2026-01-06 - AGE - City Council Regular Meeting January 6, 2026 — 6:30 PM
Golden Valley City Hall
Council Chambers
1.Call to Order
1A.Pledge of Allegiance and Land Acknowledgement
1B.Oaths of Office for Council Members Tracey Fussy and Chris Queitzsch for Terms Expiring
on January 7, 2030
1C.Proclamation Honoring January 19th, 2026 as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
1D.Proclamation Honoring Sweet Potato Comfort Pie's 11th Annual Reverend Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr. Holiday of Service Event
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.
3A.Approval of City Check Registers
3B.Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces:
3B.1.Adopt Resolution No. 26-001 Appointing Representation on the Joint Water Commission
(JWC)
3B.2.Adopt Resolution No. 26-002 Approving Updates to Environmental Commission Bylaws
3C.Licenses:
3C.1.Approve Address Update to Off-Sale Liquor License - Lund Beverages, LLC, 5723 Duluth St
3C.2.Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - The Loppet Foundation
3C.3.Approve Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Holy Name of
Jesus Catholic School
3C.4.Approve Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Sons of the
American Legion Post 523
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Members of the public may attend this meeting in-person, by watching on cable channel 16, or by
streaming on CCXmedia.org. The public can make in-person statements during public comment
sections, including the public forum beginning at 6:20 pm.
Individuals may provide public hearing testimony remotely by emailing a request to the City Clerk's
office at cityclerk@goldenvalleymn.gov by 3 p.m. on the day of the meeting.
City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting January 6, 2026 — 6:30 PM
1
3D.Bids, Quotes, and Contracts:
3D.1.Approve Purchase of Two Pickups from Midway Ford and One Pickup from Tenvoorde
Ford, Inc.
3E.Grants and Donations:
3E.1.Adopt Resolution No. 26-003 Accepting a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Act
(LCA) Policy Development Grant Agreement
3E.2.Adopt Resolution No. 26-004 Accepting Donations of Ongoing Programs
3F.Adopt Resolution No. 26-005 Designating Depositories for City Funds
3G.Adopt Resolution No. 26-006 for the Annual Elections for the 2026-2027 Insurance Policy
3H.Approve Designation of 2026 Official Newspapers - New Hope/Golden Valley Sun-Post and
Minnesota Star Tribune
3I.Adopt Resolution No. 26-007 Approving Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South
3J.Adopt Resolution No. 26-008 Approving Lot Consolidation, Resolution No. 26-009
Approving a Variance, and Resolution No. 26-010 Approving Final Plat at 400 Sunnyridge
Lane
3K.Adopt Resolution No. 26-011 Approving Official Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley
4.Public Hearing - None.
5.Old Business - None.
6.New Business
6A.Review of Council Calendar
6B.Mayor and Council Communications
1. Other Committee/Meeting updates
7.Adjournment
City of Golden Valley City Council Regular Meeting January 6, 2026 — 6:30 PM
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Human Resources
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
1C. Proclamation Honoring January 19th, 2026 as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
Prepared By
Seth Kaempfer, Equity and Inclusion Manager
Summary
The third Monday of each January honors the life, work, and legacy of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. This day provides community with a time to reflect on the historical accomplishments of the
Civil Rights Movement while acknowledging the work that remains to achieve a society free from
discrimination and injustice.
This proclamation calls upon the community of Golden Valley to collectively understand the impact of
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as well as other important figures in the national Civil Rights
Movement such as Bayard Rustin, Fannie Lou Hamer, Claudette Colvin, the Student Nonviolent
Coordinating Committee, and Minnesota locals like Fredrick McGhee, Reverend Denzil Carty, and
Nellie Stone Johnson. This proclamation also calls on the community of Golden Valley to recognize
that many of the injustices named and fought against during the Civil Rights Movement are still
present today, and that the continued advancement of equity and justice requires support from the
community as a whole, which includes denouncing prejudice and oppression in all its forms.
Legal Considerations
This item did not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
This proclamation aligns with the City's commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion and the City's
welcome statement, and by honoring the work of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and calling into
focus the work of the Civil Rights Movement, it provides an opportunity for the community to learn
and by understanding that to move forward in justice, it is vital to recognize one's history.
Recommended Action
Present proclamation honoring January 19th, 2026 as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.
Supporting Documents
Proclamation for Dr MLK Jr Day
3
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING
REVEREND DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR DAY
JANUARY 19, 2026
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley recognizes and honors the work of
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; and
WHEREAS, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. continues to posthumously be
of influence through his efforts for and leadership in Black liberation and racial equity;
and
WHEREAS, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., through word and action,
spread messages of perseverance against structures and systems of both economic
and racial oppression, especially in the face of racialized violence and hatred; and
WHEREAS, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. helped call into focus that a
moderate and apathetic stance against racial inequity gives power to the oppressor and
this stance “prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive
peace which is the presence of justice”; and
WHEREAS, an act of Congress of the United States in 1983, declared the third
Monday in January to officially honor Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; and
WHEREAS, this day is also a time to reflect on the great work and advocacy of
many individuals and organizations in the Civil Rights Movement such as Bayard
Rustin, Fannie Lou Hamer, Claudette Colvin, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating
Committee, and Minnesota locals like Fredrick McGhee, Rev. Denzil Carty, and Nellie
Stone Johnson; and
WHEREAS, this day as well as the work, impact, and legacy of Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. and others are recognized and embodied through the work of
Sweet Potato Comfort Pie and their 11th Annual Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday of
Service on Sunday, January 18th; and
WHEREAS, many of the injustices and inequities, of which Reverend Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. and Civil Rights leaders and activists raised awareness on, still prevail
in current culture and institutions, and this day calls upon all to continue efforts in the
name of eradicating all forms of institutionalized discrimination, prejudice, and
oppression.
4
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Golden Valley does hereby proclaim January 19, 2026, to be Reverend Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. Day and call upon the people of Golden Valley to dedicate themselves
to and actively promote racial equity and justice, and the rejection of bigotry in all its
forms.
I, Mayor Roslyn Harmon, proudly certify this proclamation with my signature and
the seal of the City of Golden Valley on Tuesday, January 6, 2026.
_____________________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Manager's Office
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
1D. Proclamation Honoring Sweet Potato Comfort Pie's 11th Annual Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. Holiday of Service Event
Prepared By
Andrea Connolly-Dees, Executive Assistant
Summary
On Sunday, January 18, 2026, Sweet Potato Comfort Pie will hold the 11th Annual Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday of Service event.
Legal Considerations
None
Equity Considerations
None
Recommended Action
Present proclamation honoring Sweet Potato Comfort Pie's 11th Annual Reverend Dr. Martin Luther
King Jr. Holiday of Service Event.
Supporting Documents
Proclamation Honoring Sweet Potato Comfort Pie
6
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PROCLAMATION HONORING THE CONTRIBUTIONS AND LEGACY OF
THE SWEET POTATO COMFORT PIE ORGANIZATION
WHEREAS, The Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Organization known as being a
catalyst for caring and building community, commemorates its 11th Annual Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Weekend of Service here in Golden Valley; and
WHEREAS, We recognize the Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Organization for not only
living up to its name of baking the sacred dessert of Black Culture by using the recipe of
its President and Founder Rose McGee of Golden Valley, but also provides space for
healing circle conversations about race, peace, and justice that model Dr. King’s dream
for upholding our beloved community; and
WHEREAS, We commend the Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Organization’s
courageous responses to catastrophic events locally and nationally by promoting social
justice actions against racism, violence, and other discriminatory behaviors inflicted on
humanity; and
WHEREAS, We acknowledge Rose McGee, the Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Board
of Directors, and the many volunteers who work cohesively in organizing this special
tribute to Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by welcoming all people regardless of their
ethnicity, gender, or religion. Pies are baked by volunteers, stories are shared in circles
as people listen to each other, and the pies are given in recognition for overcoming a
difficult situation or in joyful celebration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Golden Valley hereby honors and celebrates the Sweet Potato Comfort Pie Organization
for an invaluable service and imprint to the residents of Golden Valley and beyond
addressing the issues. We extend our heartfelt gratitude for using a creative approach
through food and the arts to address tough and challenging topics designed to bridge
relationship gaps and foster a healthier community.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I Mayor Roslyn Harmon, proudly certify this
Proclamation with my signature and the seal of the City of Golden Valley on January 6,
2026.
___________________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Finance
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3A. Approval of City Check Registers
Prepared By
Jennifer Hoffman, Assistant Finance Director
Summary
Approval of the check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley.
Document is located on city website at the following location: http://weblink.ci.golden-
valley.mn.us/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=1060600&dbid=0&repo=GoldenValley
The check register(s) for approval:
12-17-2025 Check Register
12-23-2025 Check Register
12-30-2025 Check Register
Financial or Budget Considerations
The check register is attached with the financing sources at the front of the document. Each check has
a program code(s) where it was charged.
Legal Considerations
Not Applicable
Equity Considerations
Not Applicable
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Public Works
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3B.1. Adopt Resolution No. 26-001 Appointing Representation on the Joint Water Commission (JWC)
Prepared By
Tim Kieffer, Public Works Director
Summary
The City Council appointed the City Manager to serve on the Joint Water Commission that includes the
cities of Golden Valley, Crystal, and New Hope. The current term expires January 31, 2026. Therefore,
the Council needs to reappoint a representative to the commission. Historically, the appointments are
filled by the City Managers of each respective city.
To ensure the City always has voting representation on the JWC, the proposed resolution also allows
the staff person filling the role as City Manager or the Public Works Director to represent the city in
the City Manager’s absence.
Financial or Budget Considerations
This item does not have financial impacts.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
Effective governance helps ensure reliable potable water service which is essential for public health,
safety, and the economic vitality of a community.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-001 appointing representation on the Joint Water Commission.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-001 Appointing Representation on the Joint Water Commission
9
RESOLUTION NO. 26-001
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING REPRESENTATION ON THE JOINT WATER
COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the cities of Golden Valley, Crystal, and New Hope created a Joint
Water Commission (the “JWC”) in 1963 to benefit the three communities; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 2 of the JWC Joint Powers Agreement, the City
Council of each city must appoint a representative to the JWC Commission by resolution;
and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to appoint the City Manager to the
Commission for a three-year term or until such time as there is a change to the joint
powers organization; and
WHEREAS, The City Manager should be reappointed before the current term
expires on January 31, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the City has subject matter experts, such as the Public Works
Director, that attend JWC meetings and are fully equipped to weigh in on matters from
the City's perspective in the absence of the City Manager or, in the City Manager’s
absence, the staff person filling the role of City Manager.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley, Minnesota, that the Golden Valley City Manager is hereby reappointed to a three-
year term that is set to expire on January 31, 202 9, as the City of Golden Valley's
representative on the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley,
Minnesota, that in the Golden Valley City Manager’s absence, the staff person filling the
role of City Manager or the Public Works Director can act as the City of Golden Valley’s
representative on the Golden Valley-Crystal-New Hope Joint Water Commission for the
term that is set to expire on January 31, 2029 .
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota this 6th day of
January, 2026.
____________________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
Attested:
____________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Administrative Services
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3B.2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-002 Approving Updates to Environmental Commission Bylaws
Prepared By
Ethan Kehrberg, Sustainability Specialist
Summary
The Environmental Commission (EC) advises, recommends, and assists the Council in matters relating
to the environment and human health. To continue meeting its intent and mission, the Commission
regularly reviews its bylaws and makes recommendations to the City Council. To better align with the
various efforts established and implemented by the City, the EC proposed the following bylaw change:
Update monthly meeting date to the third Monday of the month instead of the fourth Monday
of the month so there is less overlap with other City commission meetings.
When meetings overlap with government holidays, many of which occur on Mondays, staff will
proposed alternative meeting dates to the Chair and EC. The EC will approve all annual meeting dates
for transparency. The EC approved draft 2026 meeting dates at their November meeting due to the
number of Monday holidays in 2026, contingent upon City Council approval of bylaw changes. Those
dates are attached for reference.
This is the only proposed change to the bylaws.
Financial or Budget Considerations
There are no financial or budgetary considerations related to this item.
Legal Considerations
The updates to the bylaws have gone through Legal Review and continues to align with current
ordinances related to the establishment of this commission.
Equity Considerations
The updates to the Environmental C ommission bylaws increases accessibility to allow community
members, city staff, and council members to have more availability to attend EC meetings without
missing other commission meetings. During 2025, the EC met at the same time as the Planning
Commission, which limited the ability for residents, City Councilmembers, and staff to attend both
meetings. This meeting date changes will allow more residents, staff, and Council members to
participate in the process consistent with Equity Pillar 2 for Inclusive and Effective Community
11
Engagement.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-002 approving updates to the Environmental Commission Bylaws.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-002 - Approving Updates to Environmental Commission Bylaws
Exhibit A - City of Golden Valley - Environmental Commission - Bylaws
Proposed 2026 EC Meeting Dates
12
RESOLUTION NO. 26-002
RESOLUTION APPROVING UPDATES TO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION BYLAWS
WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission Bylaws provides a list of duties and
specific direction for the Environmental Commission to carry out their work as required in
City Code Section 2-131; and
WHEREAS, the Commission must review the Bylaws no less than every three years
and may review the Bylaws more frequently as needed; and
WHEREAS, the Bylaws may be amended at any regular Environmental Commission
meeting with a majority of members present; and
WHEREAS, on November 24, 2025, the Environmental Commission recommended
approval to amendments to the Bylaws as shown in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the revised bylaws as shown in Exhibit A.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA that this Council hereby approves the revised Bylaws of
the Environmental Commission attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
13
BYLAWS
Environmental Commission
Article I: Purpose, Mission, and Duties
The Environmental Commission shall be an advisory commission to the City Council on matters relating to
the environment and human health. The Commission shall:
•develop and make recommendations to educate the public on environmental regulations, policies,
practices and tools
•develop and make recommendations as an advisory review body for amendments to or revisions of
the City’s Surface Water Management Plan and provide advice as requested by the Council on other
city programs and initiatives
•review and make recommendations regarding the city’s existing environmental ordinances, policies,
and guidelines
•develop and make recommendations on management practices for the City’s nature areas, public and
private ponding areas, and other such city-owned properties as directed by the City Council
•develop and make recommendations regarding waste reduction, recycling, and organics/composting
•review and make recommendations on the City's resilience and sustainability policies and actions to
address climate variations
•participate, as directed by the City Council, in local activities initiated by other public and quasi-public
agencies regarding environmental issues
•advise and recommend such other functions or procedures as may be assigned to them by the City
Code or the Council
Article II: Membership, Appointments, Terms, and Officers
A.Membership
The Commission shall consist of seven regular members, and two voting youth members. Regular members
shall be residents of the City. Youth members shall live or attend school within Golden Valley, the
Robbinsdale Area District or Hopkins School District and be enrolled in school grades 9 through 12. A
vacancy shall be deemed to exist if a member ceases to meet the residency requirements.
B.Appointments and Terms
Appointments are made effective May 1 of each year. The Council shall appoint regular members of the
Commission for three-year staggering terms. Youth members shall be appointed for a one-year term. The
terms of Commission members shall be fixed and determined at the time of appointment by the governing
ordinance. Emphasis in appointments will be made based on knowledge of environmental issues and their
relationships to the natural environment and the quality of life in the City. The City Council shall appoint
the members of the Commission and to fill vacancies for unexpired terms.
C.Officers
The Commission shall elect officers of Chair and Vice-Chair from the Commission membership by its voting
members at its regular annual meeting, (no later than the second meeting after May 1 in each year). The
Chair and Vice Chair positions rotate, and members may only serve two consecutive years as the Chair or
Vice-Chair. Should the office of Chair or Vice-Chair become vacant, the Commission shall elect a successor
from its membership at the next regular meeting and such election shall be for the unexpired term of said
office. Officers may also delegate the duties of their position to other Commissioners as deemed
appropriate by the Commission.
Resolution No. 26-002 (Exhibit A)
14
BYLAWS – Environmental Commission 2
Amended November 26, 2025
Chair responsibilities include:
•work with staff liaison to develop meeting agendas
•conduct and preside at all meetings in a productive and time-efficient manner
•ensure the Commission conducts its activities within the stated mission and bylaws of the
Commission
•appoint Commissioners to subcommittees
•monitor and ensure the progress of the Commission
•report to the City Council
Vice-Chair responsibilities:
•perform the duties of the Chair in the absence or incapacity of the Chair
•perform all other duties as prescribed by the Commission
Article III: Meetings and Attendance
A.Meetings
All meetings of the Commission shall be conducted in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law
and City Code. This means all business and discussion occurs at a meeting which has been posted and is
open to the public.
The presence of a majority of all regular members currently appointed to the Commission shall constitute
a quorum for the purpose of conducting its business and exercising its powers and for all other purposes.
In the event a quorum is not reached, a smaller number of members may meet to have informal
discussion, however, formal action shall not be taken and must be reserved for such time as when a
quorum of the Commission is reached. A quorum of the members should not discuss Commission business
by email, forms of social media, telephone, or informal meetings. Commission meetings may be cancelled
by the staff liaison if there are no items on the agenda for discussion.
The proceedings of meeting should be conducted using standard parliamentary procedure.
i.Regular Meeting
The regular meeting of the Commission shall be held on the third Monday of the month at City
Hall at 6:30 pm. The Commission may, by a majority vote, change its regular meeting dates for any
reason provided proper public notice of the changed meeting is provided.
ii.Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of the commission shall be a regular meeting, typically the first meeting after
May 1 of each year, at which time elections will be held.
iii.Special Meetings
A special meeting may be called by the Chair or whenever three members request the same in
writing. Staff shall give notice to each commissioner, at least three days prior to any special
meeting, of the time, place, and purpose of the meeting.
Resolution No. 26-002 (Exhibit A)
15
BYLAWS – Environmental Commission 3
Amended November 26, 2025
B.Attendance
Members are expected to attend all meetings. If a member is unable to attend a meeting, they should
contact the staff liaison, who will inform the chair. If a quorum cannot be attained, the meeting will be
canceled. Staff liaisons will track attendance at each meeting. Each April, the City Manager’s office will
review attendance records for the preceding calendar year (April-March) and send a standardized letter of
warning to any member that has missed:
•two consecutive or three total meetings for groups that meet once a month; or
•two consecutive or five total meetings for groups that meet twice a month.
Because attendance is so important to the work of the City’s boards and commissions, the City Manager
may ask the member to explain the reasons for their absences. If circumstances (other than health
circumstances) prevent the member from committing to consistently attend future meetings, the member
may be asked to step down. If the member’s attendance does not improve after receiving a warning, the
Council may take action to remove the member.
Article IV: Rules
A.Recordkeeping
All minutes and resolutions shall be in writing and shall be kept in accordance with City procedures,
Minnesota Statute and Rules regarding preservation of public records and the Minnesota Data Privacy Act.
B.Work Plan
The Commission will draft an annual work plan that details activities and projected timelines for the
upcoming year.
•The Chair may appoint Commissioners to be primarily responsible for each work plan activity.
•The Commission may establish subcommittees to oversee work plan activities. The
subcommittees will be chaired by Commissioners appointed by the Chair.
•The Commission’s work plan will be submitted to the City Council, typically during the first
quarter of the calendar year. The Chair and/or Commissioners will attend a Council/Manager
meeting to discuss the annual work plan with the City Council.
•The Commission’s work plan must be agreed upon by the City Council.
C.Annual Report
The Commission shall submit an annual report to the City Council summarizing the past year's activities.
The report may highlight information the Commission feels appropriate to convey to the City Council.
D.Performance of Duties
Commissioners are expected to adequately prepare for meetings. Commissioners unable to complete an
assigned task should notify the commission chair or subcommittee chair as soon as possible. The
Commission staff liaison may ask the City Council to review a Commissioner’s appointment based upon its
assessment of significant non-performance of duties.
Article V: Amendments and Revisions
The Commission will review these bylaws no later than the second meeting after May 1 every three
years. Members may present recommendations for changes and amendments. These bylaws can be
altered or amended at any regular monthly Commission meeting with a majority of members present,
provided that notice of the proposed changes and amendments is provided to each member at least 10
business days before the meeting. The Council must review and approve any changes to, and has final
authority regarding, these bylaws.
