HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025/11/10 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
NOVEMBER 10, 2025
6:15 p.m. Special city council meeting – Council Chambers
1.Call to order
a.Roll call.
b.Pledge of Allegiance.
2.Approve agenda.
3.Presentations – none.
4.Minutes – none.
5.Consent item.
a.Resolutions authorizing a grant application for Minnesota Department of
Employment and Economic Development contamination cleanup and investigation
grant for Beltline Station Development project - Ward 1
6.Public hearings – none.
7.Regular business.
a.Canvass results of the November 4, 2025 Municipal General Election
8.Communications and announcements – none.
9.Adjournment.
Immediately following city council meeting
Study session – Community Room
Discussion items
1. Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of
Zoning Appeals
2. Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Agenda special city council and study session meetings of November 10, 2025
Written reports
3. Conveyance of EDA owned land to the city – all wards
4. Sewer access charge (SAC) credit policy
5. Development update Q4 2025
6. Minnetonka Boulevard twin homes update – Ward 1
Members of the public can attend St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and city council meetings in person. At regular
city council meetings, members of the public may comment on any item on the agenda by attending the meeting in-person or by
submitting written comments to info@stlouisparkmn.gov by noon the day of the meeting. Official minutes of meetings are
available on the city website once approved.
Watch St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority or regular city council meetings live at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or at
www.parktv.org, or on local cable (Comcast SD channel 14/HD channel 798). Recordings of the meetings are available to watch on
the city's YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/@slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the meeting’s end.
City council study sessions are not broadcast. Generally, it is not council practice to receive public comment during study sessions.
The council chambers are equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505.
Meeting: Special city council
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Consent agenda item: 5a
Executive summary
Title: Resolutions authorizing a grant application for Minnesota Department of Employment
and Economic Development contamination cleanup and investigation grant for Beltline
Station Development project – Ward 1
Recommended action: Motion to adopt the resolutions authorizing the application for, and
upon award, acceptance of the award for a Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) contamination cleanup grant to support the Beltline Station
Development project.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to authorize an application for, and upon
award, acceptance of the award for eligible grant expenses to support the Beltline Station
Development project?
Summary: Grant funds will be used to support the ongoing Beltline Station Development
project through site clean-up and assessment. Staff will apply for approximately $430,000 in
grant funds. This request is before the council because if awarded, the dollar amount accepted
could be above the statutory authority of the city manager.
Financial or budget considerations: Any grant funding received will assist with the project
financial feasibility and bridge a new gap in the financing that arose from finding additional
contamination onsite.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolutions
Prepared by: Clancy Ferris, legislative & grants analyst
Reviewed by: Dean Porter-Nelson, redevelopment administrator
Jennifer Monson, economic development manager
Karen Barton, community development director
Joe Olson, deputy finance director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5a) Page 2
Title: Resolutions authorizing a grant application for Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development contamination cleanup and investigation grant for Beltline Station Development project –
Ward 1
Resolution No. 25 -__
Authorizing a grant application for Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development contamination cleanup and investigation grant for
Beltline Station Development project
Be it resolved that the City of St. Louis Park approved the Contamination Cleanup grant
application submitted to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED)
on November 3, 2025, by the city of St. Louis Park for the Beltline Station redevelopment site.
Be it further resolved that the City of St. Louis Park is located within the seven-county
metropolitan area defined in section 473.121, subdivision 2, and is participating in the local
housing incentives program under section 473.254.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council November 10, 2025:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5a) Page 3
Title: Resolutions authorizing a grant application for Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development contamination cleanup and investigation grant for Beltline Station Development project –
Ward 1
Resolution No. 25 -__
Committing Local Match and Authorizing Contract Signature for the grant
application for Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development contamination cleanup and investigation grant for Beltline Station
Development project
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park acts as the legal sponsor for project(s) contained in the
Contamination Cleanup Grant Program previously submitted on November 3, 2025 and the city
manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic
Development for funding of this project on behalf of the city of St. Louis Park; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance,
and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate project
administration; and
Whereas, the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application are
committed to the project identified; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park has not violated any federal, state or local laws
pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or
corrupt practice; and
Whereas, upon approval of its application by the state, the City of St. Louis Park may enter
into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project(s), and that the
City of St. Louis Park certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulation as stated in
all contract agreements,
Now therefore be it resolved that the mayor and the city manager are hereby authorized
to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council November 10, 2025:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: Special city council
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Action agenda item: 7a
Executive summary
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Recommended action: Motion to approve resolution declaring results of the Nov. 4, 2025
municipal general election and set the date and time for post-election review.
