANNING COMMISSION 2018 ANNUAL REPORT AND 2019 PROPOSED WORK PLANw' n Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 2 2018 Planning Commission Commissioners Rich Baker, Chair (2019) Andy Johnson, Vice Chair (2021) Ronald Blum, Secretary (2021) Brett Angell (2020) Adam Brookins (2019) Lauren Pockl (2021) Chuck Segelbaum (2020) Ian Black, Student (2018) Council Liaison Steve Schmidgall City Staff Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Emily Goellner, Senior Planner/Grant Writer Amy Morgan, Planning Intern Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant Purpose, Mission, and Prescribed Duties The Planning Commission shall: review and make recommendations on specific development proposals made by private developers and public agencies review and make recommendations on proposed rezonings, subdivision plans, amendments to the zoning text, platting regulations and variances, and similar items having to do with administration and regulatory measures conduct special studies dealing with items such as renewal, civic design, maintenance of a suitable living and working environment, economic conditions, etc (these studies may be conducted at the initiative of the Planning Commission and/or specific direction from the City Council) review major public capital improvement plans against the policy and goals stated in the Comprehensive Plan for the area advise and make recommendations relative to housing, new development, and redevelopment projects proposed by the HRA prior to the final commitment of such projects by the HRA advise and make recommendations in matters relating to and affecting the environment Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 3 Table Of Contents 2018 Overview page 4 2019 Proposed Work Plan page 11 Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 4 2018 Overview The Golden Valley Planning Commission saw an uptick in the number of applications it reviewed in 2018, which was more in line with historic trends compared to a relatively slow 2017. Two large project proposals drew a significant number of residents to meetings in April to discuss an expansion to Meadowbrook Elementary School and to meetings in May and November to protest a new senior building at the corner of Golden Valley Rd and Lilac Rd. The Meadowbrook expansion was approved, but the senior project (Watermark) was eventually denied. The Commission also processed a fair number of Conditional Use Permits, prompting a presentation by staff and the City Attorney on how best to evaluate and draft conditions for those types of proposals. There were a handful of lot subdivisions and three lot consolidations associated with redevelopment or the cleaning up of unutilized right-of-way. In addition to its regular work, the Commission completed its review of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and in November recommended that the City Council deliver the draft plan to the Metropolitan Council for consideration. A recodification of the City Code in September allowed staff to bring forward a reorganization of the Zoning Chapter and a handful of adjustments to the Code. 2018 Activity The information below attempts to capture in figures and graphs the activities of the Planning Commission over the past year. Planning Commission Meetings Held: 20 Cancelled: 5 Joint: 1 April 26: TOD Zoning Workshop with City Council) Zoning Text Amendments Considered 3 Staff-Led Discussions/Presentations 21 Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 5 20 4 Planning Applications Considered Recommended Approval Recommended Denial 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total Planning Applications By Year Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Site Plan Review Land Use Change Rezoning Platting Subdivision/Lot Consolidation) Variance (Subdivision) CUP PUD/Major Amend Planning Applications By Type (Five Years) 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Site Plan Review Land Use Change Rezoning Platting… Variance (Subdivision) CUP PUD/Major Amend Planning Applications By Type (2018) Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 9 Zoning Text Amendments Considered Item Description Mixed Income Housing Addition of language requiring compliance with the City’s housing policy when certain planning approvals are requested Recodification of Zoning Chapter Reorganization and simplification of chapter text; revisions to provisions regarding Tax Parcel Divisions, Conditional Use Permits, and outdoor storage, among others Business and Professional Offices Zoning District Modernization of the district to address permitted and conditional uses as well as the district purpose Staff Led Discussions/Presentations 2040 Comprehensive Plan: 9 o 8 Planning Commission Work Sessions o 1 Public Hearing for Approval Annual Commissioner Orientation Commissioner Annual Training (Conditional Use Permits) Zoning Code: 4 Arch. and Material Standards, Overlay Districts, BPO District, Firearm Sales) TOD Zoning Study Douglas Drive Redevelopment Area Plan Expansion Zoning Code Recodification: 2 o 1 Discussion o 1 Review of Code Revocation of Conditional Use Permit 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program Other PUD Amendments Considered (not reviewed by Planning Commission) Administrative Amendments: 3 Midtown Development PUD 24 – allows for the construction of a deck at 1120 Boone Ave North Golden Valley Commons PUD 70 – installation of a bulk nitrogen tank for Halo Cyrotherapy Liberty Crossing PUD 123 – installation of a decorative fence along Winnetka Ave Minor Amendments: 3 North Wirth Parkway PUD 33 – allows for the construction of a link between two buildings by consolidating two parcels The Xenia PUD 113 – revision to the number of units allowed, the number of parking spaces required, and other site amenities The Three.Nine.Four Apartments PUD 112 – increase in the number of units in the Global Point Senior Living building Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 10 Major Projects Reviewed Item/Location Type Description Latitude 14 8806 Olson Memorial Hwy CUP Renovation of a Class III Restaurant in the Commercial Zoning District Import Auto Sales 730 Florida Ave S CUP Amendment Repurposing of a vacant building for auto sales and repair Meadowbrook School 5430 Glenwood Ave Major PUD Amendment Expand school with new classrooms, loading dock, and cafeteria space; add queuing lanes and other traffic-related improvements Watermark Senior Living 5530 & 5540 Golden Valley Rd and 1530 Welcome Ave N Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning Reguide to Medium Density Residential and rezone to R-3 to accommodate a new Residential Facility Watermark Senior Living 5530 & 5540 Golden Valley Rd and 1530 Welcome Ave N Rezoning, CUP Rezone to R-1 to accommodate a new Residential Facility serving 25 seniors Jaguar/Land Rover 8905 Wayzata Blvd Major PUD Amendment Expand building, reconfigure the display and parking areas at the front entrance Retro Companies 2429 Douglas Drive Comprehensive Plan amendment, Rezoning Reguide to Moderate Density Residential and rezone to R-2 to accommodate a new Residential Facility Home Health Care 800 Boone Ave S CUP Amendment Revision of existing Conditional Use Permit to address ongoing issues related to after- hours events, noise, and parking Previously Approved Projects with Construction Pending 2015 Central Park West – Phase 2 Apartments (Utica Ave S) 2016 Central Park West – Phase 1 Office (10 West End) Golden Valley Planning Commission 2018 Annual Report 11 2019 Proposed Work Plan Implementation of 2040 Comprehensive Plan Carry out Phase II of the Downtown Study, including conceptualizing the completion of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Network and a drafting framework to guide future redevelopment of key properties. Rezone properties to create consistency with the Future Land Use Map. Update the Medium Density Residential (R-3) zoning district to achieve target densities. Investigate Pedestrian/Corridor