Resolution No. 26-002 (Exhibit A)
16
2026 Environmental Commission Meeting Dates
• Jan 12 (moved due to holiday)
• Feb 23 (moved due to holiday)
• Mar 16
• Apr 20
• May 18
• Jun 15
• Jul 20
• Aug 17
• Sep 14 (moved due to holiday)
• Oct 19
• Nov 16
• Dec 21
17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3C.1. Approve Address Update to Off-Sale Liquor License - Lund Beverages, LLC, 5723 Duluth St
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
Representatives from Lund Beverages, LLC, d/b/a Lunds & Byerlys Wines & Spirits reached out to staff
in the City Clerk's office at the end of December to start the process of updating the address on file for
their liquor license. Please note that this change reflects an administrative update only - changing from
5719 Duluth Street to 5723 Duluth Street. The business is not physically relocating, and there is no
change to its operating location. This correction is being made to ensure accuracy of records for
administrative and insurance purposes. All business operations will continue at the same physical
location as before.
The City Clerk is working with staff at Lund Beverages, LLC and the State's Alcohol and Gambling
Enforcement Division to ensure all necessary documents are in order for this address update. The
Golden Valley Police Department completed the necessary background investigations during the
recent renewal period in June so new investigations are not required at this time.
The City Clerk is recommending approval contingent upon the successful completion of all required
paperwork and payment of any license fees. The updated license will be in effect for the remainder of
the set licensing period ending June 30, 2026.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Fees received are budgeted and help to defray costs the City incurs to administer and process license
updates. No licenses are issued until payment is received in full.
Legal Considerations
The City Clerk reviews the applications and ensures that all required documentation, including
insurance, is properly delivered to the State's Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division for further
processing and approval.
Equity Considerations
Equity review was not needed as this item falls under the general course of business for the City
Clerk's office.
18
Recommended Action
Motion to approve an address update to the Off-Sale Liquor License for Lund Beverages, LLC, d/b/a
Lunds & Byerlys Wines & Spirits, from 5719 Duluth Street to 5723 Duluth Street for the remainder of
the license period ending June 30, 2026, contingent upon the successful completion of all required
paperwork and payment of any license fees.
19
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3C.2. Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - The Loppet Foundation
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
The Loppet Foundation has applied for a temporary on-sale liquor license for the 2026 City of Lakes
Loppet Festival event at 1221 Theodore Wirth Parkway from Saturday, January 31 through Sunday,
February 1, 2026.
Golden Valley City Code does allow temporary on-sale liquor licenses to be issued to a club or
charitable, religious, or other nonprofit organization with Council approval. A certificate of liability
insurance naming the City as an additional insured is also required and has been provided by the
applicant.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Fees received for temporary liquor licenses help to defray costs the City incurs to administer license
requirements.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
This item does not require equity review.
Recommended Action
Motion to approve a temporary on-sale liquor license for The Loppet Foundation, 1221 Theodore
Wirth Parkway, for the City of Lakes Loppet Festival event from Saturday, January 31 through Sunday,
February 1, 2026.
20
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3C.3. Approve Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Holy Name of Jesus
Catholic School
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
The Holy Name of Jesus Catholic School of Medina, has applied for a Gambling License Exemption to
conduct gambling (paddlewheels and raffle) at their upcoming fundraising event at the Golden Valley
Country Club, 7001 Golden Valley Road, on March 14, 2026.
As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit an
application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or denied by
the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the
30-day waiting period.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
Approving lawful gambling exemptions gives nonprofit organizations the opportunity to create
relationships within the community and make connections that can help provide unbiased programs
and services to those in need.
Recommended Action
Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice
requirement for the Holy Name of Jesus Catholic School of Medina to conduct gambling (paddlewheels
and raffle) at their upcoming fundraising event at the Golden Valley Country Club on March 14, 2026.
21
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3C.4. Approve Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Sons of the American
Legion Post 523
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
The Sons of the American Legion Post 523 have applied for two Gambling License Exemptions to
conduct gambling (bingo and raffle) for events at the Chester Bird American Legion Post 523, 8900
Golden Valley Road, on February 13 and April 3, 2026.
As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit an
application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or denied by
the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the City to waive the
30-day waiting period.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
Approving lawful gambling exemptions gives nonprofit organizations the opportunity to create
relationships within the community and make connections that can help provide unbiased programs
and services to those in need.
Recommended Action
Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice
requirement for the Sons of the American Legion Post 523 to conduct gambling (bingo and raffle) for
events at the Chester Bird American Legion Post 523, 8900 Golden Valley Road, on February 13 and
April 3, 2026.
22
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Public Works
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3D.1. Approve Purchase of Two Pickups from Midway Ford and One Pickup from Tenvoorde Ford, Inc.
Prepared By
Tim Kieffer, Public Works Director
Marshall Beugen, Street and Vehicle Maintenance Superintendent
Summary
Staff propose replacing two pickups for the Street Maintenance and Engineering Departments and one
pickup for the Police Department. Staff replace city vehicles routinely to keep the fleet in good
working condition and stabilize the budgetary impact from year to year.
Staff evaluate vehicles and equipment on an annual basis to determine replacement programing. The
vehicles scheduled for replacement meet the criteria set forth in the City’s Vehicle Replacement Policy
and Vehicle Condition Index (VCI). The VCI is a tool used to assess all vehicles and equipment
scheduled for replacement. Any vehicle/equipment scoring 23 to 27 points meets the category of
“qualifies for replacement” and above 28 points meets the category of “needs immediate
consideration”. Below is a summary of the ratings:
Unit No.Year/Make/Model VCI
238 2012 Ford F-150 Super Cab Pickup Truck 30
704 2016 Ford F-150 Crew Cab Pickup Truck 31
802-22 2022 Ford F-150 Responder Pickup Truck 27
Staff recommend purchasing the vehicles from state contracts through the State of Minnesota’s
cooperative purchasing venture (CPV).
Below is a summary of the proposed purchases:
Contract No.Proposed Make/Model Vendor Purchase Price
259180 2026 Ford F-150 Super Cab Pickup Midway Ford $42,110.72
259180 2026 Ford F-150 Crew Cab Pickup Midway Ford $49,144.72
244262 2026 Ford F-150 Responder Pickup Tenvoorde Ford, Inc.$47,938.00
Financial or Budget Considerations
The 2026-2035 Vehicle and Equipment Capital Improvement Program includes $50,000 for unit 238
23
(V&E-163), $50,000 for unit 704 (V&E-182), and $70,000 for unit 802-22 (V&E-216).
Legal Considerations
The proposed equipment will be purchased following Minn. Stat. § 471.345 Subd. 15 Cooperative
purchasing.
(a) Municipalities may contract for the purchase of supplies, materials, or equipment by utilizing
contracts that are available through the state's cooperative purchasing venture authorized by section
16C.11. For a contract estimated to exceed $25,000, a municipality must consider the availability, price
and quality of supplies, materials, or equipment available through the state's cooperative purchasing
venture before purchasing through another source.
Equity Considerations
Certified Targeted Group/Economically Disadvantaged/Veteran-Owned small businesses receive a 12%
preference from the Office of State Procurement.
Recommended Action
• Motion to approve purchase of two 2026 Ford Pickups from Midway Ford in the amount of
$91,255.44.
• Motion to approve purchase of one 2026 Ford Pickup from Tenvoorde Ford, Inc. in the amount of
$47,938.00.
Supporting Documents
Midway Ford Quotes
Tenvoorde Ford, Inc. Quote
24
Midway Ford Commercial Travis Swanson
Fleet and Government Sales 651-343-5212
2777 N. Snelling Ave.tswanson@rosevillemidwayford.com
Roseville MN 55113
Fax # 651-604-2936
Contract 259180
Standard
Automatic Transmission 40/20/40 Cloth Seat 2.7L V6
Air Conditioning Dual Front Air Bags Carpet Floor Covering
AM/FM Radio 4-Wheel ABS Brakes Bumpers w/Rear Step
Matching Full Size Spare Tire Tilt Wheel Power windows
Power Locks Cruise Control Sync 4
Chrome Bumpers Aluminum Wheels
Options Code Price Select Exterior Colors Code Select
Blue Jeans Metallic N1
Running Boards 18B $228 x Agate Black G1
Back-up Alarm 85H $210 x Carbonized Gray Metallic J7
Skid Plates 413 $145 x Iconic Silver Metallic JS
Vinyl Floor 16G N/C x Oxford White YZ
Vermillion Red($660.00)E4
Extended Service Contracts Cost Select
7 year/75,000 mile $2,570
PremiumCare Warranty
(Bumper to Bumper)
Option Total $583
You must have a active FIN code to participate in this
Base Price Totals purchase contract : FIN code #
$41,507.72 Purchase Order required prior to order placement
Options Price Totals $583.00
Extended Warranty PO #
Transit Impr Excise Tax $20.00
Tax Exempt Lic
6.5% Sales Tax Name of Organization
Document fee
Sub total per vehicle $42,110.72
Number of Vehicles 1 Address
Grand Total for all units $42,110.72
City, State, Zip
Acceptance Signature Contact Person/ Phone #
Print Name and Title Date Contact's e-mail address and fax #
2026 F-150 4X4- Super Cab- 6.5' Box
25
Midway Ford Commercial Travis Swanson
Fleet and Government Sales 651-343-5212
2777 N. Snelling Ave.tswanson@rosevillemidwayford.com
Roseville MN 55113
Fax # 651-604-2936
Contract 259180
Standard
Automatic Transmission 40/20/40 Cloth Seat 5.0L V8
Air Conditioning Dual Front Air Bags Carpet Floor Covering
AM/FM Radio 4-Wheel ABS Brakes Bumpers w/Rear Step
Matching Full Size Spare Tire Tilt Wheel Power windows
Power Locks Cruise Control Sync 4
Chrome Bumpers Aluminum Wheels
Options Code Price Select Exterior Colors Code Select
301A Pkg(Required)301A $633 x Blue Jeans Metallic N1
5.0L V8 995 $109 x Agate Black G1
Tow/Haul 53T $919 x Carbonized Gray Metallic J7
Running boards 18B $228 x Iconic Silver Metallic JS
Tow Mirrors 54Y $360 x Oxford White YZ
Mirror Spots 59S $160 x Vermillion Red($660.00)E4
Back-up Alarm 85H $210 x
Skid Plates 413 $145 x
Vinyl Floor 16G N/C x
Extended Service Contracts Cost Select
7 year/75,000 mile $2,570
PremiumCare Warranty
(Bumper to Bumper)
Option Total $2,764
You must have a active FIN code to participate in this
Base Price Totals purchase contract : FIN code #
$46,360.72 Purchase Order required prior to order placement
Options Price Totals $2,764.00
Extended Warranty PO #
Transit Impr Excise Tax $20.00
Tax Exempt Lic
6.5% Sales Tax Name of Organization
Document fee
Sub total per vehicle $49,144.72
Number of Vehicles 1 Address
Grand Total for all units $49,144.72
City, State, Zip
Acceptance Signature Contact Person/ Phone #
Print Name and Title Date Contact's e-mail address and fax #
2026 F-150 4X4- Crew Cab- 6.5' Box
26
27
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Development
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3E.1. Adopt Resolution No. 26-003 Accepting a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Act (LCA)
Policy Development Grant Agreement
Prepared By
Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Summary
The Golden Valley Community Development Department made application for and was awarded a
$50,000 Policy and Program Grant to help fund the City's Missing Middle Housing Study and
implementation. The Study has the following goals:
Researching missing middle housing as it relates to Golden Valley
Provide actionable metrics around local and regional housing demand
Create policies that will allow infill density in low density areas of the city
Increase the types of housing units available to meet demographic and cultural needs
A resolution needs to be approved to accept grants and donations of real or personal property.
Financial or Budget Considerations
The Metropolitan Council awarded the City $50,000 and there is no required local match. The Missing
Middle Housing Study was included in the 2025 budget (1400.6340) and this grant can fund future
implementation actions, such as code amendments. Any portion of the Missing Middle Housing Study
completed after this agreement is signed will also be paid for from this grant, which is approximately
$3,000.
Legal Considerations
The City Attorney reviewed and approved the attached grant agreement.
Equity Considerations
This study supports the 2030 Strategic Directive for Strategic (Re)development, specifically the goal to
foster a healthy mix of housing stock that accommodates various price points and life stages. The
creation of missing middle housing supports the City's goals to preserve and promote economically
diverse housing options in our community by creating high quality housing in Golden Valley for
households with a variety of income levels, ages, and sizes.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-003 accepting a Metropolitan Council LCA Policy Development
28
Grant Agreement.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-003 - Accepting a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Act (LCA) Policy
Development Grant Agreement
Golden Valley 2026 LCA Policy Grant Agreement
29
RESOLUTION NO. 26-003
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT (LCA) POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT GRANT
WHEREAS, funding is available from the Metropolitan Council for cities to develop
policies and programs that remove barriers to producing or preserving affordable housing;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is committed to increasing affordable housing
options and creating a welcoming City; and
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley is eligible to apply for funding through the
Metropolitan Council grant program to help finance a Missing Middle Housing Study with the
goals of researching missing middle housing as it relates to Golden Valley, provide actionable
metrics around local and regional housing demand, create policies that will allow infill density
in low density areas of the city, and increase the types of housing units available to meet
demographic and cultural needs; and
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2025, the Golden Valley City Council authorized City staff to
submit a grant application in the amount of $50,000; and
WHEREAS , on September 18, 2025, the Metropolitan Council formally notified the
City of their award of $50,000 through the Livable Communities Act Policy and Program
Development grant.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA that this Council hereby authorizes the City Manager or
their designee to accept $50,000 from the Metropolitan Council LCA Policy and Program
Development Grant.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
_____________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
30
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 1 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
GRANTEE: City of Golden Valley GRANT NO. SG-25117
PROJECT: Missing Middle Housing Study to Update Zoning & Policy
GRANT AMOUNT: $50,000 CYCLE: 2025 – Round 2
COUNCIL ACTION: September 10, 2025 EXPIRATION DATE: December 31, 2027
Reviewed by OGC 11/18/25
METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
GRANT AGREEMENT
THIS GRANT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into by the Metropolitan Council
(“Council”) and the Municipality, County, or Development Authority identified above as “Grantee.”
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes section 473.251 creates the Metropolitan Livable Communities
Fund, the uses of which fund must be consistent with and promote the purposes of the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Act (“LCA”) and the policies of the Council’s Metropolitan Development
Guide; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes sections 473.251 and 473.253 establish within the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Fund a Livable Communities Demonstration Account and require the Council
to use the funds in the account to make grants or loans to municipalities participating in the Local
Housing Incentives Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 or to Counties or
Development Authorities to fund the initiatives specified in Minnesota Statutes section 473.25(b) in
Participating Municipalities; and
WHEREAS, the Grantee is a Municipality participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account
program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254, a County, or a Development Authority; and
WHEREAS, the Council allocated a portion of its Livable Communities Demonstration Account
funds to a Livable Communities Act Policy Development Grant Program to help Municipalities create
locally adopted, enforceable policies that have an impact on physical development city-wide or in
specifically defined areas, and further the goals of the Livable Communities Act and the Council’s
Imagine 2050 goals; and
WHEREAS, the Grantee seeks funding in connection with an application for Livable Communities
Act Policy Development Grant Program funds submitted in response to the Council’s notice of
availability of grant funds for the “Funding Cycle” identified above and will use the grant funds made
available under this Agreement to help fund the policy development activities as described in the
application; and
WHEREAS, the Council awarded Livable Communities Act Policy Development Grant Program
funds to the Grantee with the understanding that the Policy Development Project described in the
31
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 2 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
application will proceed to completion in a timely manner, the Grantee will present physical
development policies for consideration to its governing body that emphasize equitable development
within the Grantee’s designated “Policy Area,” and all grant funds will be expended prior to the
“Expiration Date” identified above.
NOW THEREFORE, in reliance on the above statements and in consideration of the mutual
promises and covenants contained in this Agreement, the Grantee and the Council agree as follows:
I. DEFINITIONS
1.01. Definition of Terms. The terms defined in this section have the meanings given them in this
section unless otherwise provided or indicated by the context.
(a) Council Action. “Council Action” means the action or decision of the governing body of the
Metropolitan Council, on the meeting date identified at Page 1 of this Agreement, by which
the Grantee was awarded Livable Communities Act Policy Development Grant Program
funds.
(b) County. “County” means Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington
Counties.
(c) Development Authority. “Development Authority” means a statutory or home rule charter
city, a housing and redevelopment authority, an economic development authority, or a port
authority in the Metropolitan Area.
(d) Metropolitan Area. “Metropolitan Area” means the seven-county metropolitan area as
defined by Minnesota Statutes section 473.121, subdivision 2.
(e) Municipality. “Municipality” means a statutory or home rule charter city or town participating
in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254.
(f) Participating Municipality. “Participating Municipality” means a statutory or home rule
charter city or town which has elected to participate in the Local Housing Incentive Account
program and negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the Municipality pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes section 473.254.
(g) Project. “Project” means the grant-funded policy development activities for which funding is
requested in the Grantee’s application for Livable Communities Act Policy Development
Grant Program funds.
(h) Policy Area. “Policy Area” means: (1) the Grantee or a Participating Municipality to which
the policy will apply; or (2) if the policy will not apply to physical development projects on a
city-wide basis, the specific geographic boundary of the area(s) to which the policy will apply,
such as a station area. The Policy Area cannot include regional park lands. The Policy Area
may include regional trails that cross through or are located adjacent to the Policy Area, but
neither the policy nor its application may alter or eliminate any regional park lands or trails.
32
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 3 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
II. GRANT FUNDS
2.01. Source of Funds. The grant funds made available to the Grantee under this Agreement are
from the Livable Communities Demonstration Account of the Metropolitan Livable Communities
Fund. The grant funds are derived from the property tax authorized by Minnesota Statutes
section 473.253, subdivision 1, and are not from State or federal sources.
2.02. Grant Amount. The Council will grant to the Grantee the “Grant Amount” identified at
Page 1 of this Agreement. The Council’s obligation to reimburse the Grantee for eligible grant-
funded expenditures shall not exceed the Grant Amount. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, the Grantee understands and agrees that any reduction or termination of Livable
Communities Demonstration Account funds made available to the Council may result in a like
reduction in the Grant Amount made available to the Grantee.
2.03. Authorized Use of Grant Funds. The Grant Amount made available to the Grantee under
this Agreement shall be used only for the purposes and Project activities described in the application
for Livable Communities Act Policy Development Grant Program funds. A summary of the Project
(“Project Summary”) that describes eligible uses of the grant funds as approved by the Council is
attached to and incorporated into this Agreement as Attachment A. Grant funds must be used to fund
the initiatives specified in Minnesota Statutes section 473.25(b), in a Participating Municipality.
2.04. Ineligible Uses. Grant funds must be used for eligible costs directly associated with the
Project activities for which the Council awarded grant funds. A detailed list of ineligible and eligible
costs is available from the Community Development/Metropolitan Transportation Services Finance
and Administration Department. Grant funds also shall not be used by the Grantee or others to
supplant or replace: (a) grant or loan funds obtained for the Project from other sources; or (b) Grantee
contributions to the Project, including financial assistance or other resources of the Grantee; or
(c) funding or budgetary commitments made by the Grantee or others prior to the Council Action,
unless specifically authorized in Attachment A. The Council shall bear no responsibility for cost
overruns which may be incurred by the Grantee or others in the implementation or performance of
the Project activities. The Grantee agrees to comply with any “business subsidy” requirements of
Minnesota Statutes sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 that apply to the Grantee’s expenditures or uses of
the grant funds.
2.05. Restrictions on Loans. The Grantee shall not use the grant funds to make loans to any
subgrantee, subrecipient, or contractor and the Grantee shall not permit any subgrantee, subrecipient,
or contractor to use the grant funds for loans to any subrecipient at any tier. The requirements of this
Section 2.05 shall be included in all subgrant and subrecipient agreements, and contracts.
2.06. Project Changes. The Grantee must promptly inform the Council in writing of any
significant changes to the Project activities described or identified in Attachment A. Failure to inform
the Council of any significant changes to the Project or significant changes to grant-funded Project
activities, and use of grant funds for ineligible or unauthorized purposes, may jeopardize the Grantee’s
eligibility for future LCA awards. Grant funds will not be disbursed prior to Council approval of
significant changes to the Project or to the grant-funded activities described or identified in
Attachment A.
33
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 4 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
2.07. Budget Variance. The Grantee may reallocate up to twenty percent (20%) of the Grant
Amount among the grant-funded activities, provided: (a) the grant funds may be used only for Policy
Development Project activities for which the Council awarded the grant funds; (b) the reallocation
does not significantly change the Policy Development Project deliverables; and (c) the Grantee
receives written permission from Council staff prior to reallocating any grant funds. Council staff
may administratively approve budget reallocation requests that exceed twenty percent (20%) of the
Grant Amount only if the reallocation does not significantly change the Policy Development Project
deliverables. Notwithstanding the aggregate or net effect of any variances, the Council’s obligation
to provide grant funds under this Agreement shall not exceed the Grant Amount identified at Page 1
of this Agreement.
2.08. Loss of Grant Funds. The Grantee agrees to remit to the Council in a prompt manner: any
unspent grant funds, including any grant funds that are not expended prior to the Expiration Date
identified at Page 1 of this Agreement; any grant funds that are not used for the authorized purposes;
and any interest earnings described in Section 2.11 that are not used for the purposes of implementing
the grant-funded Policy Development Project activities described or identified in Attachment A. For
the purposes of this Agreement, grant funds are “expended” prior to the Expiration Date if the Grantee
pays or is obligated to pay for expenses of eligible grant-funded Policy Development Project activities
that occurred prior to the Expiration Date and the eligible expenses were incurred prior to the
Expiration Date. Unspent or unused grant funds and other funds remitted to the Council shall revert
to the Council’s Livable Communities Demonstration Account for distribution through application
processes in future Funding Cycles or as otherwise permitted by law.
2.09. Payment Requests and Disbursements. Subject to the terms and conditions in Section 2.10,
the Council will disburse grant funds in response to payment requests submitted by the Grantee
through the Council’s online grants management system and reviewed and approved by the Council’s
authorized agent. The Council will make the final determination whether the expenditures are eligible
for reimbursement under this Agreement and verify the total amount requested from the Council.
Reimbursement of any cost does not constitute a waiver by the Council of any Grantee noncompliance
with this Agreement.
The Council shall disburse grant funds for grant-eligible expenditures within thirty-five (35) days of
the receipt of satisfactory documentation from the Grantee. Notwithstanding the provisions of this
Section 2.09, the Council will not disburse any grant funds to the Grantee unless the governing
body of the Grantee (or the governing body of the Participating Municipality within which the
Project is located) has adopted a Fair Housing Policy as required by Section 5.12.
The Council will reimburse up to 90 percent of the awarded grant funds. The remaining 10 percent
may be withheld before a final payment is issued until the Grantee: (a) completes the Project or grant
deliverables identified in the project summary; and (b) submits a final request for payment and the
Final Report as required under Section 3.03. If the required deliverables are not submitted within the
term and closeout period specified in Section 4.01, the Council shall have no obligation to disburse
the remaining 10 percent. In such cases, the Council may revert the remaining funds to the Council’s
Livable Communities Demonstration Account for redistribution through future funding cycles or as
otherwise permitted by law.
34
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 5 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
2.11 Interest Earnings. If the Grantee earns any interest or other income from the grant funds
received from the Council under this Agreement, the Grantee will use the interest earnings or income
only for: (a) implementing the Policy Development Project activities described or identified in
Attachment A; or (b) implementing or supporting projects that help the Grantee (or the Participating
Municipality within which the Policy Development Project is located) meet its affordable and life-
cycle housing goals.
III. ACCOUNTING, AUDIT AND REPORT REQUIREMENTS
3.01. Accounting and Records. The Grantee agrees to establish and maintain accurate and
complete accounts and records relating to the receipt and expenditure of all grant funds received from
the Council. Notwithstanding the expiration and termination provisions of Sections 4.01 and 4.02,
such accounts and records shall be kept and maintained by the Grantee for a period of six (6) years
following the completion of the Policy Development Project activities described or identified in
Attachment A or six (6) years following the expenditure of the grant funds, whichever occurs earlier.
Accounting methods shall be in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
3.02. Audits. The above accounts and records of the Grantee shall be audited in the same manner
as all other accounts and records of the Grantee are audited and may be audited or inspected on the
Grantee’s premises or otherwise by individuals or organizations designated and authorized by the
Council at any time, following reasonable notification to the Grantee, for a period of six (6) years
following the completion of the Policy Development Project activities or six (6) years following the
expenditure of the grant funds, whichever occurs earlier. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
section 16C.05, subdivision 5, the books, records, documents and accounting procedures and
practices of the Grantee that are relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the Council
and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six (6) years.
3.03. Report Requirements. The Grantee will report to the Council on a semi-annual basis by
January 31 (for the period July 1 through December 31) and July 31 (for the period January 1 through
June 30) of each calendar year during the term of this Agreement. The Grantee reports shall describe
the status of the Policy Development Project activities described or identified in Attachment A. The
reports shall also describe the project spending for the current reporting period and projected spending
for future reporting periods. The Grantee must complete and submit to the Council a Final Report
before the final disbursement of grant funds will be approved. The form and content of the Final
Report will be determined by the Council. These reporting requirements shall survive the expiration
or termination of this Agreement.
IV. AGREEMENT TERM
4.01. Term and Closeout. This Agreement is effective (the “Effective Date”) upon execution of
this Agreement by the Council. Unless terminated pursuant to Section 4.02, this Agreement expires
on the “Expiration Date” identified at Page 1 of this Agreement. Failure of the Grantee to timely
execute this Agreement does not extend the Expiration Date. The Grantee has 120 calendar days after
the Expiration Date to provide documentation and information necessary to closeout this Agreement
35
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 6 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
and receive disbursements for eligible grant-funded Policy Development Project activities as
prescribed in Section 2.03. If the Grantee fails to provide necessary documentation and information
during this 120-day closeout period, the Grantee shall not be eligible to receive any unpaid grant
funds and the Council will not disburse any unpaid grant funds to the Grantee. This 120-day closeout
period does not extend any Grantee reporting deadlines established in this Agreement or authorize
the Grantee to expend or commit any grant funds after the Expiration Date. All grant funds not
expended by the Grantee prior to the Expiration Date and requested for reimbursement prior
to the end of the closeout period may revert to the Council.
4.02. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by the Council for cause at any time upon
fourteen (14) calendar days’ written notice to the Grantee. Cause shall mean a material breach of this
Agreement and any amendments of this Agreement. If this Agreement is terminated prior to the
Expiration Date, the Grantee shall receive payment on a pro rata basis for eligible Project activities
described or identified in Attachment A that have been completed prior to the termination.
Termination of this Agreement does not alter the Council’s authority to recover grant funds on the
basis of a later audit or other review and does not alter the Grantee’s obligation to return any grant
funds due to the Council as a result of later audits or corrections. If the Council determines the
Grantee has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the applicable
provisions of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, the Council may take any action to protect
the Council’s interests and may refuse to disburse additional grant funds and may require the Grantee
to return all or part of the grant funds already disbursed.
4.03. Amendments and Extension. The Council and the Grantee may amend this Agreement by
mutual agreement. Amendments or an extension of this Agreement shall be effective only on the
execution of written amendments signed by authorized representatives of the Council and the Grantee.
If the Grantee needs a change to the Project, additional time within which to complete the grant-funded
activities, a change in the budget, or a change in grant-funded activities, the Grantee must submit to the
Council at least ninety (90) calendar days prior to the Expiration Date, a complete, written
amendment request. All requirements must be met for a request to be considered complete. The
Expiration Date may be extended, but the period of any extension(s) shall not exceed one (1)
year beyond the original Expiration Date identified at page 1 of this agreement.
V. GENERAL PROVISIONS
5.01. Equal Opportunity. The Grantee agrees it will not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, gender identity,
marital status, status with regard to public assistance, familial status, membership or activity in a local
civil rights commission, disability, sexual orientation or age and will take affirmative action to insure
applicants and employees are treated equally with respect to all aspects of employment, rates of pay
and other forms of compensation, and selection for training.
5.02. Conflict of Interest. The members, officers, and employees of the Grantee shall comply with
all applicable state statutory and regulatory conflict of interest laws and provisions.
5.03. Liability. Subject to the limitations provided in Minnesota Statutes chapter 466, to the fullest
extent permitted by law, the Grantee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Council and its
36
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 7 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
members, employees, and agents from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses,
including but not limited to attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from the conduct or
implementation of the Project activities funded by this grant, except to the extent the claims, damages,
losses, and expenses arise from the Council’s own negligence. Claims included in this
indemnification include, without limitation, any claims asserted pursuant to the Minnesota
Environmental Response and Liability Act (MERLA), Minnesota Statutes chapter 115B, the federal
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) as
amended, United States Code, title 42, sections 9601 et seq., and the federal Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) as amended, United States Code, title 42, sections 6901 et seq.
This obligation shall not be construed to negate, abridge, or otherwise reduce any other right or
obligation of indemnity which otherwise would exist between the Council and the Grantee. The
provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. This
indemnification shall not be construed as a waiver on the part of either the Grantee or the Council of
any immunities or limits on liability provided by Minnesota Statutes chapter 466, or other applicable
state or federal law.
5.04. Acknowledgments and Signage. The Grantee will acknowledge the financial assistance
provided by the Council in promotional materials, press releases, reports and publications relating to
the Project. The acknowledgment will contain the following or similar language:
Funding support for this project was provided by the Metropolitan
Council Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund.
The acknowledgment should refer to the “Metropolitan Council” (not “Met Council” or “Metro
Council”).
5.05. Permits, Bonds and Approvals. The Council assumes no responsibility for obtaining any
applicable local, state, or federal licenses, permits, bonds, authorizations, or approvals necessary to
perform or complete any Project activities described or identified in Attachment A.
5.06. Subgrantees, Contractors and Subcontractors. The Grantee shall include in any subgrant,
contract or subcontract for Project activities appropriate provisions to ensure subgrantee, contractor,
and subcontractor compliance with all applicable state and federal laws and this Agreement. Along
with such provisions, the Grantee shall require that contractors and subcontractors performing work
covered by this grant comply with all applicable state and federal Occupational Safety and Health Act
regulations.
5.07. Stormwater Discharge and Water Management Plan Requirements. To the extent
appropriate, the Project should include consideration of stormwater discharge and water management
plan requirements in federal and state laws, the Council’s 2050 Water Policy Plan, and the local water
management plan(s) for the jurisdiction(s) within which the Project Area is located.
5.08. Authorized Agent. Payment requests, written progress reports, and correspondence
submitted to the Council pursuant to this Agreement shall be directed to the Authorized Agent named
below or their successor through the Council’s online grants administration portal or to the below
contact information:
37
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 8 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
Attn: Erin Brueggemann
Metropolitan Council
CD & MTS Finance and Administration
390 Robert Street North
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805
erin.brueggemann@metc.state.mn.us
5.09. Non-Assignment. Minnesota Statutes section 473.253, subdivision 2, requires the Council
to distribute grant funds to eligible “municipalities,” metropolitan-area counties, or “development
authorities” for projects in municipalities participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account
program. Accordingly, this Agreement is not assignable and shall not be assigned by the Grantee.
5.10. Authorization to Reproduce Images. The Grantee certifies that the Grantee: (a) is the
owner of any renderings, images, perspectives, sections, diagrams, photographs or other
copyrightable materials (collectively, “copyrightable materials”) that are in the Grantee’s application
or are submitted to the Council as part of the grant application review process or after grant award, or
that the Grantee is fully authorized to grant permissions regarding the copyrightable materials; and
(b) the copyrightable materials do not infringe upon the copyrights of others. The Grantee agrees the
Council has a nonexclusive royalty-free license and all necessary permissions to reproduce and
publish the copyrightable materials for noncommercial purposes, including but not limited to press
releases, presentations, reports, and on the internet. The Grantee also agrees the Grantee will not hold
the Council responsible for the unauthorized use of the copyrightable materials by third parties.
5.11. Warranty of Legal Capacity. The individuals signing this Agreement on behalf of the
Grantee and on behalf of the Council represent and warrant on the Grantee’s and the Council’s behalf
respectively that the individuals are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on the Grantee’s and
the Council’s behalf respectively and that this Agreement constitutes the Grantee’s and the Council’s
valid, binding, and enforceable agreements.
5.12. Fair Housing Policy. If the Project will include a housing component, the governing body
of the Grantee (or the Participating Municipality within which the Project is located) must have
adopted a Fair Housing Policy. For the purposes of this section, the term “Fair Housing Policy”
means a written statement regarding the Grantee’s commitment to fair housing that substantively
includes at least the following elements: a purpose statement; procedures for responding to fair
housing concerns and complaints; and a designated individual or staff position responsible for fair
housing issues. A best practices guide, as well as a copy of a model local fair housing policy is
available at: https://metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Files/Resources/Best-Practices/Fair-Housing-
Policy-Guide.aspx.
5.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart, each of which counterpart
constitutes an original, but both of which together constitute one instrument.
5.14. Electronic Signatures. The electronic signatures of the Council’s and the Grantee’s
authorized representatives shall be valid as the original signatures of the authorized representatives
and shall be effective to bind the Council and the Grantee under this Agreement. This Agreement
38
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 9 of 10
SG-25117 rev. 11/18/2025
containing, or to which there is affixed, an electronic signature shall be deemed to (a) be “written” or
“in writing”; (b) have been signed; and (c) constitute a record established and maintained in the
ordinary course of business and an original written record when printed from electronic files.
“Electronic signature” also means a manually signed original signature that is then transmitted by any
electronic means, including without limitation a faxed version of an original signature or an
electronically scanned and transmitted version (e.g., via PDF) of an original signature. The Council’s
or the Grantee’s failure to produce the original signature of any electronically transmitted signature
shall not affect the enforceability of this Agreement.
This space intentionally left blank. Signature page follows.
39
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
LCA POLICY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM
Page 10 of 10
rev. 11/18/2025
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantee and the Council have caused this Agreement to be executed
by their duly authorized representatives. This Agreement is effective on the date of final execution
by the Council.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: _____________________________
LisaBeth Barajas, Executive Director
Community Development Division
Date: ___________________________
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
By: _______________________________
Rosalyn Harmon, Mayor
Date: _____________________________
By: _______________________________
Noah Schuchman, City Manager
Date: _____________________________
Approved as to form:
________________________________________
SG-25117
40
ATTACHMENT A
POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SUMMARY
This attachment comprises this page and the succeeding page(s) which contain(s) a summary of the
Project described in the application for Livable Communities Act Policy Development Grant Program
grant funds submitted in response to the Council’s notice of availability of Livable Communities Act
Policy Development Grant Program funds for the Funding Cycle identified at Page 1 of this
Agreement. The summary reflects the Project activities for which the Grantee was awarded grant
funds by the Council Action, and may reflect changes in Project funding sources, changes in funding
amounts, or minor changes in the proposed Project that occurred subsequent to application
submission. The application is incorporated into this Agreement by reference and is made a part of
this Agreement as follows. If the application or any provision of the application conflicts with or is
inconsistent with the Council Action, other provisions of this Agreement, or the Project Summary
contained in this Attachment A, the terms, descriptions, and dollar amounts reflected in the Council
Action or contained in this Agreement and the Project Summary shall prevail. For the purposes of
resolving conflicts or inconsistencies, the order of precedence is: (1) the Council Action; (2) this
Agreement; (3) the Project Summary and Location(s); and (4) the grant application.
41
PROJECT SUMMARY
Grant Number: SG-25117
Type: Policy and Program Development (LCA)
Grantee: City of Golden Valley
Project Name: Missing Middle Housing Study to Update Zoning & Policy
Project Location: N/A
Council District: 8 – Anjuli Cameron
Project Detail
Project Overview
The project supports the creation of local missing-middle housing
solutions/tools that can be implemented to align with local housing goals
and increase the range of housing types in the community. Policy
recommendations intend to improve the effectiveness of existing programs
such as the Home Ownership Program for Equity (HOPE).
Use of funds
Recommended
Award Amount Uses
$50,000 Consultant time
Deliverables Policy and ordinance(s) presented to City Council for approval
42
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Finance
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3E.2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-004 Accepting Donations of Ongoing Programs
Prepared By
Lyle Hodges, Finance Director
Summary
This resolution is for acceptance of donations received throughout the year for ongoing programs that
are approved annually at year end. The period of collection is December 9, 2024 through December
17, 2025. Two reports are attached including the donations received for the Noah Joynes Youth
Recreation Fund and those received for the Community Services Commission.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Funds will be held and used for approved purposes in 2026.
Legal Considerations
This donation acceptance request is in accordance with State Statutes and City Policy.
Equity Considerations
As with all financial transactions, the City seeks to incorporate an equity lens when deciding how to
spend public funds.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-004 accepting donations for ongoing programs.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-004 - Accepting Donations for Ongoing Programs
Exhibit A - CSC Donation Report 2024-2025
Exhibit B - Noah Joynes Donation Report 2024-2025
43
RESOLUTION NO. 26-004
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR ONGOING PROGRAMS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-20 on March 16, 2004,
which amended the Donation/Gift policy and amended with Resolution No. 20-44 on July 7,
2020 adding the Noah Joynes Youth Recreation fund; and
WHEREAS, the Resolution states that a gift of real or personal property must be
accepted by the City Council by resolution and be approved by a two-thirds majority of the
Council; and
WHEREAS, a detailed report of cash donations sent to the Golden Valley
Community Services Commission from 12/09/2024 through 12/17/2025 is attached as
Exhibit A for a total of $6,250.00; and
WHEREAS, a detailed report of cash donations sent to the Noah Joynes Youth
Recreation Fund from 12/09/2024 through 12/17/2025 is attached as Exhibit B for a total of
$410.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley:
1. Accepts $6,660.00 in donations on behalf of the community to be held and used
for approved purposes in 2026 for the Golden Valley Community Services
Commission and Noah Joynes Youth Recreation Fund.
2. Receives and accepts the detailed reports of cash donations attached hereto as:
a. Exhibit A – Donations to the Community Services Commission
(12/09/2024 through 12/17/2025)
b. Exhibit B – Donations to the Noah Joynes Youth Recreation Fund
(12/09/2024 through 12/17/2025)
3. Extends their heartfelt gratitude to the community members, businesses, and
organizations who generously donated to programs that help bridge the gap for
human service needs in the community and provide financial support for youth to
participate in recreational and educational activities, programs, athletics, lessons,
and events in a safe, supportive, and positive environment.
Adopted by the City Council of Golden Valley, Minnesota this 6th day of January 2026.