Overlay Districts as a tool for promoting quality design. Zoning Code Amendments/Updates Adopt new Architectural and Material Standards. Create a simplified and generalized Mixed Use Zoning District. Reformat and modernize the tables of Principal, Conditional, Restricted, and Prohibited Uses for each of the City’s zoning districts. Revisit the zoning districts in which Places of Worship are allowed in order to be consistent with the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Planning Application Review and Evaluation Continue to review and make recommendations on land use applications as they are submitted to the City, including subdivision requests, Conditional Use Permits, and Planned Unit Developments. Other Planning/Zoning Items of Relevance Respond to the direction of the City Council to investigate pressing issues such as zoning requirements for narrow lots or tree preservation. Commissioner Training and Education Work with staff to explore new and innovative planning concepts and to respond to the interests of individual Commissioners (gateway areas, small scale retail nodes, public art, etc.). Hello Apartments on Golden Valley Rd Staff photo) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting April 9, 2019 Agenda Item 1. b. Board of Zoning Appeals – 2018 Annual Report Prepared By Emily Goellner, Senior Planning/Grant Writer Summary Staff will provide a review of the work completed by the Board in 2018. Attachment Board of Zoning Appeals – 2018 Annual Report (11 pages) BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 2018 ANNUAL REPORT Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 2 2018 Board of Zoning Appeals Commissioners Nancy Nelson, Chair (2019) Richard Orenstein, Vice Chair (2019) David Perich (2019) Andy Snope (2019) Rotating Planning Commission Representative Vacancy-Youth City Staff Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Emily Goellner, Senior Planner/Grant Writer Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant Purpose, Mission, And Prescribed Duties The Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) hears requests for variances from the requirements of the Zoning Code, which is Chapter 113 of the Golden Valley City Code. The BZA consists of five members that meet once a month if there are any petitions pending for action. A Planning Commissioner serves as the fifth member of the BZA. Criteria For Analysis A variance may be granted when the petitioner for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this Chapter. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means: the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter the plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 3 Table Of Contents 2018 Overview page 4 Five-Year Summary: 2014-2018 page 6 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 4 2018 Overview Variances Considered 11 In R-1 Residential Zoning District 9 0 1 2 3 4 Front Setback Side Setback Rear Setback Height Parking Fence Height 2018 BZA Requests By Type Number Of Requests Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 5 8 1 1 2018 BZA Decisions Approved Approved - Modified Denied Garage Addition, 1 New Home, 2 Home Addition, 1 Fence, 3 Parking Lot, 2 2018 Proposed Projects Requesting Variances By Type Of Project) Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 6 Five-Year Summary: 2014-2018 Variances Considered 119 In R-1 Residential Zoning District 107 In R-2 Residential Zoning District 2 In Commercial Zoning District 1 In Institutional Zoning District 6 In Industrial Zoning District 1 In Light Industrial Zoning District 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Front Setback Side Setback Rear Setback Height Building Envelope Articulation Shoreland Setback Average Grade Accessory Structure Location Accessory Structure Size Paved Area Accessory Structure Height Fence Height 2014-2018 BZA Requests By Type Number Of Requests Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals 2018 Annual Report 7 Types Of Variances Considered Variance Type Description Front Yard Setback Requests to build structures within 35 feet of the front yard property line in R- 1, R-2, and Institutional Districts. Institutional Districts also require that at least 25 feet be landscaped and maintained as a buffer zone . Side Yard Setback Requests to build structures within the side yard setback area, which rang es from 5 feet to 50 feet depending on the type of structure and the Zoning District. Rear Yard Setback Requests to build structures within the rear yard setback area, which ranges from 5 feet to 50 feet depending on the type of structure and the Zoning District. Articulation Requests to waive articulation requirement, which requires inward or outward articulation of 2 feet in depth and 8 feet in length for every 32 feet of side wall on homes in the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts. Height Requests to build principal structures over the maximum height requirement, which ranges from 25 to 28 feet depending on the type of roof and the Zoning District. Fence Height Requests to build fences over the maximum height requirements, which ranges from 4 to 12 feet depending on the location on the property (front yard or side/rear yard) and the Zoning District. Building Envelope Requests to build a structure beyond the maximum building envelope, which is defined for properties within the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts. This includes the 2:1 or 4:1 slope requirement when the structure is taller than 15 feet at the side yard setback line. Accessory Structure Location Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structure in a location that is not completely to the rear of the principal structure or in a location that is not at least 10 feet from the principal structure. Accessory Structure Size Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structures above the allowable limit of 1,000 square feet in R-1, R-2, and Institutional Zoning Districts. Accessory Structure Height Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structures above the maximum height requirements, which is 10 feet in the R-1, R-2, and Institutional Zoning Districts. Garage Width Request to build a garage in the R-2 District that is wider than 65 percent of the width of the front façade. Average Grade Requests to change the average grade of a property by more than 1 foot. Shoreland Setback Requests to build a structure within the minimum shoreland setbacks, which are larger than standard front, side, and rear setbacks. Impervious Surface Requests to construct additional impervious surface beyond the maximum allowable, which is 50 percent of the lot in R-1 and R-2 and 60 percent in R-3 and R-4 Zoning Districts. Minimum Parking Request to build or use an existing parking lot or garage with a number of parking spaces that is less than the minimum required based on the use of the property. CI T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OFROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y OF N E W H O P E CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I TY O F S T . LOUISPA R KCITY OFPLYMOUTHWinnetka Ave SWinnetka Ave NWinnetka Ave NDouglas Dr NDouglas Dr NMedicine Lake Rd Glenwood AveMendelssohn Ave NPly m out h Ave N 10th Ave N GoldenValley Rd 7thAve Boone AveNWisconsinAve NNevadaAveNGeneralMillsBlvdGolde n V alleyRdRhodeIslandSandburg Rd Countr y Club Dr Olympia StHarold Ave Laur el Ave Louisiana Ave SJersey AveFloridaAve SGolden Hills DrZane Ave NLindsay St Olson Mem HwyFrontage Rd TurnersCrossroad NMeadow Ln NNobleAve NHampshireAveSXeniaAveSWayzataBlvdW ayz a ta Blvd Zenith Ave NDecatur Ave NDuluth S t G o l d e n Val leyRd Be tty CrockerDr Pennsylvania Ave SWayzataBlvd TheodoreW i r t h Pkw yN Frontage CI T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OFROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y OF N E W H O P E CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I TY O F S T . LOUISPA R KCITY OFPLYMOUTHWinnetka Ave SWinnetka Ave NWinnetka Ave NDouglas Dr NDouglas Dr NMedicine Lake Rd Glenwood AveMendelssohn Ave NPly m out h Ave N 10th Ave N GoldenValley Rd 7thAve Boone AveNWisconsinAve NNevadaAveNGeneralMillsBlvdGolde n V alleyRdRhodeIslandSandburg Rd Countr y Club Dr Olympia StHarold Ave Laur el Ave Louisiana Ave SJersey AveFloridaAve SGolden Hills DrZane Ave NLindsay St Olson Mem HwyFrontage Rd TurnersCrossroad NMeadow Ln NNobleAveNHampshireAve SXenia Ave SWayzataBlvd W ayz ata BlvdZenithAveNDecaturAve NDuluth S t G o l d e n Val leyRd Be tty CrockerDr Pennsylvania Ave SWayzataBlvd TheodoreW i r t h PkwyN FrontageR dLilacDrNAveN!