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
Theresa J. Schyma, City Clerk
44
Page: 1 of 5
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
GVHSF Donation 12/09/2024 218770 WWW 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Steven Blehert
12/09/2024 218790 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00
Name Jean Rose
12/09/2024 218792 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Nancy Haik
12/09/2024 218794 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Elaine Reiss
12/09/2024 218796 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Dennis & Valerie Dahlman
12/09/2024 218799 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Martin Virshek
12/09/2024 218803 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Glen Eiden
12/09/2024 218805 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Susan Berns
12/09/2024 218829 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Paul Sortland & Carolyn Anderson
12/09/2024 218830 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Bruce Anderson
12/09/2024 218834 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Lizabeth Marshall
12/09/2024 218835 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Norman Wilsman
12/09/2024 218836 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name David Beeson
12/10/2024 218897 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Daniel Makey
12/12/2024 219040 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Donna Ostdiek
12/12/2024 219052 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Laura Pugh
12/12/2024 219053 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Timothy Rice
12/13/2024 219143 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Jane and Michael Pellizzer
12/13/2024 219144 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Gordon & Janet Beavers
12/13/2024 219145 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Karren Mills
12/16/2024 219441 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Nancy & Jim Johnson
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:06 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit A)
45
Page: 2 of 5
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
GVHSF Donation 12/16/2024 219442 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Patrick O'Rourke
12/16/2024 219459 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Richard Hurd
12/16/2024 219461 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Janel & Michael Carr
12/16/2024 219463 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Roxy Benthin
12/16/2024 219464 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name David & Jan Kuball
12/16/2024 219466 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00
Name James Uttley
12/16/2024 219467 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name B. Schaub
12/16/2024 219468 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Gillian & Jeffrey Rosenquist
12/16/2024 219473 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Charles Noerenberg & Kristina Ford
12/18/2024 219597 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Joyce & Martin Orbuch
12/18/2024 219599 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Anne & Richard Christiansen
12/18/2024 219600 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Steven Schmidgall
12/18/2024 219601 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Heidi & Michael Schweigert
12/19/2024 219653 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Arlene & Leslie Freeberg
12/20/2024 219732 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Donna Godejohn
12/20/2024 219733 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
Name Anthony & Nina DiAngelis
12/20/2024 219734 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Catherine Davis
12/23/2024 219985 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Barbara Deans
12/23/2024 219986 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Doris Thimmesh
12/23/2024 219987 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Thomas & Julie Theiringer
12/23/2024 219988 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:06 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit A)
46
Page: 3 of 5
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
Name Gerald Martinson
GVHSF Donation 12/23/2024 219989 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00
Name Schlumpberger's
12/23/2024 219990 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Stephen Pesavento
12/24/2024 220031 WWW 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Angela Lawson
12/26/2024 220082 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Suzann & Matthew Swaggert
12/26/2024 220129 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Fred & Sandy Poferl
12/26/2024 220130 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Bob & Marg Shaffer
12/26/2024 220131 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Judith Gerhardt
12/26/2024 220135 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Pauline Siepka
12/26/2024 220136 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Virginia & Homer Hauke
12/26/2024 220138 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00
Name Dennis Flom
12/26/2024 220140 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00
Name Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Nida
12/26/2024 220143 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Steven Collin
12/27/2024 220324 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Terrence Price
12/27/2024 220326 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Mary Quirk & Steven Durben
12/28/2024 220572 WWW 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Jong-Han Lee
01/02/2025 221328 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Neal & Kathleen Scharmer
01/02/2025 221330 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Allen & Andra Barnard
01/02/2025 221332 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Mary Jane Hedstrom
01/02/2025 221333 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Kim & Jim Lindahl
01/06/2025 222216 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Jim Elert
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:06 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit A)
47
Page: 4 of 5
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
GVHSF Donation 01/07/2025 222352 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00
Name Harriet Swartz
01/10/2025 222688 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Sarah & Daniel Anderson
01/10/2025 222689 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Lee Biersdorfq
01/17/2025 223472 WWW 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Koehler
01/21/2025 223913 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Karen & Eric Peterson
01/21/2025 223915 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Bonnie Ostlund
01/21/2025 223918 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Trudy Hoag
01/21/2025 223919 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Stephen & Mary Robinson
01/27/2025 224734 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Nancy Hannan
01/28/2025 224818 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Stephanie Landmark
01/28/2025 224837 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Steve and Bonnie Heller
02/04/2025 225535 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Rober Owens
02/05/2025 225646 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Dwayne King
02/21/2025 227200 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Lisa Lehman
02/24/2025 227544 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Pam Berven
02/26/2025 227733 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00
Name Mary Ann Campbell
03/10/2025 228984 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Robert Wheeler
03/28/2025 230636 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Jean & Nick Neumann
04/02/2025 231423 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Elaine Hagen
04/04/2025 231614,2321 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00
Name Jeff Hanscom
04/30/2025 233623 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 300.00
Name Wayne E. Keplinger
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:06 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit A)
48
Page: 5 of 5
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
GVHSF Donation 05/21/2025 234966 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
Name Trudy Lerner
06/05/2025 235733 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Helen Siegel
06/05/2025 235734 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Emmett Carpel
06/16/2025 236951 Kwiinikainen 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Luverne Erickson
08/07/2025 240710 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Louise Carppenter
08/14/2025 241202 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,000.00
Name Mary Jo Peterson
09/18/2025 243463 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
Name Steven Savitt
10/07/2025 244476 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00
Name Kathi Augstin Mahle
10/16/2025 245048 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
Name Margaret & Ilo
12/05/2025 249395 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name Vernon & Luann
0 0.00 0.00 93 6,250.00
Report Grand Totals 0 0.00 0.00 93 6,250.00
Report Summary Totals
Total Transactions: 93
Service Items with a Transaction: 1
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:06 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit A)
49
Page: 1 of 1
GVHSF Donations - Names only
Service Item Date Receipt # User Quantity Fee Amt Disc Amt Tax Amt Net Fees
Tax Deductible Donation For Noah Joynes 01/30/2025 225004 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Name LeAnn Anderson
02/07/2025 225792 dostdiek 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 360.00
Name Fred Knight
0 0.00 0.00 2 410.00
Report Grand Totals 0 0.00 0.00 2 410.00
Report Summary Totals
Total Transactions: 2
Service Items with a Transaction: 1
City of Golden Valley User: jvorachit Run Date/Time: 12/17/2025 @ 8:10 am
Resolution No. 26-004 (Exhibit B)
50
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Finance
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3F. Adopt Resolution No. 26-005 Designating Depositories for City Funds
Prepared By
Lyle Hodges, Finance Director
Summary
State statute 118A.02 requires cities to designate, as a depository of its funds, one or more financial
institutions. The City utilizes Wells Fargo Bank as the primary depository for operational funds used to
record the receipt of funds and to pay the City's obligations. The City utilizes Ehlers Investment
Partners and the 4M Fund as the primary depositories for the investment of funds not needed for
immediate operating needs. In addition, the City may utilize other banking service providers for
specific needs such as bond and debt payments, transfers, and other operations.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Not applicable.
Legal Considerations
State statute 118A.02 requires cities to designate, as a depository of its funds, one or more financial
institution.
Equity Considerations
Not applicable.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-005 Designating Depositories for City Funds.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-005 - Designating Depositories for City Funds
51
RESOLUTION NO. 26-005
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORY
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes set procedures and require the City Council to
designate depositories for City funds which include the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA) as a blended component unit; and
WHEREAS, these statutes allow the City Council to authorize the Accounting
Supervisor or Finance Director/Treasurer to annually designate a bank as the official
depository for the City funds and manage the collateral pledged to such funds; and
WHEREAS, Wells Fargo Bank, Minnesota, N.A., is the official depository; and
WHEREAS, Wells Fargo Bank, Minnesota, N.A., wires transfer funds to below
institutions for investments purchased by the City and HRA:
4M Fund
Ehlers Investment Partners – Pershing LLC the Bank of New York Mellon
US Bank
Wells Fargo
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley, Minnesota, that the following signatories or alternates are authorized to be
signatories on checks drawn on funds deposited:
1. General Checking:
Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem and Finance Director or Assistant Finance
Director; Each check requires two (2) signatures.
Use of facsimile signatures by the following named persons:
Roslyn Harmon Mayor
Lyle Hodges Finance Director
2. Internal Deposit Funds:
(Motor Vehicle Registration Fund Checking, DNR Transaction account)
Transfers may be made by the City Finance Director and Assistant Finance
Director to the State of Minnesota, DNR and City of Golden Valley General
Checking; Deputy Registrar may make transfers between accounts (Motor
Vehicle Registration Fund and DNR Account) and to the State of Minnesota
for deposits.
3. Imprest Fund Checking: (Park and Recreation, City Activity Account,
Brookview Golf Course and Brookview Golf Activity):
52
Resolution No. 26-005 -2- January 6, 2026
Signatories shall be as designated by the City Manager who shall notify the
bank at the time of authorization or change and each check shall require one
(1) signature. Transfers from accounts are authorized by the Finance
Director/Treasurer or Assistant Finance Director.
4. ACH Transfers: (City of Golden Valley General Account):
Will be authorized for the Payroll Accountant, Assistant Finance
Director or Finance Director/Treasurer for payroll transfers created by
the Payroll System.
Will be authorized for the Deputy Registrar, Accountant, Assistant
Finance Director or Finance Director/Treasurer for transfers to the
State or Department of Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Will be authorized for the Assistant Finance Director and Finance
Director/Treasurer will be authorized to make transfers to the Investment
firms or electronic payments authorized.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following shall be authorized to make
investments of city funds and shall be authorized to deposit the principal of said
investments in the above-named depositories as necessary and beneficial to the City:
City Manager, Finance Director/Treasurer, Assistant Finance Director and Accountant.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is authorized and directed to
furnish each of the depositories with certified copies of this resolution along with such
signature documentation as is required by the depository and the authorizations set forth in
all above.
Adopted by the City Council of Golden Valley, Minnesota this 6th day of January 2026.
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
53
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Finance
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3G. Adopt Resolution No. 26-006 for the Annual Elections for the 2026-2027 Insurance Policy
Prepared By
Lyle Hodges, Finance Director
Summary
Cities obtaining liability coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust must decide
whether or not to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. Staff
recommends that the City does not waive the statutory limit on tort liability established by Minnesota
Statutes 466.04 for the 2026-2027 insurance policy. This policy renews annually on February 1.
Financial or Budget Considerations
If the City does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no
more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total which all claimants
would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be
limited to $1,500,000. Insurance rates from the League of Minnesota Cities reflect this coverage.
Legal Considerations
The League of Minnesota Cities requires the governing body of cities to decide whether or not to
waive the statutory tort liability limits.
Equity Considerations
Not applicable.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-006 for the Annual Election for the 2026-2027 Insurance Policy.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-006 - Annual Elections for the 2026-2027 Insurance Policy
54
RESOLUTION NO. 26-006
RESOLUTION FOR THE ANNUAL ELECTIONS
FOR THE 2026-27 INSURANCE POLICY
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley must declare whether or not to waive the
statutory limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley that it does not waive the statutory limits on tort liability established by Minnesota
Statutes 466.04 for the 2026-27 insurance policy.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota this 6th day of
January 2026.
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
55
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3H. Approve Designation of 2026 Official Newspapers - New Hope/Golden Valley Sun-Post and
Minnesota Star Tribune
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, the Council must designate a newspaper of general circulation
in the City as the official newspaper in which all ordinances, hearing notices, advertisement for bids,
etc. are required to be published. Due to certain timing constraints and since the New Hope/Golden
Valley Sun-Post is published weekly, it is in the best interest of the City to designate an additional
newspaper that has daily publication. When publishing notices the City will only publish in one of the
two official newspapers for each notice. Additionally, the City's website includes information for both
of the official newspapers.
The New Hope/Golden Valley Sun-Post and the Minnesota Star Tribune are both qualified to serve as a
legal and official newspaper under Minnesota Statutes Section 331A.02, Subd. 1 .
Financial or Budget Considerations
The cost of publishing public hearing notices has been factored into the 2026 Council Budget.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
Ensuring all residents of Golden Valley have access to important information regarding City Council
decisions fits within the City's Equity Plan for inclusive and effective community engagement.
Recommended Action
Motion to designate the New Hope/Golden Valley Sun-Post and the Minnesota Star Tribune as the
2026 official newspapers for the City of Golden Valley.
56
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Development
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3I. Adopt Resolution No. 26-007 Approving Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South
Prepared By
Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Summary
Rusty Danielson, the property owner of 911 Winnetka Avenue South, requests a Minor Subdivision to
adjust the interior lot line between his property and the neighboring property 843 Winnetka Avenue
South. No new dwellings or construction are proposed as part of this application.
Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application on November 10, 2025, at which time
no one testified. Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Minor Subdivision
application.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Standard City fees were collected with the subdivision application.
Legal Considerations
The Legal Department has reviewed the title documents of this property. As a condition of approval of
the lot line adjustment, the property owner(s) shall, within 180 days of approval or prior to the
issuance of any building permit or other land use authorization related to the affected parcels,
whichever occurs first, submit to the City Planning Division satisfactory proof that all deeds or other
conveyance instruments necessary to transfer legal ownership interests to effectuate the approved lot
line adjustment have been duly executed and recorded in the official records of Hennepin County.
Proof shall include legible copies of the recorded instruments bearing the recorder’s endorsement,
together with an updated legal description for each adjusted parcel as recorded. Failure to timely
provide such proof of recordation shall render this approval null and void at the discretion of the
Planning Division, and no permits or approvals dependent on this lot line adjustment shall be issued or
continue in effect until compliance is demonstrated.
Equity Considerations
The applicant’s request was part of a public hearing at the November 10, 2025, Planning Commission
meeting which provided residents an opportunity to participate in the process consistent the
Community Affairs and Effective Governance and Management Strategic Directives.
Recommended Action
57
Adopt Resolution No. 26-007 Approving a Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South, based on
the Findings and Conditions in the Staff Report.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-007 - Approving Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South
911 Winnetka Survey and Minor Subdivision
November 10, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report
November 10, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting MInutes
58
RESOLUTION NO. 26-007
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION AT 911 WINNETKA AVENUE
WHEREAS, Rusty Danielson, the property owner of 911 Winnetka Avenue, has
applied for a Minor Subdivision under Chapter 109 Subdivisions, Division 4 Minor
Subdivisions and Consolidations in order to adjust the lot line between 911 Winnetka
Avenue and 843 Winnetka Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Minor Subdivision is situated upon lands in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, legally described as follows:
Lot 21, Block 3, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS including
the adjacent Half of vacated Erie Avenue and the South 13 feet of the North Half of
vacated Erie Avenue, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
AND
Lots 13 and 14, Block 2, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS
including that part of adjacent North Half of vacated Erie Avenue lying North of the
South 13 feet thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the proposed Minor Subdivision has been found to be in all respects
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws
of the State of Minnesota and Section 109-121 of the City Code:
1. Each lot meets the minimum area requirements of the R-1 zoning district.
2. Each lot meets the minimum dimension requirements of the R-1 zoning district.
3. The entire front of each lot abuts on a street right-of-way and each lot has direct
vehicular access.
4. Steep slopes or excessive wetness do not encumber the proposed lots.
5. Public sewer and water connections are directly accessible to each lot.
6. The minor subdivision provides the required public easements on each lot.
7. The City Attorney will complete the review of title documents before the final plat
is recorded with the County.
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2025, the Golden Valley Planning Commission held a
public hearing and recommended approval of the Minor Subdivision application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley hereby adopts Resolution No. 26-007, subject to the following condition:
The property owner(s) shall, within 180 days of approval or prior to the issuance of any
building permit or other land use authorization related to the affected parcels, whichever
occurs first, submit to the City Planning Division satisfactory proof that all deeds or other
conveyance instruments necessary to transfer legal ownership interests to effectuate the
approved lot line adjustment have been duly executed and recorded in the official records
of Hennepin County. Proof shall include legible copies of the recorded instruments bearing
the recorder’s endorsement, together with an updated legal description for each adjusted
parcel as recorded. Failure to timely provide such proof of recordation shall render this
approval null and void at the discretion of the Planning Division, and no permits or
59
Resolution No. 26-007 -2- January 6, 2026
approvals dependent on this lot line adjustment shall be issued or continue in effect until
compliance is demonstrated.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
_____________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
60
916.7PowerPole914.07914.42914.69913.60914.96916.2916.2GF916.6PowerPole915.3915.20915.0915.3915.6916.59917.02917.2FFE918.7917.4917.5917.4917.2FFE917.0916.7916.3916.6916.3916.7916.6915.5915.4915.1tcc914.97tcc915.10tcc915.36tcc915.12tcc915.88tcc916.13tcc916.30916.7916.9tcc916.90tcc916.58tcc916.49tcc916.84916.3916.6tcc916.46Catch Basinrim=915.82MmailboxMmailboxGuyAnchorPowerPole916.9915.9916.9916.0916.0916.5917.1917.2918.9918.9918.79916.8916.7916.6916.7916.6FFE916.9EElec.MeterA/C916.7916.2916.3916.7917.1916.8916.9917.6GGasMeter915.6915.8916.1916.2916.5918.1916.42917.4FFE919.4917.5GF918.1915.7915.7917.2915.9916.2917.1918.0917.3917.3916.81917.7917.3917.29LightPole916.5916.7EElec.MeterA/C917.5GGasMeter916.5916.7916.9917.3916.58916.5916.3916.20915.70SUMTER A
V
E
S
O
U
T
H
13.5
91
4
91
6916
916916916S 89°16'55" E 157.7545.945.046.25.818.2
83.244.215.8 50.924.0 50.924.0
P a v e r sNORTH LINE OF VACATED ERIE AVENUESOUTH LINE OF VACATED ERIE AVENUEN 08°31'58" E 209.78
S 08°31'58
"
W
2
0
9
.
7
8S 89°16'55" E 157.75122.06
122.06
87.82
87.72 S 89°16'55" E 157.75PARCEL B6666PARCEL A50
13.0
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF VACATED ERIE AVENUEWINNETKA AVE SOUTH
O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
w
i
r
e
sW o o d F e n c eResidence No. 84312.035.9 7.812.0W o o d F e n c eResidenceNo. 911GarageO v e r h e a d w i r e sC o n c r e t eW o o d F e
n
c
eResidence No.1023Residence No. 843P a v e r sW o o d F e n c e30.030.0F i r e p l a c eW o o d F e n c eW o o d F e n c eS t e p sD e c kE g r e s s w e l lW o o d F e n c e G r a v e lG r a v e l D r i v e w a yB i t u m i n o u s23.8
23.8 C o n c r e t eD e c kC o n c r e t eE g r e s s w e l lP a v e r sP a v e r sE g r e s s w e l lEgress WellC a n tC o n c r e t e 10.012.0 6.224.012.07.735.927.9Adjoining Owner:Matthew London1023 Winnetaka Ave. S.Adjoining Owner:Jacob Kampf Et Al1030 Sumter Ave.Adjoining Owner:James Winkels914 Sumter Ave.Adjoining Owner:Roger Kim Noren840 Sumter Ave.Adjoining Owner:Jason & Julie Reece820 Sumter Ave.Adjoining Owner:Corby & Angela Koehler1023 Winnetaka Ave. S.Adjoining Owner:Rusty Danielson Et Al911 Winnetaka Ave. S.Adjoining Owner:David Salmen824 Winnetaka Ave. S.Adjoining Owner:Ting Yu Huang800 Winnetaka Ave. S.Adjoining Owner:State HighwayF:\survey\confer and ericksons boulevard gardens\21-3\01 Surveying - 91132\01 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwg
F:\survey\confer and ericksons boulevard gardens\21-3\01 Surveying - 91132\01 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwgFile No.F.B. No. ** inv. 91132Certification Existing Legal DescriptionsKatlin Danielson property (north parcel)843 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MNPID No.: 05.117.21.23.0062Lots 13 and 14, Block 2, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS includingthat part of adjacent North Half of vacated Erie Avenue lying North of the South 10 feetthereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Rusty Danielson property (south parcel)911 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MNPID No.: 05.117.21.23.0063Lot 21, Block 3, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS including theadjacent Half of vacated Erie Avenue and the South 10 feet of the North Half of vacatedErie Avenue, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Signed: ____________________________________________ Gregory R. Prasch Registration No. 24992Prepared this 9th day of September 2025.The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client.I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervisionand that I am a duly Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.For: 843 & 911 Winnetaka Ave. S. Proposed Legal DescriptionsProperty Currently Zoned: R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning Ordinance Requirements: Building Setbacks (principal structure) Front - 35 feet Side Yard - Structure 15 feet or less in height shall be 12.5 feet. The side setbacksfor any portion of a structure greater than 15 feet in height shall be measuredto an inwardly sloping plane at a ratio of 2:1 beginning at a point 15 feetdirectly above the side setback line Rear Yard - 25 feet Refer to City code for additional requirement7601 73rd Avenue NorthMinneapolis, Minnesota 55428(763) 560-3093DemarcInc.comADMINISTRATIVE LOT DIVISIONADMINISTRATIVE LOT DIVISION drawn by:Property Address:843 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MN PID No.: 05.117.21.23.0062911 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MN PID No.: 05.117.21.23.0063Total Area = 32,785 sq. ft.Area of proposed: Parcel A = 19,076 sq.ft Parcel B = 13,709 sq.ftTitle insurance commitment showing property description and any encumbrances ofrecord not provided, survey subject to change.The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client.Property located in Section 5, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County, MinnesotaBenchmark: Hennepin County GPS (NAVD88 Geoid18B)12345field by: tmMiscellaneous NotesDeveloper:Debbie DanielsonReal Estate ConsultantKeller Williams952-358-9618 Office952-358-9518 Fax952-457-8239 Celldebbiedanielson@kw.comProperty Owners:Katlin Danielson property (north parcel)843 Winnetka Ave., S.Golden Valley, MN 55426Rusty Danielson property (south parcel)911 Winnetka Ave., S.Golden Valley, MN 55426Surveyor:DemarcSurveying and Engineering7601 73rd Avenue N.Brooklyn Park, MN 55428Attn: Greg Praschphone: 763-560-3093e-mail: gregprasch@demarcinc.com Development Personnel ContactsSCALE IN FEET0603090Denotes Found Iron MonumentDenotes Iron Monument SetBollardLightPower PoleSanitary ManholeStorm ManholeManhole (use not determined)Catch BasinCommunication Pedestal RiserSignTelephone Pedestal RisertpedcpedLegendPARCEL A (19,076 sq.ft)Katlin Danielson property843 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MNPID No.: 05.117.21.23.0062Lots 13 and 14, Block 2, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS includingthat part of adjacent North Half of vacated Erie Avenue lying North of the South 13 feetthereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.PARCEL B (13,709 sq.ft)Rusty Danielson property911 Winnetka Ave., S. Golden Valley, MNPID No.: 05.117.21.23.0063Lot 21, Block 3, CONFER AND ERICKSON'S BOULEVARD GARDENS including theadjacent Half of vacated Erie Avenue and the South 13 feet of the North Half of vacatedErie Avenue, Hennepin County, Minnesota.Zoning Information61
1
Date: November 10, 2025
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Subject: Minor Subdivision Application for 911 Winnetka Avenue South
Site Image
2018 aerial photo (Hennepin County)
911 Winnetka
Avenue
843 Winnetka
Avenue
Existing Lot Line
Proposed Lot Line
62
Subject Property
Locations: 911 and 843 Winnetka Avenue South
Parcel ID Numbers: 0511721230063 and 0511721230062
Applicant/Property Owners: Rusty Danielson and Katlin Danielson
Site Size: 911 Winnetka: 0.3 acres, 13,217 square feet
843 Winnetka: 0.45 acres, 19,407 square feet
Future Land Use: Low Density Residential
Zoning District: R-1 Single-Family Residential
Existing Use: Single family home
Adjacent Properties: Single family homes
911 Winnetka Avenue is a single family lot with a house built in 1966. Access to the property is
from a gravel driveway off Winnetka Avenue that is less than one foot south of the property
line. A fence between the two properties sits just north of the interior lot line.