( AcousticsAssociates Lat14 Asian Eatery Christian Life Center Former OptumOffice Site BellboyCorporation NobleElementarySchool 0 1, 800 3,600900Feet IPrint Date: 3/21/ 2019Sources:-Hennepin CI T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OFROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y OF N E W H O P E CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I TY O F S T . LOUISPA R KCITY OFPLYMOUTHWinnetka Ave SWinnetka Ave NWinnetka Ave NDouglas Dr NDouglas Dr NMedicine Lake Rd Glenwood AveMendelssohn Ave NPly m out h Ave N 10th Ave N GoldenValley Rd 7thAve Boone AveNWisconsinAve NNevadaAveNGeneralMillsBlvdGolde n V alleyRdRhodeIslandSandburg Rd Countr y Club Dr Olympia StHarold Ave Laur el Ave Louisiana Ave SJersey AveFloridaAve SGolden Hills DrZane Ave NLindsay St Olson Mem HwyFrontage Rd TurnersCrossroad NMeadow Ln NNobleAve NHampshireAveSXeniaAveSWayzataBlvdW ayz a ta Blvd Zenith Ave NDecatur Ave NDuluth S t G o l d e n ValleyRdBe tty CrockerDr Pennsylvania Ave SWayzataBlvd TheodoreW i r CI T Y O F N E W H O P E C I T Y O F C R Y S T A L C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E CITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K CITY OF MINNEAPOLISCITY OFST. LOUIS PARKCITY OFROBBINSDALECITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y OF N E W H O P E CITY OF PLYMOUTHCITY OF MINNEAPOLISC I TY O F S T . LOUISPA R KCITY OFPLYMOUTHWinnetka Ave SWinnetka Ave NWinnetka Ave NDouglas Dr NDouglas Dr NMedicine Lake Rd Glenwood AveMendelssohn Ave NPly m out h Ave N 10th Ave N GoldenValley Rd 7thAve Boone AveNWisconsinAve NNevadaAveNGeneralMillsBlvdGolde n V alleyRdRhodeIslandSandburg Rd Countr y Club Dr Olympia StHarold Ave Laur el Ave Louisiana Ave SJersey AveFloridaAve SGolden Hills DrZane Ave NLindsay St Olson Mem HwyFrontage Rd TurnersCrossroad NMeadow Ln NNobleAveNHampshireAve SXenia Ave SWayzataBlvd W ayz ata BlvdZenithAveNDecaturAve NDuluth S t G o l d e n Val leyRd Be tty CrockerDr Pennsylvania Ave SWayzataBlvd TheodoreWir t h Pkw yN Frontage R d LilacDrNAveN!( AcousticsAssociates Lat14 Asian Eatery Christian                     Executive Summary  Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting  April 9, 2019    Agenda Item  2. Downtown Study Scope/Update    Prepared By  Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager    Summary  The City Council has directed staff to develop a small area plan for the downtown area in order to  help guide redevelopment, to complete the new bicycle and pedestrian network by making new  connections, and to begin to imagine the future of the City Hall Campus as buildings age and  facility needs change over time.    $45,000 was set aside in the 2017 budget to begin to address these issues. $10,000 was spent as  part of Phase I work with the Urban Land Institute and $35,000 remains to hire a consultant to  work with staff to conduct Phase II. Staff has used feedback from Phase I, as well as information  from past studies and planning efforts, to develop a scope of work that advances the goals of the  City Council.    Pending feedback from the Council, staff will finalize the scope of work and prepare a contract for  consideration at an upcoming City Council meeting.    Background  The area being referred to as the Golden Valley “Downtown” has been the subject of many  conversations and actions over the past decades.    Valley Square Redevelopment  In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the City—through its Housing and Redevelopment Authority  (HRA)—worked to develop the Valley Square area into a civic center that would provide a full‐ service, mixed‐use district and a sense of identity for residents. Homes and businesses were  purchased and demolished or relocated, streets were realigned, and new development was  initiated, including the Calvary Center, the Valley Square Office Center, and the Valley Square  Corporate Center.      A downturn in the market slowed redevelopment in the mid‐1980s, but in the years that followed  additional activity took place, including the construction of a new McDonald’s facility, a relocated  Post Office, the Valley Creek office buildings, and redevelopment of the Golden Valley Commons  block.    Envision Golden Valley  The Envision project was conceived in 1997 and was meant to help Golden Valley residents come  together to form a common vision for the city. Neighborhood focus groups and a telephone survey  were conducted in 2001 and in 2004 a “summit” was held to collect input from small groups and  draft broad vision statements.    In addition to many other ideas, the Envision final report solidified the theme of creating a “small  town downtown” for business, entertainment, housing, and government services. Specific  direction included:     Making Highway 55 and Winnetka Avenue the center of the new downtown   Encouraging walkable streetscapes and small, independent businesses to create a Main  Street feel   Supporting commercial development that reinforces community identity and engagement   Asking owners to update or redevelop aging buildings, industrial areas, and parking lots    Humphrey School Capstone Project  A graduate student project in 2004 looked at both the I‐394 Corridor and the Golden Valley  downtown. The final report – shared with the staff and City Council – includes a vision statement,  an assessment of current conditions, a concept land use plan, and potential  circulation/transportation improvements.    2040 Comprehensive Plan  The preparation for the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan involved a series of open houses and an  online survey that were used to collect information about the priorities of residents for the year  2040. Many of the responses referred to the downtown and expressed a desire for a dynamic area  that included places to shop, eat, work, and socialize. In addition, there was significant interest in  improving the bicycle and pedestrian connections that could link the downtown with the rest of  Golden Valley. The plan identifies “Downtown West” as a Planning District in which redevelopment  pressures will be focused over time.    Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel (ULI TAP)  In 2018, the City hired the Urban Land Institute to help explore the challenges associated with  redevelopment of the downtown. This followed on the heels of their Navigating Your Competitive  Future session that took place in 2017 and can be thought of as Phase I of the overall downtown  study.    ULI brought in a panel of experts in redevelopment, design, construction, and real estate to help  examine the study area and to offer perspective and recommendations for moving forward with a  proactive approach to redevelopment. Key findings, presented to the City Council and Planning  Commission in a final report, included:     Narrowing the geographic focus of the study area to center on Winnetka Avenue and  Golden Valley Road   Improving connections for a variety of transportation uses within the downtown, including  linking the creek to the City Hall campus and the Luce Line Regional Trail to the shopping  areas along Highway 55   Identifying a public finance policy that could help achieve the vision for the downtown   Supporting additional retail (grocery store, hotel) to help fuel more retail or entertainment  uses; housing is also an appropriate use    The significant amount of information generated in the recent past provides a solid background for  the Phase II work and also informs the initial concepts. Rather than needing to start with a process  of gathering input from residents (since preferences are already known), work can quickly begin on  drafting preliminary designs for review and comment by the Planning Commission, City Council,  residents, and the broader business community.    