Proposal
The property owner of 843 Winnetka has agreed to sell the southern portion of their lot to the
property owner of 911 Winnetka. This land sale would move the interior lot line north three
feet to the north and bring the 911 Winnetka Avenue driveway setback into code compliance.
This lot line adjustment would also allow the 911 Winnetka landowner to pave the gravel
driveway in its current location without a variance. City code does not currently have a process
to allow lot-line adjustments to be approved administratively, so the applicant seeks approval
to adjust the lot line northwards three feet through the Minor Subdivision process in City Code
Chapter 109, Division 4.
The revised lots would exceed the dimensional requirements for the R-1 district as shown in the
table below.
R-1 Standards Lot 1 (843 Winnetka) Lot 2 (911 Winnetka)
Lot Size 10,000 sq. ft. 19,076 sq. ft. 13,709 sq ft.
Lot Width 80 ft. 119 ft. 91 ft.
Front Setback 35 ft. 45 ft. (no change) 46 ft. (no change)
Side Setbacks 15 ft. for 100 ft.
lot, 12.5 ft. for
80 ft. lot
18 ft (no change), 41 ft. 12 ft. (no change, legally
nonconforming),
55 ft.
Rear Setback 25 ft. 83 ft. (no change) 61 ft. (no change)
Driveway 3 ft. (no change) 3 ft.
63
Planning Analysis
Level of Discretion in Decision Making
The City has limited discretion when approving a Minor Subdivision application. Per City Code,
the City must approve a Minor Subdivision application if it meets the requirements listed in
Section 109-121.
Eligibility
In keeping with Minn. Stats. § 462.358, subd. 1a, which allows for the establishment of more
than one class of subdivision and more than one set of regulations, certain proposed land
subdivisions and consolidations may qualify for application as a minor subdivision. Each of the
following conditions must be met to establish eligibility:
1. The land to be subdivided or consolidated must be part of a recorded plat or a recorded
registered land survey (RLS). The site is part of an existing plat, Confer and Erickson’s
Boulevard Gardens.
2. Consolidations may involve any number of parcels, but subdivisions shall be limited to the
creation of four or fewer lots from one or more original parcels. The applicant proposes to
adjust one lot line between two existing parcels. No lots will be subdivided or
consolidated.
3. The subdivision or consolidation shall not necessitate any additional public investment in
new roads or utilities to serve the lots. No new dwellings are proposed as part of this
project. Staff has determined the proposal requires no new roads or utility lines.
Staff finds the request meets these three conditions to be considered a minor subdivision.
Application Analysis
In reviewing this application, staff has examined the request in accordance with the standards
outlined in Section 109-121 of the City Code, which provides the criteria for approving a Minor
Subdivision.
1. Minor subdivisions shall be denied if the proposed lots do not meet the requirements of the
appropriate zoning district. Both lots will meet all dimensional and area requirements in
the R-1 zoning district after the lot line adjustment.
2. A minor subdivision may be denied if the City Engineer determines that the lots are not
buildable. No new buildings or dwellings are proposed as part of the application. Both
existing homes will remain on the lots.
3. A minor subdivision may be denied if there are no sewer and water connections available
or if it is determined by the City Engineer that an undue strain will be placed on city utility
systems by the addition of the new lots. No changes to sewer or water capacity are
proposed as part of the project.
4. Approval of the minor subdivision may require the granting of certain easements to the
city. New easements along all existing and new property lines will be required in the final
plat drawing.
5. If public agencies other than the city have jurisdiction of the streets adjacent to the minor
subdivision, the agencies will be given the opportunities to comment. Not applicable.
64
6. The city may ask for review of title if required by the City Attorney for dedication of certain
easements. Title documentation has been submitted for review by the City Attorney. Legal
review will be complete before the application goes to City Council.
7. The minor subdivision may be subject to park dedication requirements. Since no new
dwellings are proposed as part of the application, no park dedication fees are required.
Findings of Fact
Criteria Finding Met?
Meets requirements of appropriate zoning district Yes
Buildable lot Yes
Sufficient sewer and water capacity Yes
Easements Yes
Other agency review Not applicable
Title review Yes
Park dedication fees Yes
Public Notification
To comply with State law and the City’s public hearing notice requirements, a notice was
published in the Sun Post Newspaper and notices were mailed to property owners within 500
feet of the site. At the time of this report, staff has received on comments on the application.
Recommendation
Staff recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision application based on the findings in the
staff report, with the following conditions:
1. The lot line adjustment shall not go into effect until the sale of the land.
2. The Minor Subdivision approval shall expire 180 days after the date of approval unless
the applicant has filed a complete application for approval of the Final Plat.
3. The fence shall be rebuilt along the new interior lot line, at a time determined by both
property owners.
65
Recommended Motion
“I move to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision for a lot line adjustment at 911 and
843 Winnetka Avenue South, subject to the findings and conditions in the staff report.”
Next Steps
Council will consider the Minor Subdivision and Final Plat applications in December.
If City Council approves the Final Plat, the subdivider shall then file it for recording with the
Hennepin County Recorder or the Registrar of Titles within 60 days of the date of the resolution
approving the Final Plat. If not filed within 60 days, the Final Plat shall be null and void unless an
extension is given by the Council.
Staff Contact Information
Prepared by:
Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
jkramer@goldenvalleymn.gov
Reviewed by:
Chloe McGuire, Deputy Community Development Director
cmcguire@goldenvalleymn.gov
66
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
1. CALL TO ORDER AND LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
• Acting Chair Cohen called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. and read the Land Acknowledgement
• Regular Members Present: Amy Barnstorff, Gary Cohen, Chuck Segelbaum, Martin Sicotte,
David Hill
• Regular Members Absent: Mike Ruby and Eric Van Oss
• Student Member, Status: Remy Rosenberg
• Staff Members Present: Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Steven Okey, Associate Planner
Chloe McGuire, Deputy Community Development Director
• Council Member Present: None
2. CONSENT AGENDA:
2.A. Approval of agenda
• Cohen asked for a motion to approve.
• Barnstorff moved.
• Hill seconded.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
2.B. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No 25-007 Certifying Land Acquisition of 1875 Lilac Drive
North is in Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan
• Cohen noted adopting the resolution.
• Segelbaum stated that 2B is under the consent agenda. He clarified that the resolution has
not been adopted.
• Cohen agreed that it had not been adopted, but there was no public hearing for the
resolution.
• Kramer explained that there was a similar item on the consent agenda in the recent past, like
this. She added that if a discussion is needed, then the item can be pulled, or a separate
motion can be made to adopt the resolution.
• Segelbaum asked how the Staff determined to use the City versus the Commission in the
findings that were listed with the resolution.
• Kramer clarified to ask if Commissioner Segelbaum was referring to the numbered findings in
the resolution.
• Segelbaum explained that in the resolution 25-007, which includes the numbered findings,
how does the Staff determine whether to note when the findings state The City versus not,
such as in eight and nine.
• Kramer stated that the initial Whereas being held by the City Council, is that the Council took
action on September 15, to authorize the Staff to use that specific eminent domain action.
She added that the next two Whereas list the Planning Commission, as those are the findings
that the Staff is recommending the Commission adopt, which state that the acquisition of this
property in order to build a fire station, meets the City good goals, meets goals within the
comprehensive plan. She noted that Planning Commission does not see a lot of resolutions,
but when the Staff brings resolutions to the City Council, then the findings of fact that the Staff
is recommending are included, and then the Council, by approving an item, agrees with those
findings and adopts them as their own.
• Segelbaum stated the familiarity with analyzing something to see if it is consistent with the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, but not necessarily where the Commission is asked to make 67
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
findings of fact, such as those in the resolution. He added that the example of the new site
will increase safety by allowing drive-thru truck bays, space to avoid conflicts, and the City’s
firefighters deserve safe and updated facilities that will result in positive health outcomes,
which can only be completed with the construction of a new facility. He noted that the
Commission has not studied it sufficiently to come up with independent findings, and that it
could be subject to finding, because what was studied before coming up with the finding. He
stated that if the finding stated that the City had made that finding, then that would be
different, because then, within the purview of the Planning Commission, they are well
equipped to talk about whether or not something falls within a particular statute, code
section, or within the comprehensive plan. He noted the concern with the findings that do not
preface the City has determination.
• Kramer stated that in the packet she left out the findings that the Council had found in
September, and the findings in the Planning Commission's packet are taken from the findings
of the Council.
• Segelbaum explained that the findings are good, but the concern is with the findings and the
wording. He added that, for instance, did anyone else make a finding that positive health
outcomes, which can only be achieved with the construction of a new facility or safety, which
is currently unable to be completed in the City. He noted that if it was vetted by the Staff,
then it seems fine.
• Kramer summarized finding number one as stating what the institutional assembly land use
does.
• Segelbaum noted that finding one is in the purview of the Commission.
• Kramer explained that findings two through ten are from the findings of the City Council in
September. She added that finding eleven ties the acquisition of the land specifically to a
comprehensive plan goal.
• Segelbaum stated that finding eleven seems appropriate. He asked if there was a way to
rephrase two through ten.
• McGuire stated that findings two through ten could be removed, as they are not necessary for
the Planning Commission findings.
• Kramer noted that two through ten could be moved under the City Council, Whereas, and
then keep the Planning Commission specific ones in the current list.
• Segelbaum added that one and eleven would be appropriate for the Planning Commission.
• McGuire stated that findings one, two, and eleven would be good.
• Segelbaum agreed that two would be fine as well.
• Cohen clarified that as the Acting Chair, he met with Staff before the meeting, and the
Planning Commission is acting to certify the land acquisition as compliance with the
comprehensive plan, not whether it is the right location or other myriad of issues. He added
that the Commission is focusing on how it impacts the comprehensive plan and zoning. He
noted that moving findings one, two, and eleven under the Commission, and three through
ten under the Council, will help to clarify the final document that will go to the City Council.
• Segelbaum stated that the Commission should discuss whether it agrees with the findings.
• Cohen noted that it is a worthwhile discussion.
• Segelbaum explained that a new fire station, given all the facts that are listed, is very much
consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and is an important asset for the City. He
added that it meets a lot of the goals about health, safety, welfare, and community.
• Cohen stated that, seeing there is no further discussion, the motion would be that the 68
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
Planning Commission adopt the resolution.
• Segelbaum moved to adopt Planning Commission 25-007 certifying that the land acquisition of
81875 Lilac Drive North is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, assuming the
resolution has been amended as discussed.
• Sicotte seconded.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
3.A. Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South
• Kramer presented the Minor Subdivision at 911 Winnetka Avenue South and a
recommendation for approval. She added that the Applicant was in attendance as well.
• Cohen asked if there were any questions for the Staff.
• Hill asked which property the fence would be on.
• Kramer showed a picture of the property, noting where the edge of the driveway will be and
where the fence is currently. She added that when the property line moves up, it will be just
north of the fence. She noted that currently, the two owners are family members, but the City
Attorney advised the move because, in the future, the fence may become a problem.
• Sicotte asked if, once it goes through the City Council, this would be an item that would be
passed administratively and not go before the Planning Commission.
• Kramer stated that it would be correct in the future, because it met all the requirements,
there is no variance or any other additional application needed for it, so in the future,
applications like this one will not go before the Planning Commission; they will just be
approved administratively by the Staff.
• Cohen opened up the public hearing.
• Resident Rusty Danielson, 911 Winnetka Avenue South, spoke.
• Danielson stated that his driveway was the old Eerie Lane alley, and he is pouring the curb cut
straight back. He added that if this is not done, then there would be three feet of gravel on
one side of the driveway, which does not make sense. He stated that his neighbor did not
object to moving the property line.
• Cohen closed the public hearing and opened the item for discussion.
• Barnstorff stated that it makes a lot of sense, and she is looking forward to it going through
the Council so that it does not have to go before the Planning Commission because it will save
many people a lot of time. She noted she is in favor.
• Segelbaum explained that there are only certain criteria that would permit the Commission to
deny the application, and none of those criteria appear to be present. He added that because
of that, the Commission needs to approve it.
• Sicotte and Hill agreed with the approval.
• Cohen added that the Commission is looking forward to the City Council acting on what the
Commission has approved so that these types of applications can be dealt with
administratively.
• Cohen asked for a motion.
• Sicotte moved to recommend approval of the minor subdivision for a lot line adjustment at
911 and 843 Winnetka Avenue South, subject to the findings and conditions in the Staff
report.
• Barnstorff seconded the motion.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
69
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
3.B. Ordinance Amending Chapter 105 - Signs
• Cohen introduced the topic of the Ordinance Amending Chapter 105 – Signs.
• Kramer introduced the presenter, Erin Perdu, who was part of the consulting team that helped
to update the sign code.
• Perdu presented the code amendment from the Staff report.
• Segelbaum asked if the number of signs that are used had been considered. He added that
some properties have a large number of many of the same signs, and the use of many signs,
something that was thought about.
• Perdu stated that in some districts, it was considered. She pointed out that in the regulations
by zoning districts, the number of signs is indicated in some of the districts, but not in R1 and
R2. She noted that in the office, commercial, and the light industrial the number of free-
standing signs is limited to one or one per street frontage, so repeated signs are not allowed.
She stated that for wall signs, there is a maximum of one per wall.
• Segelbaum asked which section the free-standing signs code is listed in.
• Perdu stated that it is in the table, section 105-11 Regulations by Zoning District. She added
that many lists and texts were consolidated into tables.
• Segelbaum asked in an R3 or R4 district, if there were a series of signs spaced ten to twenty
feet apart along the road, the code would hypothetically limit it to just one. He asked if free-
standing means connected to the building.
• Perdu stated that there is a definition in the code, but basically free-standing structure is a
structure that is in the ground.
• Hill asked about the electronic and flashing signs, but was curious if there was anything about
efficiency, such as LED.
• Perdu noted that there is nothing in the code currently about efficiency. She added that the
code regulates the manner and the construction of signs, but if the Commission wanted to
include something about choosing energy-efficient fixtures, it could be included. She stated
that she has not seen that in a sign code.
• Segelbaum asked what enforcement mechanisms the City has when someone is not
compliant. He added that it needs to be clarified whether this must be specified explicitly or
whether it is simply treated like any other provision when someone is out of compliance.
• Kramer explained that the question gets to a lot of the internal discussion that was had on
sign code, not just looking at the ordinance, but how the ordinance would be enforced
internally. She stated that any complaint or non-compliance would be handled like any other
non-compliance issue. She noted that the City is getting more code compliance staff,
hopefully soon, as it is in the proposed budget. She explained that right now, the Planning
Staff would go out and let people know that they are out of compliance with the system that is
used to issue citations and such.
• Segelbaum asked what the mechanisms are to handle it.
• Kramer stated that it is all handled internally and that in the future, it can be done more
efficiently and be responsive to it in the new year.
• Perdu noted that there is not a lot of language about enforcement in this section of the code,
but generally, there is language in the code about how the provisions are enforced, and this
would be among them.
• Kramer added that part of what the Staff was trying to do with the sign code update is to
make a code that is more easily enforceable.
• Cohen stated that once the code update is adopted, clarification is needed on whether
businesses that do not meet the new code will be grandfathered in or how that situation will
be handled.
• Kramer stated that it would be like any other code change; if the person is no longer in 70
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
compliance, then there is a legal nonconformity. She added that a legal nonconformity can
exist as is, but it cannot be expanded. She gave an example that if, after the code change, a
property has more signage than is allowed, they can maintain the signs, but are not allowed to
add more. She noted that if the building got torn down and the signage were removed, when
the building is rebuilt, it would have to be in compliance with the code.
• Sicotte asked about murals and artwork, and how they differentiate from signage to make
sure there is room for artwork.
• Perdu stated that a definition was included of a painted wall sign, and the definition of a sign
was revised. She noted that this was a question from the City Attorney as well about what the
difference is between a painted wall sign and a mural. She pointed out that the definition of a
sign is an advertisement for commercial purposes, and a mural does not meet that definition.
She stated that public art and murals are not included in the code, but painted wall signs were
added as a valid sign and would be included in the updated code. She restated that a mural
does not meet the definition of a sign, therefore is not limited by the code amendment.
• Sicotte asked about corporate-inspired art, and there may not be answers, but it is a gray area
and could cause an issue.
• Perdu noted that there is a definition of mural as well, and the Staff tried to make it a clear as
possible, but there may be difficult situations that come up.
• Hill asked about the various signs that may be in drive-thrus, which give directions, and if that
should be allowed or covered.
• Perdu stated that in section 105-6, and in consultation with the City Attorney, she indicated
that the City could not specifically call out directional signs. She noted that the solution to
that is stated as if a sign is not legible from the right-of-way, then it does not count as part of
your signage. She gave an example of menu boards. She added that some directional signs
may fall into this, but there is allowance for free-standing and wall signs for all commercial
businesses, so they could flex that to accommodate.
• Segelbaum stated that assuming someone does want to have a sign that reads enter and it is
legible from the roadway, but the intent of the code is not necessarily to ban that in
combination with the sign for the business. He asked if there was any sort of mechanism that
a person could follow to petition to get special dispensation.
• Kramer noted that the person could apply for a variance.
• Segelbaum asked if it would go to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
• Kramer stated that it is correct.
• Perdu added that in section 105-6, signs that are six square feet and smaller are exempt, with
the intention of not regulating the small signs.
• Segelbaum asked if it would still count as one sign.
• Perdu explained that the sign is exempt from the ordinance, so it would not count as the one
sign either.
• Segelbaum asked if a succession of five signs that are five square feet would be allowed.
• Perdu read that the language in the code reads that the signs have to be six square feet or
less, less than three feet in height, and located adjacent to a driveway or private road. She
added that in theory, it would protect against lining up signs along the right-of-way.