Next Steps  As recommended in the ULI TAP final report, staff has worked to scale back the area of  investigation for continued study. Moving forward, staff believes the critical area consists of four  quadrants centered on the Winnetka Avenue and Golden Valley Road intersection. These include:     Southwest Quadrant: options for the future of the Golden Valley Shopping Center (reuse vs.  redevelop) as well as the Wells Fargo site and the now‐vacant Park Nicollet building   Northwest Quadrant: focus on the light industrial properties along Lewis Road north of  Bassett Creek which are being rezoned to Mixed Use   Northeast Quadrant: evaluate future options for redesigning and/or consolidating civic  buildings on the City Hall campus   Southeast Quadrant: provide better bicycle/pedestrian connections to Golden Valley  Commons    In addition, bicycle and pedestrian facilities would be examined throughout the study area,  including logical connections to a potential future elevated crossing of Highway 55 at Winnetka  Ave (a redesign and replacement of the existing pedestrian bridge).    Staff has been working with the planning consulting firm of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi) to  develop a scope of work that meets the needs of the City while also adhering to the budget  approved by the City Council in 2018. The draft scope proposes to complete four main tasks  between the months of June and December in 2019. The study would result in a set of preferred  concepts for the downtown and guiding principles – likely tailored to each of the four quadrants  that will be examined since some will experience large scale redevelopment while others will  simply be better integrated into the evolving fabric of the downtown.    This Phase II work would not be enough to completely prepare a small area plan for the  downtown; additional tasks as part of a Phase III, should it be funded, would be necessary to  develop a full plan that could be adopted as part of the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. More on  this can be found in the next section, Future Work.      The four main tasks being proposed for Phase II include:    Task 1: Understand Potential Change Areas   Review past studies and planning efforts   Analyze current land use patterns   Identify issues and opportunities    Task 2: Explore Site Redevelopment Scenarios   Draft preliminary vision and guiding principles   Conduct design charrette with staff and others   Develop redevelopment concepts for all four quadrants   Develop refined bike/ped concepts    Task 3: Seek Community Input   Conduct community engagement with stakeholders and public   Meet with Planning Commission/City Council    Task 4: Prepare Preferred Site Concepts   Refine vision and guiding principles   Prepare preferred redevelopment concepts   Prepare preferred bike/ped concepts   Meet with Planning Commission/City Council   Prepare final document    Future Work  If funded, Phase III work could be undertaken in 2020 and would complete the small area plan so  that it could be adopted and used to guide future redevelopment in the downtown. Additional  tasks would include refinement of the Phase II concepts, community engagement to evaluate and  finalize the concepts, a summary of implementation steps, an analysis of potential financial tools  to support redevelopment, and additional exploration of the feasibility of a redesigned bike/ped  bridge over Highway 55.    Task 5: Prepare Building and Street Redevelopment Concepts   Refine study concepts with building details, 3D visualizations, etc.   Prepare street and bikeway schematic designs   Prepare design guidelines by quadrants   Conduct community engagement on preferred concepts   Meet with Planning Commission/City Council    Task 6: Assemble Downtown Framework Plan Document   Prepare draft document with implementation steps   Review with staff and/or Planning Commission/City Council   Prepare final document   Approval of final document by Planning Commission/City Council      Additional tasks (by others):  Analysis of Available Financial Tools  Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge Feasibility Study    For a closer look at projects by HKGi that have addressed similar areas and/or questions, staff  suggests visiting the following web pages and browsing the documents included there:    City of Chaska  Downtown Master Plan ‐ https://www.chaskamn.com/417/Downtown‐Master‐Plan  City Square West redevelopment project ‐ https://www.chaskamn.com/583/City‐Square‐West    City of St. Louis Park  Louisiana Station Area Framework ‐ https://www.stlouispark.org/home/showdocument?id=770    Other Efforts  Other work is ongoing or planned over the next year or two that supports the Downtown Study.    Staff is in the process of reworking the I‐394 Mixed Use Zoning District so that it is easier to  implement and can be applied in other parts of the city. A number of properties in the downtown  area have been guided for Mixed Use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Updated zoning regulations  can be crafted with an eye towards supporting the goals of the study. Similarly, the Planning  Commission will be discussing a Pedestrian Overlay District that could also help guide  redevelopment in a way that better accommodates pedestrians and bicyclists.    Hennepin County staff involved in their Active Living project have reached out to Golden Valley to  explore a potential demonstration project in the summer of 2019 as a way to test some  alternatives to help safely/comfortably bring bikes and pedestrians into the downtown. Staff will  work to coordinate this effort with the library and a potential Farmer’s Market event.    The City Council has budgeted $35,000 in 2019 to begin a municipal facilities study to evaluate the  City’s current and future needs at the City Hall Campus and elsewhere in the city. The results of  this study should ultimately help inform the site design for the Northeast Quadrant.    Finally, at the conclusion of the Downtown Study there may be opportunities to apply for a Livable  Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant from the Metropolitan Council to help support  the vision for the area and refine plans for specific projects. Grants are generally awarded to  proposals that:     Connect housing, jobs, civic sites, retail centers, and local/regional transportation systems   Demonstrate a variety of housing densities, types and costs, creative placemaking,  environmentally sensitive development, and compact land use   Catalyze additional development that efficiently uses land and infrastructure, and supports  vibrant, diverse communities          Request  Staff is looking for feedback on the following items:  1. Are the draft project boundaries correct and do they provide a reasonable geographic area  for study?  2. Is the City Council comfortable with the two phase approach to developing a Small Area  Plan for the downtown?  3. Are any critical elements of Phase II work missing from the draft scope?    Attachments   Map of Proposed Downtown Study Area (1 page)   Draft Scope of Work – Downtown Study, Phase II (2 pages)    Map of Proposed Downtown Study Area NW SW NE SE Golden Valley Downtown Study Phase II HKGi Initial Proposed Work Scope March 28, 2019 1 Task 1 Understand Potential Change Areas $6,900 1.1 Conduct kick off meeting with staff 1.2 Review relevant plans and studies 1.3 Assemble base data and mapping 1.4 Analyze current land use utilization 1.5 Develop downtown core bike/ped network alternatives 1.6 Summarize issues and opportunities 1.7 Meeting with staff to identify potential change areas 1.8 Develop potential change areas diagram Task 2 Explore Site Redevelopment Scenarios $13,500 2.1 Create preliminary downtown core vision and guiding principles 2.2 Conduct a design charrette with staff 2.3 Develop alternative redevelopment and placemaking site concepts for SW quadrant 2.4 Develop alternative redevelopment and placemaking site concepts for NE municipal quadrant 2.5 Develop high level redevelopment site concepts for NW quadrant north of Bassett Creek 2.6 Develop alternative infill/parking and placemaking site concepts for SE quadrant 2.7 Develop refined downtown core bike/ped concepts 2.8 Meeting with staff to review alternative site concepts Task 3 Seek Community Input $4,200 3.1 Conduct meetings with property owners/stakeholders 3.2 Conduct community engagement for input on alternative concepts 3.3 Meeting with PC or CC Task 4 Prepare Preferred Site Concepts $10,000 4.1 Meeting with staff to identify preferred directions 4.2 Refine downtown core vision and guiding principles 4.3 Prepare preferred downtown core redevelopment and placemaking concepts 4.4 Prepare a preferred downtown core bike/walk plan 4.5 Meeting with PC or CC 4.6 Prepare final downtown core concepts and guiding principles Reimbursable Expenses $400 Total Fees $35,000 Golden Valley Downtown Study Phase II HKGi Initial Proposed Work Scope March 28, 2019 2 Task 5 Prepare Building and Street Redevelopment Concepts $16,000 1.1 Refine site concepts to include detailed building placement, massing, and character (cross-section views/3D visualizations) 1.2 Prepare street and walk/bikeway schematic designs (cross-section views/3D visualizations) 1.3 Meeting with staff to identify preferred directions 1.4 Prepare site, building, street and walk/bikeway design guidelines for each quadrant 1.5 Conduct community engagement for input on preferred concepts 1.6 Meeting with PC or CC Task 6 Assemble Downtown Framework Plan Document $13,600 2.1 Prepare draft plan document including Implementation Approach 2.2 Meeting with staff to review draft document 2.3 Revise draft plan document 2.4 Meeting with PC or CC to review draft plan document 2.5 Revise draft plan document 2.6 Meeting with PC or CC to approve final plan document Reimbursable Expenses $400 Total Fees $30,000 Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting April 9, 2019 Agenda Item 3. Residential Waste Collection Options and Decision Prepared By Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Summary Council set as one of its 2018 goals to consider the future of residential waste collection practices in Golden Valley. Council has since reviewed current practices and different models of collection and identified goals for waste collection in Golden Valley. Staff has met with the licensed haulers to learn about the industry and review the Council’s goals and also held a panel discussion for residents to learn about waste collection methods and gather comments. Additionally, the Golden Valley League of Women Voters recently completed a report to further direct the analysis. To move the decision about the future of waste collection in Golden Valley forward, staff is now suggesting that Council consider one of the three options discussed below. Option 1 – Maintain Status Quo This option keeps the City’s current open system and requirements for waste collection in place and does not modify the licensing standards the City presently has in place. This option would mean little or no disruption or changes for residents or haulers. Option 2 – Enhance Licensing Standards This option retains the City’s current open system of waste collection; however, depending on the requirements Council establishes, could increase the standards for hauler performance and limit the number of haulers operating in Golden Valley. This option potentially achieves many of the goals identified by Council in 2018 for waste collection. The steps involved in this option would include: 1. Researching licensing requirements of other cities and best practices for the collection and disposal of solid waste. 2. Drafting modifications to the current waste hauling ordinance and developing or enhancing licensing criteria, including: a. Limiting the number of licenses available b. Truck specifications (size, fuel, axels, safety features) c. Tracking and reporting collection and disposal metrics d. Special service requirements (valet, yard waste) e. Collection days f. Publication of rates and fees g. Customer minimums, vehicle routing, disposal requirements 3. Revising licensing standards and applications. 4. Adoption and implementation of a modified waste hauling ordinance. If this option is selected, staff will work with the Environmental Commission to research best practices, develop criteria for licensing, and review the draft ordinance. Additionally, engagement with haulers and residents will occur at various points in the process. Staff will use the balance of 2019 to revise the current ordinance and develop new licensing standards with an effective date of April 2020 when licenses are renewed. Option 3 – Pursue Organized Collection A third option for Council to consider is organized collection. Historically, organized collection has meant that a city contracts with one hauler to provide waste collection services. More recently, State Statute 115A.94 allows cities and haulers to collaborate to establish a consortium of haulers, allowing haulers to retain their proportionate market share and communities to achieve some order to waste collection. Statute defines “Organized Collection” as a system for collecting solid waste in which a specified collector (i.e. hauler), or member of an organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a defined geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid waste that is released by generators for collection. Statute prescribes the following process to establish an organized collection system: 1. Negotiate with haulers to develop a proposal and an agreement for organized collection through a consortium of haulers (the consortium model). a. Provide public notice and give notice to licensed haulers of intent to organize. b. Allow at least 60 days to negotiate a proposal with the haulers. c. Proposal must include City goals, zones, traffic, safety, environmental performance, services, price, and reflect proportion of haulers current market. d. The City must provide notice and hold a public hearing on the proposal. e. The City and hauler consortium can then enter into a contract with a minimum initial term of seven years. Implementation can begin no sooner than six months following the decision to organize. 2. If an agreement to organize is not reached the consortium model, the Council could pursue one of the other previously discussed options, or pursue a contract hauler model, where the City contracts with one or more haulers to collect waste in all or part of the City. If the Council chooses to consider such a model, Statute requires it first establish an options committee” to research various methods of organized collection. The committee must: a. Determine which methods of collection to examine, including: i. The existing system ii. A single hauler system iii. A multi-hauler system where each hauler collects in a geographic zone b. Establish evaluation criteria to evaluate different methods of collection, including costs for residents, impact on choice, mileage of collection vehicles on streets, operational costs for the city, impact on haulers, waste reduction incentives, and other social, environmental, economic, and aesthetic factors. c. Collect information on the efficacy of other collection systems in other communities. d. Collect and document input from local elected officials, staff, haulers, and residents. e. Prepare a report summarizing the committee’s research, findings, and recommendations. The Council must consider the committee’s report, and, after providing public notice, hold at least one public hearing before deciding