• Segelbaum asked if there is a series of them that are smaller.
• Perdu noted that if the signs are not adjacent to an entrance or a driveway, then the signs are
not exempt from the code and would fall under the maximum of one.
• Segelbaum asked if any updates are anticipated to be more controversial than others.
• Perdu explained that she did not think there would be any that would be highly controversial,
as the City was very intentional about talking to people before writing, about what kind of
flexibility in the code would be helpful. She noted that in many cases, the size was increased 71
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
where necessary. She added that the most controversial thing may be the things that the City
cannot regulate because of the content, such as cannabis signs.
• Hill stated that when the parking code was updated, the word church was replaced with
places of assembly, and he asked whether the same change should be made in this code.
• Kramer noted that it is a good callout and an easy fix.
• Cohen opened up the public hearing.
• Resident Robby Dolan, 900 Mendelsshon Avenue, spoke
• Dolan stated that he is an employee of Ascentek/Lube-Tech. He noted that the campus is
18.69 acres spread across five different lots and four buildings. He stated that the team
consists of 348 people and is privately owned. He explained that the company has recently
grown and has opened up new capabilities for the business, which has given the company the
opportunity to rebrand. He added that he is the Senior Marketing Manager and is working on
updating signage. He stated that the proposed simplification of the ordinance is very much
appreciated by the company. He added that in going into the future with different means of
technology, as well as more traffic going down 169, it gives the company the unique
opportunity to compete against commercial lots and commercial zoned areas. He feels it will
benefit the company greatly, and the work that is being done is supported.
• Cohen closed the public hearing and opened the item for discussion.
• Barnstorff stated that she appreciates the simplification of the code, and it is nice to hear from
a business that the changes are making it easier to work with. She noted her full support and
appreciation for the work that has been done.
• Hill noted that he was not present for the start of this code amendment. He asked if the rest
of the Commission feels that most of the concerns were addressed and if the Commissioners
are comfortable with what was addressed.
• Segelbaum stated that specific types of issues were talked about that the Commission saw,
and the questions that came up again to see if they were addressed in the code, and the issues
had been regulated, meaning permitted or not permitted. He feels satisfied with the issues
having been addressed.
• Sicotte agreed and did not recall exactly the nuances of the conversation, but some things
were originally noticed. He recalled that there was discussion about signs with a lot of
movement or moving text, and there were items in the code that were adjusted or updated to
clarify that type of thing. He added that the feedback that was provided seemed to be
incorporated in a meaningful way.
• Cohen agreed and noted that the Commission discussion was higher level, not as specific. He
indicated that he was impressed by the work the City Attorney did in identifying what can
legally be done and what cannot be done within the code. He added that he was impressed by
the outreach that was done to businesses and others with the expertise. He stated that
oftentimes people will state no one talked to us or we did not know, but that is not the case
this time.
• Sicotte added that the addition of all the graphics is wonderful and very clear. He stated that
if there are opportunities to add graphics in the rest of the code, that would be a wonderful
idea.
• Segelbaum noted that part of the concerns in the past has been that the sign code has not
been clear, so therefore, more difficult to enforce. He added that it is a big improvement, and
may not cover everything, but the hypotheticals that the Commission came up with seemed to
be covered.
• Hill noted that he was impressed with the audit and how much detail went into it, all the
feedback, and how it was all able to be applied.
• Cohen stated that the City is continuing to update and simplify the codes, which is very helpful 72
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
to the community at large as the City progresses forward. He asked if the City will be at a
point where other cities come and look at Golden Valley and note that they want to use the
City’s model.
• Kramer stated that, in speaking for community development staff, that is the goal of the Staff
is to be the model. She thanked Commissioner Cohen for those words. She noted the
fantastic job that Stantec did.
• Cohen asked if there were any other questions or comments on the sign code ordinance. He
then asked for a motion.
• Barnstorff moved to recommend approval of the ordinance amending Chapter 105 – Signs,
subject to the findings and conditions in the Staff report.
• Sicotte seconded the motion.
• Kramer stated a point of order and asked if the Commission wanted to recommend approval
with the condition to change the word church to places of assembly.
• Barnstorff moved to recommend approval of the ordinance amending Chapter 105 – Signs,
with the amendment put forth by Commissioner Hill and subject to the findings and conditions
in the Staff report.
• Sicotte seconded the motion.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
4. NEW BUSINESS: -None
5. STAFF UPDATES:
• Okey gave an update on the parking code. He noted that there was a meeting regarding the
Town Center Plan, and the parking code came back up. He stated that it came up that perhaps
some of the bicycle requirements might be a little ambitious at this point. He added that as
the City gets more bike infrastructure, more with the bicycles could be implemented. He
stated that much of the parking code that had regard to biking was removed, and he would
send the updated version to the Commission.
• Barnstorff asked if it is indoor parking, outdoor parking, or both.
• Okey stated that it is mainly the indoor parking for commercial uses. He noted that the code
would still have indoor parking requirements for multifamily buildings.
• Barnstorff asked if bicycle parking would still be required on the exterior.
• Okey stated that it will be required on the exterior, and in fact, the percentage of required
bicycle parking has been upped as related to the required vehicular parking. He added that it
will come to the Commission on November 24 for final approval.
• Kramer stated that Monday, November 24, would be a parking code update public hearing
and no other applications. She noted that Tuesday, November 25, is the Board of Zoning
Appeals, with Commissioner Cohen to be present, and there will be two variance applications.
She added that on November 19, the Council will see the 911 Winnetka Minor Subdivision and
the Code Amendments for CUPs, variance, and subdivisions on the consent agenda. She
stated that on December 2, the City Council will see the sign code update and the parking code
update. She added that the Planning Commission’s last meeting of the year would be on
December 8, with two applications, one for a minor subdivision and variance, and Breck
School has submitted the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD application. She noted that
the Planning Commission meeting on December 22 and the BZA meeting on December 23
have been cancelled.
• Segelbaum asked if it would be a major PUD amendment.
• Kramer explained that it will be a rescind and replace. She noted that there will be a fresh
PUD. She stated that on November 17, there is a neighborhood meeting for the minor 73
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, November 10, 2025 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council
Chamber 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
subdivision application at 400 Sunny Ridge Lane, and it is a hybrid with a Teams link. She
added that on November 20, there will be a similar neighborhood meeting for the Breck
School application. She noted that on November 13, there is a Golden Valley Climate Equity
Plans Art event at Brookview, which is a family-friendly event to learn about simple ways to
become more sustainable with energy, water, waste, and transportation.
• Segelbaum asked if it is posted on the City website.
• Kramer confirmed that it is.
• Cohen asked if Councilmember Ginis was present.
• Kramer stated no, and there is no Council update. She reminded the Commission that an
email should have been received from IT with security training, with a heavy focus on AI.
• Barnstorff noted that the email coming from an outside source felt very sketchy. She clarified
that it was a real email and should be completed.
• Kramer stated that there is a real email with training that needs to be done, but if there is ever
a concern about a link, just check in with her.
• Segelbaum asked about which courses to do, as some were listed as overdue and some were
not due for several weeks.
• Kramer stated that there are three courses. She added that the Staff will try to schedule
annual training with the City Attorney, probably in the month of January. She noted that she
is aware of not having the safety training with the Police Chief, and will continue to work on
getting something together for that.
6. COMMISSIONER UPDATES: -None
7. ADJOURNMENT: Acting Chair Cohen adjourned the meeting at 7:35 p.m.
74
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Development
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3J. Adopt Resolution No. 26-008 Approving Lot Consolidation, Resolution No. 26-009 Approving a
Variance, and Resolution No. 26-010 Approving Final Plat at 400 Sunnyridge Lane
Prepared By
Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Summary
David and Jennifer Knaeble applied for a minor subdivision and variances for the property at 400
Sunnyridge Lane. The minor subdivision would allow the consolidation of three 40-foot lots into two
60-foot lots. The variances would allow the creation of two new lots in the R-1 zoning district where
three would be allowed under current platting.
Staff received four letters of support for the applications. The Applicant also held a neighborhood
meeting on November 17, 2025, in accordance with the Neighborhood Notification Policy, and four
residents attended. All were supportive at the meeting. Planning Commission held a public hearing on
December 8, 2025, and unanimously recommended approval of the applications.
Financial or Budget Considerations
Standard City fees were collected with the subdivision application. Before the County records the plat,
the applicant will pay the park dedication fee of $13,000.
Legal Considerations
The Legal Department has reviewed the title documents of this property. During this review, staff
discovered racial covenants recorded on the original three parcels. The applicant authorized staff to
begin the process to discharge these covenants, which commenced after the public hearing.
Equity Considerations
Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item, which gave residents an opportunity to
participate in the process consistent with the Effective Governance and Management 2030 Strategic
Directive.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-008 Approving Lot Consolidation, Resolution No. 26-009 Approving
a Variance, and Resolution No. 26-010 Approving Final Plat at 400 Sunnyridge Lane, based on the
findings in the staff report.
75
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-008 - Approving Lot Consolidation
Resolution No. 26-009 - Approving Variance
Resolution No. 26-010 - Approving Final Plat
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 8, 2025 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Preliminary Plat
Final Plat
Public Comments - 400 Sunnyridge Lane
76
RESOLUTION NO. 26-008
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT CONSOLIDATION AT 400 SUNNYRIDGE LANE
WHEREAS, David and Jennifer Knaeble have applied for a lot consolidation under
Chapter 109 Subdivisions, Division 4 Minor Subdivisions and Consolidations in order to
consolidate three lots into two lots at 400 Sunnyridge Lane; and
WHEREAS, the proposed lot consolidation is situated upon lands in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, legally described as follows:
Lots 314, 315, and 316, “Glenwood,” Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the proposed lot consolidation has been found to be in all respects
consistent with the comprehensive plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of
the State of Minnesota and the Golden Valley City Code; and
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2025, the Golden Valley Planning Commission held a
public hearing and recommended approval of the lot consolidation application.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA that this Council adopts Resolution No. 26-008 approving
the lot consolidation at 400 Sunnyridge Lane to consolidate three lots into two lots, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The lot consolidation is contingent upon the approval of the variance application
allowing the creation of new lots smaller than the minimum lot width and area
normally required by City Code.
2. Before the final plat is recorded with the county, the applicant shall pay park
dedication fees.
3. All necessary city permits will be obtained prior to the start of construction,
including but not limited to the building permit and stormwater management
permit.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
_____________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
77
RESOLUTION NO. 26-009
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE AT 400 SUNNYRIDGE LANE
WHEREAS, David and Jennifer Knaeble have applied for a variance from Section
113-88(j) to reduce the required minimum lot size from 10,000 square feet to 7,000 square
feet and the minimum lot width from 80 feet to 60 feet, in order to allow the consolidation of
three existing lots of record into two new lots at 400 Sunnyridge Lane; and
WHEREAS, the proposed variance is situated upon lands in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, legally described as follows:
Lots 314, 315, and 316, “Glenwood,” Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2025, the Golden Valley Planning Commission held a
public hearing and made the following findings of fact:
1. The applicant proposes a reasonable use of the property.
2. The platting history of the site and nonconformity of the proposed lots, despite
deviating less from the dimensional standards of the R-1 district than the current
lots, creates a unique hardship for using the land for single family development.
3. The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood. The neighborhood is predominantly single family homes on lots of
various sizes and widths.
4. The hardship in the variance request is not solely due to economic
considerations and is not caused by the landowner.
5. The variance will not permit a use not allowed in the zoning district where the
property is located.
6. The variance request is in harmony with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the
R-1 Single Family Residence zoning district.
7. The variance request is the minimum action necessary to alleviate the hardship
and maintain a substantial property right of the applicant.
WHEREAS, at the December 8 meeting Planning Commission recommended approval
of the variance application; and
WHEREAS, the proposed variance has been found to be in all respects consistent with
the comprehensive plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of
Minnesota and the Golden Valley City Code.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA that this Council adopts Resolution No. 26-009 approving
the variance at 400 Sunnyridge Lane to reduce the required minimum lot size from 10,000
square feet to 7,000 square feet and the required lot width from 80 feet to 60 feet.
78
Resolution No. 26-009 -2- January 6, 2026
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
_____________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
79
RESOLUTION NO. 26-010
RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT
FOR KATES WOODS 2ND ADDITION
WHEREAS, David and Jennifer Knaeble have requested a final plat to be known as
“Kates Woods 2nd Addition” covering the following described tracts of land:
Lots 314, 315, and 316, “Glenwood,” Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the final plat to be in compliance with the lot
consolidation which was approved by the City Council on January 6, 2026 (Resolution No.
26-008).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Golden
Valley, that said proposed plat be, and the same hereby is, accepted and approved, subject
to the following conditions:
1. Before the plat is recorded with the county, the applicant shall pay the park
dedication fee of $13,000.
2. All necessary City permits will be obtained prior to the start of construction,
including but not limited to the building permit and stormwater management
permit.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the proper officers of the City are hereby authorized
and instructed to sign the original of said plat and to do all other things necessary and
proper in the premises.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January 6, 2026.
_____________________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
80
Date: December 8, 2025
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Subject: Minor Subdivision and Variances for 400 Sunnyridge Lane
Relevant code sections
1. Minor subdivision regulations - Chapter 109 Subdivisions, Division 4 - Minor Subdivisions
and Consolidations Lot Size
2. Variances for minor subdivisions - Section 109-121(i): The conditions spelled out in this
section shall provide the only basis for denial of a minor subdivision or consolidation
except for the additional conditions imposed on residential zero lot line homes later in
this division. Approval will be granted to any application that meets the established
conditions. Additionally, an applicant may request a waiver from specific conditions
imposed in this section by applying for a variance in accordance with this chapter.
3. Buildable lots requirements in the R-1 zoning district - Section 113-88(j). No dwelling or
accessory structure shall be erected for use or occupancy as a residential dwelling on
any tract of unplatted land which does not conform with the requirements of this
section, except on those lots located within an approved plat. In the R-1 Zoning District a
platted lot of a minimum area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum width of 80 feet at
the front setback line shall be required for one single-family dwelling
Subject Property
Parcel ID Number: 1902924410110
Applicant/Property Owner: David and Jennifer Knaeble
Site Size: 0.35 acres, 15,217 square feet
Future Land Use: Low Density Residential
Zoning District: R-1 Single-Family Residential
Existing Use: Single family residential
Adjacent Properties: Single family residential
Background
The current owners of 400 Sunnyridge Lane purchased the property in March 2025. When they
purchased the property was 120 feet wide and contained a home built in 1952. They have since
demolished the home and subdivided their lot into three, 40-foot lots through Hennepin County’s
administrative tax parcel division process. The lots are now vacant. The property owners would
81
like to consolidate the three lots into two 60-foot wide lots. If City Council approves the lot
consolidation, the owners plan to construct a home on one lot and sell the other.
Site Image
2024 aerial photo (Hennepin County)
Planning Analysis
Lot consolidations are regulated under Chapter 109, Division 4 of the City Code. Because the
proposed lots do not meet the minimum lot width and lot size requirement in the R-1 zoning
district in Section 113-88(j), the applicants have applied for a variance under Section 109-121(i).
The table below contains the dimensional requirements in the R-1 district and the proposed
dimensions of the new lots.
Proposed
Lot Line
82
R-1 Standards Lot 1 (North) Lot 2 (South)
Lot Size 10,000 sq. ft. 7,682 sq. ft.* 7,673 sq ft.*
Lot Width 80 ft. 60 ft. * 60 ft.*
Front Setback 35 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft.
Side Setbacks 5 ft. 12 and 6 ft. 12 and 6 ft.
Rear Setback 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft.
*The applicants have applied for a variance to allow these dimensions.
Level of Discretion in Decision Making
The City has limited discretion when considering a lot consolidation application. Per State Statute
and City Code, the City must approve a lot consolidation application if it meets the requirements
listed in Section 109-121. The City has more discretion when considering variances. State Statute
and City Code define what criteria must be met for a variance, but the City interprets the
standards and some criteria are more subjective than others. All decisions on variance
applications must be supported, in writing, by findings of fact.
Eligibility
In keeping with Minn. Stats. § 462.358, subd. 1a, which allows for the establishment of more
than one class of subdivision and more than one set of regulations, certain proposed land
subdivisions and consolidations may qualify for application as a minor subdivision. Each of the
following conditions must be met to establish eligibility:
1. The land to be subdivided or consolidated must be part of a recorded plat or a recorded
registered land survey (RLS). The site is part of an existing plat: GLENWOOD.
2. Consolidations may involve any number of parcels, but subdivisions shall be limited to
the creation of four or fewer lots from one or more original parcels. The applicant
proposes to consolidate three existing lots into two lots.
3. The subdivision or consolidation shall not necessitate any additional public investment
in new roads or utilities to serve the lots. Staff has determined the proposal requires no
new roads or utility lines.
Staff finds the request meets these three conditions to be considered a minor subdivision.
Minor Subdivision Analysis
In reviewing this application, staff has examined the request in accordance with the standards
outlined in City Code Section 109-121, which provides the following eight (8) criteria for
granting a lot consolidation under the minor subdivision regulations.
83
1. Minor subdivisions shall be denied if the proposed lots do not meet the requirements of
the appropriate zoning district. The applicant applied for a variance to allow lots that do
not meet the minimum lot size or lot width in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed lots
meet all other dimensional requirements.
2. A minor subdivision may be denied if the City Engineer determines that the lots are not
buildable. There is adequate space on the new lots for homes to be built in compliance
with setback requirements.
3. A minor subdivision may be denied if there are no sewer and water connections available
or if it is determined by the City Engineer that an undue strain will be placed on city
utility systems by the addition of the new lots. One additional set of sewer and water
connections will be necessary. Staff finds there is sufficient service capacity of city utility
systems to serve two homes on the site.
4. Approval of the minor subdivision may require the granting of certain easements to the
city. The preliminary plat includes drainage and utility easements along all property
lines.
5. If public agencies other than the city have jurisdiction of the streets adjacent to the
minor subdivision, the agencies will be given the opportunities to comment. Not
applicable.
6. The city may ask for review of title if required by the City Attorney for dedication of
certain easements. The City Attorney completed review of title and found racial
covenants recorded on the three 40-foot lots. Per the applicant’s request, City staff has
begun the process to discharge the covenants with the Examiner of Titles office. These
covenants are not legally enforceable and do not impact the current lot consolidation
application.
7. The minor subdivision may be subject to park dedication requirements. A park dedication
fee will be required for one new single family residential unit. The proposed 2026 fee
schedule sets park dedication fees for single family residential units at $13,000. If City
Council does not approve the proposed change to park dedication fees by the time the
final plat is ready to be recorded, the fee will be calculated with the currently-used
formula: 6% of the unimproved value of the total property, with a 50% reduction for the
previously demolished home.
8. The conditions spelled out shall provide the only basis for denial of a minor subdivision.
Approval will be granted to any application that meets the established conditions. The
applicant has applied for a variance for minimum lot area and lot width, and all other
conditions have been met.
Staff finds that, with the exceptions of minimum lot area and lot width, the request meets all
criteria for granting a minor subdivision in accordance with the purpose and all applicable
standards, requirements, and procedures identified in Golden Valley City Code Chapter 109.
84
Variance Analysis
In reviewing the variance application, staff reviewed the request against the standards in
Section 113-27(c) of the Code, which provides the variance standards in compliance with
Minnesota State Statute Section 462.357. The burden of proof is on the applicant to show that
the request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter and consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Each variance application must be reviewed based on the unique circumstance of the
application. For that reason, no variance sets a precedent because no two circumstances are
identical. However, if the city finds itself granting numerous similar variances, the City could
consider amendments to the city code.
Staff considered the following requirements in Section 113-27(c) when evaluating the variance
requests:
1. A variance may only be granted when the petitioner for the variance establishes that
there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. The term "practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means the applicant
shows compliance with the following:
a. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner.
The applicant proposes consolidating three 40-foot lots into two 60-foot lots for
single family residential use. The surrounding properties are all single family
homes. Staff finds that the proposed use of the lots as single-family homes is a
reasonable use of the property.
b. The landowners’ problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property
that is not caused by the landowner.
This property is unique because it was originally platted as three 40-foot lots,
each approximately 5,129 square feet, and the owner may maintain the three
lots as-is, despite the fact they do not meet minimum lot width or lot area
requirements in the R-1 zoning district. The applicant states consolidating the
lots into two 60-foot wide, 7,700 square foot lots makes constructing homes that
meet current zoning standards much easier. Consolidating the three lots into
two also brings the lots closer into zoning code compliance, despite the smaller
lots being allowed by right.
Staff find the platting history of the site and nonconformity of the proposed lots,
despite deviating less from the dimensional standards of the R-1 district than the
current lots, creates a unique circumstance not created by the landowner.
c. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality.
The neighborhood is predominantly single-family homes on lots of various
widths from 40 to 120 feet. There are several properties with 50, 70 or 80 foot
lots on the block. Some lots on the block appear to have been consolidated from
85
smaller lots in a similar fashion to what the applicant proposes to do with their
property. The area of lots on the block has a similar wide range of sizes.
Staff finds allowing the creation of the proposed will not alter the essential
character of the locality.
2. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Staff agrees with the applicant and finds that the practical difficulties in the variance
request are not solely due to economic considerations but rather to the manner in
which the property was previously platted.
3. The Board of Zoning Appeals may not grant a variance that would allow any use that is
not allowed under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land
is located. The property is located in the Single Family Residential (R-1) zoning district.
The applicant proposes creating single-family lots, which is a permitted use. Staff finds
the variance will not permit a use not allowed in the zoning district where the property
is located.
4. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff finds that the variance is in line with the purpose of the R-1 district, which is
“to provide for detached single-family dwelling units at a low density along with directly
related and complementary uses.”
Staff also finds that the proposal to renovate the existing house is in line with the first
housing goal of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan which is to “Maintain Housing Quality -
Maintain a high-quality living environment, preserve stable residential neighborhoods,
and where necessary, improve of the condition of existing housing stock in the City.”
Staff finds the variance request is in harmony with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and
the R-1 Single Family Residence zoning district.
5. Finally, when reviewing a variance, the City must first determine whether or not there is
a practical difficulty and, if so, is the requested variance the minimum action necessary
to eliminate the practical difficulty? The applicant considered maintaining the current
40-foot lots. Under the current zoning regulations, it is difficult to build single family
homes on 40-foot lots without additional variances. Staff finds the minimum action
necessary to eliminate the practical difficulty would be to grant a variance.
Public Notification
As required by ordinance, a neighborhood notice was published in the local paper of record and
mailed to all properties within 500 feet at least 10 days before the public hearing.
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting at City Hall on November 17, 2025. Four neighbors
attended and all supported the lot consolidation request.
At the time of this staff report, staff has received one letter in support of the applications.
86
Please see the email attached to this report.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the lot consolidation to combine three lots into two lots and the
variance application to allow the new lots to be below the minimum lot width and lot area
required in the R-1 zoning district.
Next Steps
City Council is tentatively scheduled to act on the lot consolidation and variance applications on
January 6, 2026. Once City Council approves the applications, the applicant will have 120 days to
submit a final plat application for Council approval.
Staff Contact Information
Prepared by:
Jacquelyn Kramer
Senior Planner
jkramer@goldenvalleymn.gov
Reviewed by:
Chloe McGuire
Deputy Community Development Director
cmcguire@goldenvalleymn.gov
87
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
1. CALL TO ORDER AND LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
• Chair Ruby called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and read the Land Acknowledgement
• Regular Members Present: Amy Barnstorff, Gary Cohen, Mike Ruby, Eric Van Oss, David Hill
• Regular Members Absent: Martin Sicotte and Chuck Segelbaum
• Student Member, Status: Remy Rosenberg
• Staff Members Present: Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Steven Okey, Associate Planner
• Council Member Present: Sophia Ginis
2. CONSENT AGENDA:
• Barnstorff noted that on the October 27, 2025, minutes, her name was spelled incorrectly in the
notes.
• Ruby noted it would be changed.
2.A. Approval of agenda
2.B. Approval of October 27, 2026, meeting minutes
• Ruby asked for a motion to approve
• Cohen moved to approve with the update
• Van Oss seconded
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
3.A. Minor Subdivision and Variance at 400 Sunnyridge Lane
• Ruby shared how the public hearing process works.
• Kramer presented the Minor Subdivision and Variance at 400 Sunnyridge Lane as found in the
Agenda Packet. She noted that there are four emails in support of the application and that the
Staff is recommending approval.
• Barnstorff asked why it was possible to do an administrative approval for 40 feet but not for
the 60 feet.
• Kramer stated that the site was originally platted for three 40-foot lots, and then at some
point, they were all combined into one 120-foot-wide lot. She explained that the County gives
the ability to go back to any previous plat that is approved, and the City signed off on that,
which is why it did not come before the Commission. She noted that the Code has a lot
requirement of 80 feet, so it cannot be consolidated into two 60-foot lots without a variance.
• Hill asked if the site had been just bought or torn down in the last month.
• Kramer explained that the house was bought in March and recently torn down because of the
shape of the house on the lot, which allows for consolidation and not having to worry about
existing house setbacks.
• Ruby opened up the public hearing.
• Casey Pavick, 109 Mattis Lane, stated that the first house he bought was on a 40-foot lot, and
was part of the process to try to add a second-story to their property or something bigger, but
he was denied the possibility because neighbors told those who were on bigger lots that they
could not do that. He stated that he has since moved, but has friends who are still on the 40-
foot lots and are not able to build a taller house. He explained that the process with 40-foot
lots has changed and that there is no buildability to the lots anymore. He shared that he feels 88
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
like other residents are demonizing those who live on 40-foot lots or, in this case, trying to
make two 60-foot lots, but in actuality, it is creating sustainability and a way to develop the
properties.
• John Haberman, 320 Sunnyridge Lane, stated that he is two doors down and is very much in
support of this, as the house that was there was a blight on the block. He added they are very
much in support of it.
• Ruby closed the public hearing and opened the item for discussion.
• Cohen noted that all the comments that have been received or stated in the meetings have
been in support of this. He stated that he supports approving it.
• Barnstorff shared that she is in support of this and that the Staff laid out that it meets all the
necessary pieces and the City's goals of building more houses.
• Hill agreed with the past two Commissioners. He added that the chance to take one house
that was blighted and build two houses is good from a sustainability perspective.
• Cohen added that everyone should look into the racial covenants that may be on properties
and that the current owner is doing the correct thing with that.
• Ruby shared his support. He then asked for a motion.
• Van Oss made the motion.
• Barnstorff seconded the motion.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
3.B. Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Preliminary Plat for Breck School, 123
Ottawa Avenue North
• Ruby explained how the public hearing process works.
• Kramer interjected that the earlier comment about the difficulty of building on the 40-foot
lots is being looked into along with the Missing Middle Housing Study, and loosening
restrictions to help with the 40-foot lots.
• Van Oss asked if a two-car garage could be able to be built on a 40-foot lot.
• Kramer shared that it would be really hard, but the City is also looking into the possibility of
changing the requirements for garages on the narrow lots. She added that it is part of the
Parking Code that is going to the Council on December 16.
• Kramer presented the information on the Preliminary PUD and Preliminary Plat for Breck
School as found in the Agenda Packet. She noted that the Staff is recommending approval for
both, but the approval of the plat is dependent on the approval of the PUD.
• Van Oss asked for the off-site transportation improvements, and who is responsible for the
funding of it.
• Kramer shared that in conversations with Breck, the school has indicated they are willing to
put money down for these. She added that the details will be worked out in the development
agreement that will be approved along with the final PUD and final plat.
• Ruby stated that during the presentation, it was stated that there are opportunities for
improvement. He noted that in making decisions that night, he did not like the idea of making
decisions based on opportunities. He asked how the Commission will move forward with facts
and things that will be done.
• Kramer explained that because it is a preliminary PUD, the Staff is looking for a
recommendation on amenity points; certain things should be seen in the development
contract. She added that then the Staff will work with Breck to put numbers to those
contracts and make it legally binding, before going to the Council with the final plat and the
final PUD. She noted that the Council would not approve any plans until there were specifics
for all of the items.
• Cohen asked if the final PUD approval goes straight to the Council or does it goes back before 89
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
the Commission.
• Kramer noted that there was research done on it, but it is believed that the final PUD and final
plat only have to go to the City Council.
• Ruby noted that he was providing an opportunity for the developers or the school to come up
and speak.
• Dr. Natalia Hernandez, Head of School at Breck, shared that she is a resident of Golden Valley
and has two daughters who graduated from Breck. She noted that the school sits on 55 acres
of land was stewarded and unseated by the Dakota people. She added that Breck shares with
the City in the commitment to increase and amplify the voices of the Native families. She
thanked the City Staff for their partnership with the school. She explained that Breck was
found in 1886 and has been across several sights in Minnesota before landing in the City in
1980. She shared that the mission is to create confident learners who lead lives of intellectual
curiosity, self-knowledge, and social responsibility. She noted that Breck is a premier
independent school with a national reputation, and as such, the school knows it has to invest
in the school, building, and land with a deep understanding of a comprehensive site plan and
what it means to steward the land and building well. She added that no one benefits from an
aging building or land that is not well-kept. She noted that all of the pieces that were looked
at were looked at with a deep lens of what that means to be in partnership with Golden
Valley. She stated that Breck is Breck because it is in Golden Valley. She explained that the
improvements that are being talked about reinforce the school’s commitment to Golden
Valley. She pointed out that the improvements to the academic centers are to the Mind,
Brain, and Education Center is one of only two like it in the Country, and the other is to the
Melrose Center for Leadership and Equity, both intend to improve the work of educators
across the Country. She reiterated that Breck is committed to being the kind of neighbors that
the City wants. She closed with that Breck believes now is the time to be good stewards of the
land with humility and gratitude for the City’s partnership, and the school recognizes that the
process will take time.
• Megan Rogers, Land Use Attorney with Larkin Hoffman, stated that she was present to
answer any questions and clarify parts of the plan as well. She asked for the traffic slide from
the presentation to be brought up. She explained that it is such an expansive plan that the
existing PUD has been amended four times, with the addition of the Upper School being the
most recent in 2012. She added that the amendment was phase one, but two through five
had not been outlined yet. She recommended that all of them be outlined by the school and
brought before the Commission. She noted that it is a 25-year site plan for the school, and it
makes sense because of the wetness of the land; it is important to look at the property
holistically to ensure that water traffic and pedestrians are moving through it efficiently and
are being accommodated before investing in vertical construction. She pointed out the
specific things that the school will control and do in the process: the Golden Valley police
officer that the school utilizes and has a contract with the City, restricting the turning off of
Ottawa, building a new drop off plaza, which will reduce the queuing ratio and back up on to
Glenwood, adding a gate at Natchez, pay for the signs and installation of the speed limit
monitoring signs. She noted that the neighbor is at the meeting in support of a lower speed
limit in the area, but because of certain Minnesota laws, the school does not fall within the
school zone speed limits. She added that the City does have discretion to change the speed to
25 miles per hour, and it would be supported by the school. She continued to share that the
school is committed to being a partner with the City and the neighborhood with Hennepin
County, as Glenwood Avenue is controlled by the County, and the school has room for a turn
lane that could be used if found to be needed in a study done by the County. She shared what
the neighborhood engagement process has been, with a preliminary meeting being held in
May of 2025, with a mailer being sent to all within 1,000 feet of the property. She added that 90
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
the meeting was well attended, with comments about traffic and a prior version of the plan
that included improvements to Natchez Park, which was not well received by neighbors who
lived immediately next to the park and is no longer part of the plan. She noted that changes
have been made based on engagement with the neighbors. She explained that the plan does
not seek to exceed the height rather just extend it, and look at a rendering for context. She
noted that in exchange for the flexibility, there are several public benefits that are included in
the Agenda Packet. She clarified that there will be no increase in enrollment as part of the
plan. She explained that phasing is being proposed to move from west to east with the
improvements, with priority improvements being to get the infrastructure in place first, so
vertical construction can take place. She noted that all vertical construction would be funded
by donor dollars.
• Hill asked if they feel that traffic would improve with what is intended to be done, as this
seems to be an issue.
• Rogers shared that the school does believe that the traffic will improve, and the study reflects
that by adopting the recommendations, the traffic will improve. She added that traffic around
schools is always problematic, but for a school of Breck’s size, traffic is well managed on
campus, and will only improve with the improvements shown. She noted that it is important
to collaborate with the neighbors as well.
• Ruby asked how to mitigate the issues of traffic during construction.
• Rogers explained that with the acquisition of the American Legion site, there is almost an acre
of staging and parking available to the school, and this is the core component as to why the
phasing would take place from west to east.
• Ruby asked if construction hours would be limited by the City.
• Kramer shared that the hours would be managed by the City, and the school would have to
follow standard construction hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
• Rogers added that there would be a construction management plan for each phase available
on the Breck school website. She noted that the students will not leave during the
construction phases, so the site will have to function and be operational for the student body,
while the improvements are happening on campus.
• Ruby asked if the Bassett Watershed has been spoken to, and how it will be protected
throughout the construction process.
• Kramer shared that Breck and City Staff reached out to Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Commission very early on in the process, and a preliminary review of the plans has been done,
and feedback has been provided to Breck and the City, which will be included in the final
plans. She stated that the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission can start
formal review of Breck’s plans after the City Council approves the final plat. She noted that
the City’s Stormwater Permits cannot be issued until Bassett Creek finishes their review and
sends the City a letter that approves of Breck’s plans.
• Ruby asked about it during construction.
• Kramer stated that there are requirements for soil erosion and control. She added that it is all
up to the City, which does its standard monitoring and check-ins. She noted that demolition
and construction staging are covered by the building permit as well.
• Barnstorff asked for further elaboration on improvements to pedestrian and bike
improvements inside the site.
• Rogers stated that there is a contingent of people who walk and bike to school, and there are
plans to improve pedestrian walkways at key points that were identified by the traffic
engineer, such as striping and pedestrian safety mechanisms. She noted that a ton of bike
racks are being added, and space to encourage the growth of that form of transportation. She
shared that it is very difficult to change how people have always done things, because it 91
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
becomes part of their muscle memory, but that is the thought behind the new drop-off plaza.
She added that the same is true of all of the bike racks and that there is an emphasis on
getting to school in that way. She noted that in the fall and the spring, the school encourages
the students to try the bus at no cost, and there is a day were students get doughnuts for
breakfast if they bike or walk to school.
• Ruby asked about the parking code changes that are being made with this application coming
before the Commission now, and the Parking Code going before City Council soon, whether
Breck would have to follow the old or new code.
• Kramer stated that the final PUD and final plat, all the final plans, would comply with the new
Parking Code, because the final applications will not go to the Council until after the Parking
Code is updated. She noted that there may not be a lot of changes that impact Breck.
• Ruby stated that the concern would be if there is another variance or something required.
• Kramer shared that there would be no necessity for a variance, because most of what is being
talked about with parking is allowing the shared parking, which does not change with the code
update.
• Barnstorff asked with PUDs whether they have to follow all the ordinances, or if they
specifically get variances from them.
• Kramer explained that with PUDs, it can be thought of as a separate zoning district that is just
for the site. She furthered that it overlays on top of the institutional zoning that is in
existence. She added that anything that is in the PUD ordinance, a new section of code, and
the plans and the development agreement can deviate from normal zoning standards with
Planning Commission, City Council, and Staff approval. She added that there has to be a
reason for it; it cannot be arbitrary. She noted that the PUD comes into law, and then it is like
a new zoning district that only applies to this site; anything not covered by the PUD then falls
back to the institutional zoning district that is beneath it.
• Barnstorff pointed out that within the new parking code, there is something about the
landscaped islands.
• Kramer shared that Breck would have to meet the landscaped island.
• Ruby asked that if Breck asks for more parking in the future, it would be outside this PUD and
would have to be an amendment.
• Kramer agreed that it could be an amendment.
• Ruby opened up the public hearing.
• Rosenberg shared that he worked on it in May and looked into how it would benefit the
neighborhood. He shared that the fields that are being built will be more functional. He noted
that the benefits to the soccer players, such as himself, for both going to school at Breck and
to also his club time are benefited by playing on better fields. He added that the
improvements to the actual learning facilities, such as the sound quality, will be helped in this
process and make learning better for the students. He noted that the construction will have to
be watched over, but the overall benefit will be great for the community as a whole.
• Milly Rosenberg, 4624 Sunset Ridge, shared that she goes to the school and is also a
community member of Golden Valley. She noted that there are a lot of benefits to both
neighbors and students. She added that there is a shortage of good soccer fields in the metro
area, so with Breck making a better field, it would be a benefit to many. She noted the ability
to use the playgrounds, which are maintained very well. She stated that the concerns that
were heard about traffic at the May neighborhood meeting are addressed within the plans.
She described programs that connect students to the community of Golden Valley, and shared
that it attests to Breck’s commitment to bettering the neighborhood.
• Jim Park, 130 Westwood Drive North, stated that he is the parent of three students who
attend Breck and lives in the community as well. He noted that Breck is a part of the 92
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
neighborhood, and that his family walks to school, and sees that Breck is part of the overall
community and is a good neighbor. He added that whenever Breck hears of an issue with the
neighborhood, the issue is addressed as quickly as possible. He stated that his kids benefit
from diverse learning, outdoor focus, and community engagement. He added that his family
views Breck as part of the neighborhood and one of the reasons why they stay in Golden
Valley. He noted that the communication, transparency, and follow-through, the school has
been very responsive, especially when it comes to traffic or if issues arise.
• Sandy Hendivil, 25 Natchez Avenue North, stated that she lives very close to Breck. She
noted that when she received notice back in May, she had many concerns about the houses
that were acquired and what would be done, the volume of cars on Natchez, with the speed at
which that is driven on the road, whether more athletic facilities would be put in, more
students added. She shared that as she attended more meetings, she was put at ease and
became less skeptical with each meeting. She noted that feedback was taken from the
neighbors, the plans were walked back with Natchez Park, which would have brought more
traffic, and have been good partners. She is happy with the plans as they are, as they are not
building taller buildings, nor drawing more students. She noted the traffic concerns and that
not a lot is going to be done, even with all the reminders being sent. She appreciated the
partnership solution that was brought forward in putting in speed limit signs, and that the
Planning Commission will move forward with that. She noted the idea of adding a sidewalk
and encouraged the Commission to work with the school on the plans.
• Bruce Pappes, 20 Archmore Drive, stated that he lived in the City when the construction of
Breck happened and was able to work at Breck as well. He added that he also helps to run a
Google group that was started by the City for safety years ago, which is continued in his
neighborhood with over 600 people. He added that the PUD that was done for the upper
school was probably not the best, as there were a lot of complaints, and not as much
transparency. He stated that with the most recent PUD, Breck reached out to him to help
involve the whole neighborhood, and all those who use the neighborhood as well. He noted
that he has been really impressed with how much the school has listened, changed the plans,
and has committed to working with the neighborhood. He noted that the neighborhood has
been very well served by Breck.
• Ruby closed the public hearing and opened the item for discussion.
• Van Oss noted that it is a good plan, and that the City has a premier institution in it, which is
also willing to invest. He added that the public process is admirable, and the plan was
augmented based on City and public feedback. He stated that traffic is always going to be a
problem, but any improvement to the current conditions is better than what is currently. He
shared that he is in favor.
• Barnstorff agreed with Commission Van Oss. She commended Breck for the positivity around
the process, which can be a challenging thing to do. She noted that she is supportive of it.
• Cohen stated that he is very supportive of this. He added that the process the accessibility
and approachability of the people doing the work and the presentations are some of the best
he has ever seen. He added that he attended three of the public meetings, just out of interest,
and was very impressed by the process. He noted the hope of a message going to the City
Council about the traffic work that Breck would like to do in the future.
• Hill agreed with Commissioner Cohen and noted how important Breck is to the community.
He thanked everyone who worked to get things to where they are today. He asked about the
traffic improvements that are needed by the City and the County, and how to make them
happen.
• Kramer stated that the recommendation is an overall recommendation, and that conditions
can be added to the approval beyond what is in the Staff report. She added that the 93
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
conditions would fall on the Applicant, not the County or City.