to implement an organized collection system. An organized system can be implemented no sooner than six months after the decision to organize is made. Following a decision to organize under the contract model, the City would develop specifications, issue a request for proposal, select a hauler and enter into a contract with an initial term of at least seven years. The timeline for this option would likely require the balance of 2019 with implementation in 2020, although Council may wish to consider delaying implementation and align the timing of a waste collection contract with the recycling contract and organics collection in 2022. Under either step, Council will have to make determinations regarding the City’s degree of involvement in waste collection, including how billing is handled, how receptacles are managed, and how customer service is provided. As a point of reference, the current recycling contract places customer service and receptacle management on the hauler while the City bills residents quarterly. Attachments Waste Hauling Goals Matrix comparing options and outcomes (1 page) Executive Summary, July 10, 2018 summarizing staff meetings with haulers (2 pages) Executive Summary, January 8, 2019, summarizing October 29, 2018 Waste Hauling Forum discussion and comments (3 pages) Recommended Action Staff requests Council provide comments and direction regarding which residential waste collection option it wishes to pursue. Waste Collection Goals and Options Matrix Waste Collection Methods and Achievement of Council Goals April 2019 Council Goals Option 1 Maintain Status Quo Option 2 Enhanced Standards & Licensing Option 3 Organized Collection Ensure that residents have options for the type and level of waste disposal services they desire. Requires haulers to offer valet service for seniors and yard waste collection. Haulers choose to offer additional services. Residents may obtain waiver if other disposal options exist. Require licensed haulers to make available specific minimum services. Ensure through licensing. Additional services beyond the minimum may be offered by haulers. Specify the type and level of services to be made available to residents. City defines options. Establish waste disposal practices that improve environmental outcomes. Follow MPCA requirements and properly dispose of waste Identify requirements to achieve environmental outcomes such as use of CNG trucks, disposal practices, routing, and reporting, disposal practices Specify requirements to achieve environmental outcomes, such as use of CNG trucks, disposal practices, routing, and reporting Establish standards for waste collection that minimize impacts to infrastructure and enhance neighborhood livability (cleaner, safer, quieter, and healthier). Haulers must obtain City license; provide information pricing, routes, vehicle attributes, etc…; limit hours of collection; Insurance and vehicle info Expand licensing requirements to achieve certain goals, such as: Limit the number of licenses available; Require use of CNG trucks, increased number of axels; Designate a residential collection day Specify specific performance requirements to protect infrastructure and livability; Organized system will reduce number of trucks on streets. Avoid significant operational or capital cost increases to the City and residents. Minimal direct costs to the City. Residents responsible to check prices and negotiate rates. Increase licensing fees and establish fines to cover costs of licensing, administration and enforcement; Require licensed haulers to publish rates Haulers bill residents directly, provide customer service, manage carts to minimize added costs to City; No assurance of cost reductions for residents – results may be mixed. Increase the City’s and community’s understanding of the waste disposal process in order to achieve its goals and those of its partner agencies. Maintain minimal staff involvement in residential waste collection; Annual permit renewal; Increase City engagement with haulers, industry, and related groups; Increase information in newsletter, website, and at events; Require reporting of waste collection and disposal metrics as part of licensing requirements. Increase City engagement with haulers and industry and related groups; Contract management will increase contact with contractor(s); Increase information in newsletter, website, and at events; Require reporting of waste collection, disposal metrics, and other criteria. Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting July 10, 2018 Agenda Item Review of Waste Hauler Meeting and Discussion of Next Steps Prepared By Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Summary In May the Council identified five goals it has for waste collection in Golden Valley. Staff has contacted the seven licensed residential haulers in Golden Valley regarding these goals and has met with five to discuss how those goals might be achieved. The following are generalized comments staff heard in discussions with haulers: 1. Ensure that residents have options for the type and level of waste disposal services they desire. Core services are standardize among haulers. Open systems allow for customization of service, innovation and competition, while organized systems are one-size-fits-all. 2. Establish waste disposal practices that improve environmental outcomes. Larger haulers moving towards Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fleets. Harder for smaller haulers due to capital costs of trucks and fueling system. Organics collection could require addition truck or trucks on the street. Emphasize organics and recycling over waste collection 3. Establish standards for waste collection that minimize impacts to infrastructure and enhance neighborhood livability (cleaner, safer, quieter, and healthier). CNG fleet requirements, consider safety record and practices, manage truck capacity/tonnage, reduce licenses, monitor axel weight 4. Avoid significant operational or capital cost increases to the City and residents. Open system allows for competition and innovation, and reduce cost to cities If organized, City will take customer calls, do problem solving, and may do billing 5. Increase the City’s and community’s understanding of the waste disposal process in order to achieve its goals and those of its partner agencies. Establish data points and reporting – MPCA now requiring Build relationships with haulers Resident education A spectrum of options exist for curbside waste collection, ranging from an open system with minimal city involvement to a highly organized system where a city manages a collection contract or even performs the work itself. Golden Valley’s system is currently an open system and the City has minimal involvement. While many residents and haulers prefer this type of system for a variety of reasons, it is more difficult for a City to manage its infrastructure, set standards, track performance metrics, or respond to livability concerns. Conversely, other residents are interested in an organized collection system, although such a system does require more resources from a city to implement and manage. In light of the goals Council identified, as well as where Golden Valley currently falls on the spectrum of options, staff suggests Council focus its discussion of waste collection to increasing the standards for obtaining a license. An increase in standards might include the following: 1. limiting the number of hauling licenses available in the City; 2. reporting requirements by haulers for data collection and performance metrics; 3. modifying fees; 4. designating collection days; 5. other minimum requirements or performance standards. Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting January 8, 2019 Agenda Item Review of October 29th Waste Hauling Forum Prepared By Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director Summary One of the Council’s 2018 goals was to review the process of waste collection in Golden Valley. Staff provided Council some basic information regarding waste hauling in the City and options that the Council might consider. Council then established five goals for waste collection and staff used these to guide discussions with the haulers licensed in Golden Valley. Council then directed staff to engage residents in a discussion regarding waste hauling. A panel discussion was organized in October which included representatives from the waste hauling industry and several cities with different collection methods. Each panelist made brief remarks about their unique perspective on waste hauling and the moderator managed questions and comments from the audience. Approximately 75 residents attended the forum, which was also broadcast and available for viewing. Attachments Forum Agenda / Panelist Biographies FAQ for Forum Summary of Comments Panelists Both haulers had a neutral position on Open vs Organized systems Golden Valley has a good start; good to have goals and engage stakeholders – important! Open system works well to meet customer needs, drive innovation, allow haulers to grow Organized system has benefits to streets and environment Organized system is likely to increase demands on City staff Limiting licenses and number of haulers is a good way to achieve goals Haulers have capital costs to recover in an organized system Organized system does not guarantee lowest price but does ensure consistent service level and pricing; consumer protection Organized systems evolve over time Organized systems can be very different from city to city (e.g. billing, staff involvement, services offered, public investments, etc…) Consider City values and goals to help guide decisions. No right or wrong. Use data to drive decision. Resident Questions of Panelists What about curbside collection of organics? o Environmental Commission will study in 2019 Concerns about safety of trucks. Perception that trucks are not safe. o No data to suggest trucks are not safe. Does organized collection mean more efficiency for a hauler? o Fuels and labor efficiencies but there are capital investments made by haulers to operate in organized communities. Concern that organics collection would be difficult for a small, local scale hauler. o Organics collection is new territory; SLP received proposals from smaller haulers; opportunities to collect MSW semi-weekly. Service is important. Single hauler might not meet service expectations. Organized system may negatively impact snowbirds or residents who summer at cabins as they are paying for a service they do not use. Impact to haulers of zones (such as St. Anthony Village) o No chance to grow; pricing the same among haulers; Route density is important What happens to waste once collected? o May go to HERC or landfill Are there limitations to yard waste collection? o Generally April to November, but could vary by hauler or city Organized system is a monopoly o 2018 Statute – contract must be at least seven years What licensing requirements should a city consider? o Right number to meet community needs; Insurance, equipment, fee, etc… Resident stated they were told by hauler that everyone pays a different rate o St. Anthony asked residents for bills Comment that SLP has a lot of staff managing organized collection system. o 2 FTEs; Fund through fees and SCORE funds Comment that there are too many trucks on roads. We all pay taxes for services we don’t use. Consider a hybrid model – zoning and reduced number of haulers; collect on same day; increase density to lower price How can truck designs help achieve goals? o Always new innovations; Investments in CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) trucks and infrastructure; Artificial intelligence Organized system may be best. There are many things we organize that most of us benefit from to manage costs, environmental impacts, etc… Seems that prices for collection are going up. o Price is about value; Competition drives prices; Intro rate is just that – haulers fight for customers. St. Paul recently organized and there is concern about impacts on low income residents; another resident shared anecdotal experience that costs are less in St. Paul. Summary of Emailed or Written Comments Pick up Monday – Thursday, not Friday Have at least two haulers so there is choice Organize to reduce truck traffic, reduce pollution and costs, increase efficiency, eliminate need to shop for hauler, improve safety. Zones would be acceptable. Glad to hear organics collection is being studied Support for single hauler Price is important. Supportive of free enterprise but eight haulers in GV is too many. Organized system would likely provide better pricing, fewer trucks and less road damage. Support organized collection to reduce environmental and neighborhood impacts. Use a sound decision making process and take some risk. Organized system is better to reduce the number of trucks on the road Retain choice for residents. Currently no choice for recycling. Action Requested Council discussion is requested. Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting April 9, 2019 Agenda Item 4. 2018 Positive Performance-General Fund Transfer and Assignment of Fund Balance Prepared By Susan Virnig, Finance Director Summary The City of Golden Valley seeks to have a good balance in its General Fund in order to have sufficient reserves for cash flow purposes, projects, and unexpected shortfalls or emergencies. In December 2011, the City established a formal policy that states the level of fund balance should be maintained at 60 percent of adopted expenditures in the General Fund. Adequate reserves indicate fiscal prudence and help the City maintain a high rating with bond-rating agencies, which prefer to see very strong and healthy balances. When the fund balance is greater than 60 percent, it should be reduced to 60 percent by using the excess funds for specific one-time projects, acquisitions, transfers to capital funds, or for long-term debt reduction to lessen the future impact on the property tax rate. The one-time use protocol is important to ensure the City does not commit itself to expenditures that may create deficits in future budgets. For instance, when the City experiences an excess fund balance due to a one-time building permit revenue from a major commercial development, the City should not expect that same revenue will be received from future building permits. Budgets should be set using an average year of revenues and expenditures and not an exceptional year. In 2018, Golden Valley was extremely fortunate once again to have a positive performance level. Building permit revenue was lower than 2017 but still above the budgeted amount. Various Divisions came in under budget, too. These items created Fund balance to exceed 60 percent of 2019 Expenditures by $1,539,500. 2019 General Fund Budget is $21,691,575. From the 2018 Council Goals to reduce debt, staff recommends making the following transfers: General Fund (stays in fund) $45,000 Downtown Study Scope $35,000 Inspection Document Scanning $10,000 The Downtown Study Scope next steps was discussed earlier tonight. In 2018, the monies dedicated in the budget had a remaining amount of $30,000. The $35,000 will create a scope that staff can take forward for future planning and will be added to 2019 Planning Budget. Remodeling of City Hall’s lower level had moved file cabinets of documents to the City Hall lunchroom. Those documents will be sent out to be scanned to create a more usable lunchroom. The $10,000 will be added to the 2019 IT Services Budget. 