• Hill noted that he brings it up because the Commission will not see the final.
• Kramer stated that there may be a public hearing on the final PUD, and that feels appropriate.
• Van Oss asked if any traffic recommendations would be incorporated into the final
development agreement.
• Kramer noted absolutely, particularly the ones where Breck would pay for them, such as the
speed limit signs, off-campus improvements. She shared that a number would be agreed upon
and then included in the Staff report and final PUD.
• Hill asked if it would have one more chance at a public hearing.
• Kramer agreed that it would, where the final PUD and final plat would be discussed.
• Van Oss asked if the development agreement goes to the Commission.
• Kramer shared that it does not go to the Commission in final form, but the Staff can provide a
summary with bullet points of what would be in it.
• Ruby stated that he is in favor of it as well. He added that the City will do the things that it can
control, as does Breck.
• Ruby asked if there were any other questions or comments. He then asked for a motion.
• Cohen moved to recommend approval of the preliminary planned unit development and
preliminary plat for Breck school at 123 Ottawa Avenue, subject to the findings and conditions
in the Staff report.
• Van Oss seconded the motion.
• All voted in favor, and the motion passed.
4. NEW BUSINESS: -NONE
5. STAFF UPDATES:
• Kramer stated that tomorrow there is a work session on the Missing Middle Housing Study.
She explained that the background information, the market analysis, the fit test, and the table
of recommendations will be given to the Council.
• Kramer noted that there is a biweekly check-in for Commissions Hill and Van Oss with the
consultant, to go through the recommendations as well. She added that the Commission is
not expected to attend the work session. She added that the work session will also include a
discussion about a proposed public art policy.
• Ruby asked about the general maintenance of the items approved as part of a PUD.
• Kramer explained that the Development Agreement does cover installation, the securities the
City takes to make sure those things are installed, warranties taken on underground utility
improvements, stormwater, and the landscaping. She added that an escrow is taken, and then
an inspection is done one to two years later. She noted that ongoing maintenance is worked
out in the Development Agreement.
• Van Oss asked for conditions in a PUD versus a Development Agreement.
• Kramer stated that the PUD will immortalize the zoning standards, the performance standards
that would be seen in any other zoning district. She described those as uses, setbacks,
building heights, sometimes parking, if residential, then the number of units. She explained
that the conditions, such as requiring more bike installations or public art, are in the
Development Agreement.
• Van Oss stated that the Commission often does not see the Development Agreement.
• Kramer agreed but furthered that the Commission can make conditions of approval, and the
City Council would approve those, and then it would go into the Development Agreement.
• Ruby asked if the Development Agreement includes the items from the PUD.
• Kramer stated that it would not cover things such as dimensional standards like setbacks or 94
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Monday, December 8, 2026 – 6:30 p.m. | City Hall Council Chamber
7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427
building heights. She added that the PUD ordinance that is approved by the City Council is
part of the ordinance itself. She noted that whatever is shown in the plan becomes part of the
legal document of the PUD ordinance. She heard that the Commission would like to see what
would be included in the Development Agreement.
• Van Oss stated that it has come up a few times as to what is included, and there is no way for
the Commission to ensure that it happens.
• Kramer shared that the Commission does not necessarily have control over what exactly the
Council is approving. She added that recommendations can be made to the teeth of the
agreement.
• Van Oss added that the document can always be gone back to if the Commission is curious as
to what has been approved.
• Ruby asked if a PUD would be on the consent agenda.
• Kramer noted probably not, as many times there is a discussion involved with it. She
explained that there are no more meetings in December for the Commission but there is a
meeting on January 12, 2025.
• Kramer stated that the Board of Zoning Appeals will have a meeting in January.
6. COMMISSIONER UPDATES:
• Van Oss noted the call the next day for the Missing Middle Housing Study. He added that they
would use the same process as Commissioner Cohen used for Parking.
• Kramer stated that with the recent PUD application, it will be a good time to look at the PUD
Code.
• Ruby agreed because the point system and letting the applicants manage some of it seemed
like a hard way to do it.
• Cohen noted that it may be a good time to go over the bylaws about term limitations, as both
Chair Ruby and Commissioner Segelbaum will term out in 2026.
• Kramer noted that training would be coming on that.
7. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Ruby adjourned the meeting at 8:10 p.m.
95
SUNNYRIDGE LANE(A Public R/W)
ALLEY
(A Public R/W)Concrete WalkwayExisting HouseExisting HousePID: 1902924410110Address: 400 Sunnyridge LaneConcrete PID:1902924410111Address: 408 Sunnyridge LaneOwner: Richard Lewis KalmanPID: 1902924410109Address: 324 Sunnyridge LaneOwner: Kent Johnson & Kim FoleyWater Service(Per Markings in Field)8" DIP (Per Rec.)8" DIP (Per Rec.)Sanitary Service(Per Markings in Field)9" VSP (Per Rec.)9" VSP (Per Rec.)Found 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeFound 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeS89°38'41"E 128.11S00°11'05"E 120.01N89°38'51"W 127.78N00°20'40"W 120.02SUNNYRIDGE LANE(A Public R/W)
ALLEY
(A Public R/W)Concrete WalkwayExisting HouseExisting HousePID: 1902924410110Address: 400 Sunnyridge LaneConcrete PID:1902924410111Address: 408 Sunnyridge LaneOwner: Richard Lewis KalmanPID: 1902924410109Address: 324 Sunnyridge LaneOwner: Kent Johnson & Kim FoleyWater Service(Per Markings in Field)8" DIP (Per Rec.)8" DIP (Per Rec.)Sanitary Service(Per Markings in Field)9" VSP (Per Rec.)9" VSP (Per Rec.)Found 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeFound 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeS89°38'41"E 128.11S00°11'05"E 120.01N89°38'51"W 127.78N00°20'40"W 120.02 SUNNYRIDGE LANE10' D & U EASE., TYP.LOT 1, BLK 17,682 SFLOT 2, BLK 17,673 SF35' FSB25' RSB6' SSB60.00'60.00'128.11'12' SSB127.94'35' FSB25' RSB6' SSB12' SSB60.02'60.01'127.78'5' D & U EASE., TYP.10' D & U EASE., TYP.Civil Engineering ° Surveying ° LandscapeArchitecture5000 Glenwood AvenueGolden Valley, MN 55422civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cPROJECT
2025ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION10/31/25CITY SUBMITTALPROJECT MANAGERDAVID KNAEBLECONTACT NUMBER763-234-7523DRAWN BYDJKREVIEWED BYMPPROJECT NUMBER2510648776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.10/31/25KATES WOODS
SECOND ADDITION
400 SUNNYRIDGE LANE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422
DAVID AND JENNIFER KNAEBLE
227 SUNNYRIDGE LANE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422
OWNERREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NC1.0PRELIMINARY PLATOWNER INFORMATIONDAVID AND JENNIFER KNAEBLE227 SUNNYRIDGE LANEGOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422DAVID KNAEBLE763-234-7523DJKNAEBLE@GMAIL.COMSITE PLAN LEGEND:PROPERTY LINEPRELIMINARY PLAT NOTES:1.PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION: KATES WOODS SECOND ADDITION2.LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY:LOTS 314, 315 AND 316, "GLENWOOD", HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTATORRENS PROPERTYTORRENS CERTIFICATE NO. 10610113.SITE ADDRESS: 400 SUNNYRIDGE LANE, GOLDEN VALLEY MN 554224.PROPERTY OWNER: DAVID AND JENNIFER KNAEBLE, 227 SUNNYRIDGE LANE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 554225.SUBDIVIDER: DAVID AND JENNIFER KNAEBLE, 227 SUNNYRIDGE LANE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 554226.ENGINEER: CIVIL SITE GROUP, 5000 GLENWOOD AVENUE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 554227.SURVEYOR: CIVIL SITE GROUP, 5000 GLENWOOD AVENUE, GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 - RORY SYNSTELIEN - 612-615-00608.CURRENT ZONING: R1 - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL9.THE GROSS LAND AREA IS 15,354 +/- SQUARE FEET OR 0.35 +/- ACRES.ZONING NOTES:CURRENT ZONING:R1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIALPROPOSED ZONING: R1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIALZONING REGULATIONSMIN. LOT AREA: 10,000 SFMIN. LOT WIDTH: 80 FEET (MEAS. AT FSB AND CONTINUED 70 FEET FROM FRONT LOT LINE)MIN. LOT DEPTH: NASETBACKS:FRONT YARD: 35 FEETSIDE YARD: 10% [NORTH OR WEST]SIDE YARD: 20% [SOUTH OR EAST]REAR YARD: 25 FEETDRIVEWAY: 3 FEETBUILDING INFO:MAX. HEIGHT: 28 FEETMAX. STRAIGHT WALL: 32 FEET (THEN 2 FEET SHIFT FOR 8 FEET)EAVES CAN PROJECT 2.5 FEET INTO SETBACKSSETBACK LINED & U EASEMENT LINEZONING VARIANCE REQUESTS:MINIMUM LOT AREA [LOTS 1, 2]THIS PROJECT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT AREA REQUIREMENT OF 10,000 SF.MINIMUM LOT WIDTH [LOTS 1, 2]THIS PROJECT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT OF 80 FEET.96
Found 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeFound 1/2 InchOpen Iron PipeS89°38'41"E 128.11S00°11'05"E 120.00N89°38'35"W 127.78N00°20'40"W 120.00W Line of Lots 314, 315 and 316, "GLENWOOD"(Plat = 126.91)(Plat = 126.97)60.00
60.00
S89°38'38"E 127.9460.00
60.00
12BLOCK 1Drainage & Utility EasementDrainage & Utility EasementDrainage & Utility EasementDrainage & Utility EasementDrainage & Utility EasementDrainage & Utility Easement
Drainage & Utility Easement Drainage & Utility Easement Found 1/2 Inch RebarW/ Cap No. 44565Found 1/2 Inch RebarW/ Cap No. 44565R.T. DOC. NOKATES WOODS 2ND ADDITIONKNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble, as Trustees of the David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble revocabletrust dated November 8, 2016, fee owners of the following described property:Lots 314, 315 and 316, "GLENWOOD", Hennepin County, Minnesota.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as KATES WOODS 2ND ADDITION and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the drainage and utilityeasements as created by this plat.In witness whereof said David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble, as Trustees of the David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble revocable trust dated November 8, 2016,have hereunto set their hands this day of , 20.SIGNED:David J. Knaeble, Trustee of the David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble revocable trust dated November 8, 2016Jennifer R. Knaeble, Trustee of the David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble revocable trust dated November 8, 2016STATE OF , COUNTY OF This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20, by David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R.Knaeble, asTrustees of the David J. Knaeble and Jennifer R. Knaeble revocable trust dated November 8, 2016 My Commission Expires:Notary Public, Signature Notary Public, Printed NameNotary Public County,SURVEYORS CERTIFICATEI Rory L. Synstelien do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State ofMinnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that allmonuments depicted on this plat have been or will be set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01,Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat.Dated this day of , 20.Rory L. Synstelien, Licensed Land SurveyorMinnesota License No. 44565STATE OF MINNESOTA, COUNTY OF HENNEPINThis instrument was acknowledged before me this day of, 20, by Rory L. Synstelien. My Commission Expires: January 31, 20Notary Public, Signature Notary Public, Printed NameNotary Public County, MinnesotaCITY COUNCIL, CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTAThis plat of KATES WOODS 2ND ADDITIONwas approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Golden Valley, Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof heldthis day of , 20, and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2.City Council, City of Golden Valley, MinnesotaBy:, Mayor By:, ClerkCOUNTY AUDITOR, Hennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that taxes payable in 20 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat,dated this day of , 20.Daniel Rogan, County AuditorBy:, DeputySURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, MinnesotaPursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this day of , 20.Chris F. Mavis, County SurveyorBy:EXAMINER OF TITLES, Hennepin County, MinnesotaPursuant to Minn. Stat.Sec.508.62, I certify that this plat is approved for filing for lands described herein owned by the dedicators and included inCertificate of Title No. upon the prior filing of Certificate of Trust and Affidavit of Trustee marked .Dated this day of , 20, at O'Clock M.Susan T. Ledray, Examiner of TitlesBy:, Deputy ExaminerREGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that the within plat of KATES WOODS 2ND ADDITION was filed in this officethis day of , 20, at O'Clock M.Amber Bougie, Registrar of TitlesBy:, DeputyNBearings are based on the west line of Lots 314, 315 and 316, "GLENWOOD"having an assumed bearing of N 00°20'40" WFound Iron Monument (see map for type)(Plat=) Denotes a Record Dimension per the Plat of "GLENWOOD"1/2 inch by 14 inch Iron Rebar Marked "RLS 44565" to beset in accordance with State Statute Section 505.021, Subd. 10205100510SCALE IN FEET97
Hi Jacquelyn,
My wife, Rachel, and I live at 309 France Ave N in Golden Valley with our three daughters.
We received your letter about the proposed changes to the property at 400 Sunny Ridge
Lane in Golden Valley. We know the Knable's and are supportive of their desire to invest in
the neighborhood. They've been great neighbors and have made valuable investments in
the neighborhood in the past. We believe their proposal to sub-divide the property into two
60' lots is reasonable and appropriate for the neighborhood. Please let us know if you have
any questions.
Chris Green
98
From:Planning
To:Jacquelyn Kramer
Subject:FW: In favor of 400 Sunnyridge Consolidation
Date:Monday, December 8, 2025 8:04:35 AM
See letter of support below.
Steven Okey | Associate Planner | City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road | Golden Valley, MN 55427 | 763-593-3992
sokey@goldenvalleymn.gov
Pronouns: he/him/his
From: Madeline Sanchez <madelinejsanchez@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 8, 2025 7:35 AM
To: Planning <planning@goldenvalleymn.gov>
Subject: In favor of 400 Sunnyridge Consolidation
EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This message originated from outside the City of Golden Valley. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello,
We are writing to show our support for the proposed lot consolidation at 400 Sunnyridge. We live
across the street at 425 Sunnyridge and have for 7 years. We strongly favor two 60-foot lots vs three
40-foot lots as it is hard to imagine squeezing in three new houses where one once stood.
We know Jenny and Dave Knaeble and appreciate that they are considering what is good for the
neighborhood in their development of these lots. Since they currently reside on this street, we trust
that they will build two homes that are aligned with what the rest of the block and neighborhood
looks like, preserving what we all love about living in this corner of North Tyrol.
Thank you,
Madeline and Solomon Sanchez
425 Sunnyridge Lane
99
From:Kim Foley
To:Jacquelyn Kramer
Subject:400 sunnyridge lane
Date:Sunday, December 7, 2025 7:54:06 PM
EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This message originated from outside the City of Golden Valley. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi, we live next door to the proposed lot division: 400 sunnyridge. Since we cant be there
tomorrow for the meeting, we just wanted to voice that we are fine with subdividing it into 2
lots.
Kent and Kim Johnson
324 sunnyridge lane. GV
612-817-7362
Get Outlook for iOS
100
From:Martina Sailer
To:Jacquelyn Kramer
Subject:Sunnyridge Subdivision
Date:Monday, December 8, 2025 4:39:14 PM
EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This message originated from outside the City of Golden Valley. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Ms. Kramer:
We support the subdivision of 400 Sunnyridge Lane. 2 lots of 60 feet is far preferable to 3 lots
of 40 feet.
Sincerely,
Martina Sailer and Jesse Cook
307 Sunnyridge Lane
101
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community Development
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
3K. Adopt Resolution No. 26-011 Approving Official Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley
Prepared By
Jacquelyn Kramer, Senior Planner
Summary
Periodically, the City's Official Zoning Map must be updated to reflect recent ordinance amendments
that rezoned properties. The current Official Zoning Map has not been updated since 2021, so staff
recommends City Council adopt an annual resolution updating the map with all amendments from the
previous year. Staff is updating all public facing online maps to ensure all parcels have up-to-date
zoning information. Moving forward, staff intends to update the Official Zoning Map with rezoning
applications or any proactive zoning changes.
Financial or Budget Considerations
There are no financial or budget impacts associated with this resolution.
Legal Considerations
An outdated Official Zoning Map may lead to discrepancies between City Code text, the Zoning Map,
and zoning requirements on individual properties.
Equity Considerations
Regularly updating the City's Official Zoning Map follows the Effective Government and Management
Strategic Directive by upholding transparency and accountability with the community, acknowledging
mistakes and promptly addressing them.
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 26-011 approving the Official Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley.
Supporting Documents
Resolution No. 26-011 - Approving Official Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley
Exhibit A - Official Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley
102
RESOLUTION NO. 26-011
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE OFFICAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF GOLDEN
VALLEY
WHEREAS, per Section 113-56 of the City Code, the Official Zoning Map shall show
the division of the City into zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the Official Zoning Map shall be posted for viewing and download on
the City's website and shall be available upon request in the Community and Economic
Development Department office at the City Hall; and
WHEREAS, if changes are made in district boundaries or other matters depicted on
the Official Zoning Map, such changes shall be inscribed on the Official Zoning Map after
the amendment has been approved (or the permit has been issued) by the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, since the Official Zoning Map was last updated in 2021, City Council
has approved numerous zoning map amendments; and
WHEREAS, City staff has updated the Official Zoning map with all zoning map
amendments to date as shown in Exhibit “A”.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINNESOTA that this Council hereby adopts Exhibit “A” as the Official
Zoning Map of the City of Golden Valley.
Adopted by the City Council this 6th day of January, 2026.
_____________________
Roslyn Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
103
Resolution No. 26-011 (Exhibit A)
104
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Legal
763-512-2345 / 763-512-2344 (fax)
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 6, 2026
Agenda Item
6A. Review of Council Calendar
Prepared By
Theresa Schyma, City Clerk
Summary
The Council will review upcoming city meetings, events, and holiday closures.
Legal Considerations
This item does not require legal review.
Equity Considerations
This item does not require equity review.
Recommended Action
No action is required on this item.
Supporting Documents
Review of Council Calendar
105
Review of Council Calendar
Event Event Time Location
JANUARY
Sunday, January 11
Winter Market in the Valley (Indoors)10:00 AM – 1:00 PM Brookview
Bassett Creek Room
Tuesday, January 13
HRA Work Session (if necessary)6:30 PM Council Conference Room
Council Work Session 6:30 PM Council Conference Room
Sunday, January 18
11th Annual Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Weekend of Service:
Voices of Wisdom, Pathways to Peace
1:45 PM - Doors Open
2:00 - 4:30 PM - Program
The Club at Golden Valley, 7001 Golden
Valley Rd
Monday, January 19
City Offices Closed for Observance of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
2026 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Breakfast
6:45 AM - Doors Open
7:30 AM - Breakfast
Served
8:00 - 9:30 AM - Program
Minneapolis Convention Center, 1301
Second Avenue South,Minneapolis
Tuesday, January 20
Day Of Racial Healing Community Session & Watch Party 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM Brookview
City Council Meeting 6:30 PM Council Chambers
Wednesday, January 21
Golden Valley Fire Department Annual Promotion Ceremony 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM Brookview - Bassett Creek Room
Saturday, January 24
WinterFest 12:00 PM - 2:00 PM Wesley Park
(Wesley Drive and Orkla)
Monday, January 26
Town Hall: Overview of City operations, update on the Building Forward
City facilities project, and a Q&A moderated by Mayor Roslyn Harmon 6:30 PM - 8:00 PM Brookview
Tuesday, January 27
Golden Valley Business Connections 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM AAA - 5400 Auto Club Way, St. Louis
Park
FEBRUARY
Tuesday, February 3
Precinct Caucuses 7:00 PM Multiple Locations - See State Caucus
Finder for info
Wednesday, February 4
HRA Meeting 6:30 PM Council Chambers
City Council Meeting 6:30 PM Council Chambers
Sunday, February 8
Winter Market in the Valley (Indoors)10:00 AM – 1:00 PM Brookview
Bassett Creek Room
Tuesday, February 10
HRA Work Session (if necessary)6:30 PM Council Conference Room
Council Work Session 6:30 PM Council Conference Room
Monday, February 16
City Offices Closed for Observance of Presidents' Day
Tuesday, February 17
City Council Meeting 6:30 PM Council Chambers
106