2019 Pavement Management Program (PMP) $1,494,500 One of the Council goals was to create a long-term debt strategy that would lessen or lower the overall debt the City has from the Pavement Management Program (PMP). In 2019, staff is recommending to reduce the bond size needed to finance the 2019 PMP. The amount needed for the street portion is $3,890,000. By using positive performance to lower the bond size, it lowers the City’s total debt along with lowering the issuance cost on the bond sale. The total bond size needed is $2,375,000. The reduction in bond interest over the 20 years is $665,249.75. TOTAL 2018 POSITIVE PERFORMANCE $1,539,500 The consideration of this item will be at the April 16, 2019 council meeting. FINANCIAL WELLNESS: Balancing spending with emphasis on maintaining current service levels, accommodating future needs, expanding tax base, growing reserves, maintaining bond rating, and improving efficiencies and effectiveness Attachments December 2018 General Fund Financial Reports (2 pages) 100.00% Over % 2018 December YTD (Under)of Budget Type Budget Actual Actual Budget Received Ad Valorem Taxes $17,253,460 7,660,815 17,181,438 ($72,022)99.58%(1) Licenses 220,980 12,175 240,215 $19,235 108.70% Permits 1,001,433 7,103 1,538,107 $536,674 153.59% State Aid 52,375 28,246 108,616 $56,241 207.38%(2) County Aid 0 1,319 $1,319 Charges For Services: General Government 25,250 5,800 34,176 $8,926 135.35% Public Safety 160,900 10,974 196,192 $35,292 121.93% Public Works 163,600 29,939 195,483 $31,883 119.49% Park & Rec 415,550 43,421 418,757 $3,207 100.77% Other Funds 691,500 73,876 779,122 $87,622 112.67% Fines & Forfeitures 320,000 43,965 379,708 $59,708 118.66%(3) Interest On Investments 75,000 180,776 180,776 $105,776 241.03%(4) Miscellaneous Revenue 193,000 66,355 250,223 $57,223 129.65% Transfers In 30,000 2,500 30,000 $0 100.00%(5) TOTAL Revenue $20,603,048 $8,165,945 $21,534,132 $931,084 104.52% Notes: 1) Payments are received in July, December, and January (delinquencies). The first payment for taxes included some payments in full. 2) Police Training will be paid in August. Safe and Sober is billed on time spent. LGA is paid in July, Dec ($37,185 total). 3) Fines/Forfeitures are thru for October 2018. 4) Investment income is allocated at year end. 5)Transfers are monthly. Percentage Of Year Completed City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report - General Fund Revenues Dec-18 Over % 2018 December YTD (Under)Of Budget Budget Actual Actual Budget Expend. 001 Council $370,935 26,991 325,110 ($45,825)87.65%(3) 003 City Manager 839,100 80,421 747,716 (91,384)89.11%(5) 004 Transfers Out 2,002,673 20,093 2,002,673 0 100.00%(1), (6) 005 Admin. Services 1,986,970 193,235 1,963,163 (23,807)98.80% 006 Legal 209,655 16,974 201,477 (8,178)96.10%(2), (6) 007 Risk Management 310,000 (9,846)318,934 8,934 102.88%(7) 011 General Gov't. Bldgs.732,680 100,524 672,357 (60,323)91.77% 016 Planning 409,655 34,748 321,324 (88,331)78.44% 018 Inspections 811,280 81,897 752,027 (59,253)92.70%(4) 022 Police 6,204,575 645,184 5,632,489 (572,086)90.78% 023 Fire 1,561,150 170,428 1,357,350 (203,800)86.95%(3) 035 Physical Dev Admin 309,505 31,647 292,794 (16,711)94.60% 036 Engineering 776,095 114,411 746,142 (29,953)96.14% 037 Streets 1,790,925 161,863 1,784,315 (6,610)99.63% 066 Park & Rec. Admin.737,210 80,961 715,266 (21,944)97.02% 067 Park Maintenance 1,215,945 102,866 1,169,970 (45,975)96.22% 068 Recreation Programs 445,385 29,586 380,871 (64,514)85.52% TOTAL Expenditures $20,713,738 $1,881,983 $19,383,978 ($1,329,760)93.58% 1) Transfers were made in June, 2018 except for Equipment Transfer of $882,580. 2) Legal services are billed thru June. Staff Attorney started 7-16. 3) 2017 Fund Balance Assigned -$65,,000 Fire ; $20,000 Council - 4) 2018 Budget Amended -$42,000 Inspections 5) 2018 Budget Amended-$25,690 Communications 6) 2018 Budget Amended-$51,555 Legal Service; $20,093-Transfers 7) Dividend was received in December; less than prior years. City of Golden Valley Monthly Budget Report - General Fund Expenditures December, 2018 (unaudited) Division 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 C1 t � 763-593-8012(TTY 763-593-3968 1763-593-8109(fax) www.goldenvalleymn.gov 0 i - q JF11 Va Ile Housing & Redevelopmentw Authority Apr 16,2019-6:30 pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 7800 Golden Valley Road Pages 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes—Regular Meeting—January 15, 2019 4. Reimbursement of City Expenditures 5. Receipt of 2019 Financial Reports 6. North Wirth Redevelopment Area A. Consider Fourth Amendment to Private Development Agreement-GVEC Properties, LLC B. Amendment to 394 Development Agreement 7. Adjournment This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call 763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print,electronic, Braille,audiocassette,etc. 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 Cit Yvl ?v 763-593-8012 1 TTY 763-593-3968 1763-593-8109(fax)I www.goidenvalleymn.gov old en , I , City Council vai i cy. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Apr 16,2019—Immediately following HRA Meeting Council Chambers Golden Vallev Citv Hall 1. Call to Order A. Pledge of Allegiance Pages B. Roll Call C. Introduction of Metropolitan Council Representative Lynnea Atlas-Ingebretson 2. Additions and Corrections to Agenda 3. Consent Agenda Approval of Consent Agenda -All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion.There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes: 1. City Council Meeting—April 2, 2019 B. Approval of City Check Register C. Licenses: 1. General Business Licenses—Fireworks Sales D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: E. Bids and Quotes: 1. Approve 2019 Street Striping Contract 2. Approve Purchase of Scissor Lift 3. Approve Multiple Softball Field Improvements 4. Approve Twin City Tennis Camps Service Agreement F. Approve the Board and Commission appointments and reappointments G. Approve Positive Performance Allocation H. Authorize Agreement for Talo Sanitary Sewer Repair Project I. Approve Scheid Park Play Structure 4. Public Hearing A. Public Hearing—For DNR Permit for Temporary Dewatering of DeCola Ponds A, B, and C 5. Old Business 6. New Business All Ordinances listed under this heading are eligible for public input. A. Second Consideration—Ordinance#661—Amendment to the City Code for the Addition of New Micromobility Sharing Operations Section and Amending the Master Fee Schedule B. Review of Council Calendar C. Mayor and Council Communications 7. Adjournment 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 city �J 763-593-8012 1 TTY 763-593-3968 1 763-593-8109(fax)I www.goldenvalleymn.govf�Id en . V v City Council y REGULAR MEETING AGENDA May 7,2019-6:30pm Council Chambers Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road 1. Call to Order A. Pledge of Allegiance Pages B. Roll Call 2. Additions and Corrections to Agenda 3. Consent Agenda Approval of Consent Agenda -All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion.There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A. Approval of Minutes: 1. City Council Meeting—April 16, 2019 B. Approval of City Check Register C. Licenses: 1. D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions: 1. E. Bids and Quotes: 1. F. 4. Public Hearing A. 5. Old Business 6. New Business All Ordinances listed under this heading are eligible for public input. A. Review of Council Calendar B. Mayor and Council Communications 7. Adjournment This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call 763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print,electronic, Braille,audiocassette, etc. �Ww 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 city of V 763-593-8012 1 TTY 763-593-3968 763-593-8109(fax)I www.goldenvalleymn.govo ldM vane City Council/Manager y May 14,2019—6:30 pm Council Conference Room Golden Valley City Hall REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 7800 Golden Valley Road Pages 1. Commission 2018 Annual Report and 2019 Work Plan: a. Environmental Commission b. Human Rights Commission 2. Narrow Lot Discussion 3. Council Review of Future Draft Agendas: City Council May 21, City Council June 4 and Council/Manager June 11, 2019 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. This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call 763-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print,electronic, Braille,audiocassette,etc.