Policy consideration: Does the information provided meet the requirements for canvassing of
municipal election results as provided in Minnesota Statutes 205.185, subd. 3, St. Louis Park
City Charter Section 4.07, and St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 10?
Summary: Minnesota Statutes 205.185, sub. 3 states the canvassing of municipal general
election results must be conducted between the third and tenth days after an election. St. Louis
Park City Charter Section 4.07 requires the city council to meet and canvass election returns
within ten days of any regular or special election and declare the results as soon as possible.
As required by the city charter, the attached resolution includes:
• Total number of ballots cast
• Total number of spoiled ballots
• The vote for each candidate with a declaration of those who were elected
• A true copy of the ballots used
• The names of the workers and clerks of election
Additionally, Chapter 10 of the St. Louis Park City Code requires a post-election review. At the
time of canvass, the chief election official (city clerk) will select, by lot, a total of two (2)
precincts to be reviewed and set the date, time and place for the post-election review. Using
the actual ballots cast in the two (2) precincts selected, a hand count of ballots will be
conducted for the office selected in each precinct. A comparison of the results compiled by the
voting system with the results compiled by the election workers performing the hand count
must show that the results of the electronic voting system differed by no more than the
applicable percentage threshold, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 204C.36, from the
hand count of the sample tested. Valid votes that have been marked by the voter outside the
vote targets or using a manual marking device that cannot be read by the voting system must
not be included in making the determination whether the voting system has met the standard
of acceptable performance.
Financial or budget considerations: Election expenses are included in the 2025 budget.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution, Exhibit A (copy of ballots), Exhibit B (elections abstracts)
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Resolution No. 25 -____
Canvassing election returns of
St. Louis Park November 4, 2025 Municipal General Election
Whereas pursuant to St. Louis Park City Charter Section 4.07, the city council shall meet,
and canvass election returns within ten days of any election and shall declare the results as
soon as possible; and
Whereas Minnesota Statutes Section 205.185 sub. 3 states the canvassing of municipal
general election results must be conducted between the third and tenth days after an election;
and
Whereas the results prepared and certified by the election workers have been presented
in summary form to the city council for inspection,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council as follows:
1. The November 4, 2025 election returns having been canvassed, the votes received by each
candidate for city offices are as follows:
Council Member Ward 1
Candidate
Number
of Votes
Round 1
Percent
of Votes
Number
of Votes
Round 2
Percent
of Votes
Number
of Votes
Round 3
Percent
of Votes
Jerry Peterson 804 31.2% 808 31.5% 935 38.4%
Sarah M. Steffen 654 25.4% 654 25.5% Eliminated 0.0%
Daniel Bashore 1,105 43.0 % 1,106 43.0% 1,498 61.6%
Undeclared write-in
(UWI) 5 0.2% Eliminated 0.0% Eliminated 0.0%
Overvote 0 0.0% Eliminated 0.0% Eliminated 0.0%
Undervote 5 0.2% Eliminated 0.0% Eliminated 0.0%
Total votes continuing 2,573 2,568 2,433
**Total votes cast for
this office 2,573 2,573 2,573
Totally blank 39 39 39
Partially defective 0 0 0
Exhausted ballots 0 5 140
Total ballots cast 2,612 2,612 2,612
*Threshold to win = 1,287 votes
Daniel Bashore received the most votes (1,498), which was more than the threshold.
Daniel Bashore was declared the winner in three round(s) of counting.
*Threshold = ((Total votes cast)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1
**The total votes cast for this office does not include totally blank or partially defective ballots
as defined by City Code Sec. 10-4.
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Council Member Ward 2
Candidate Number of Votes Percent of
Votes
Jim Engelking 1,982 97.3%
Undeclared Write-in (UWI) 45 2.2%
Overvote 0 0.0%
Undervote 10 0.5%
Total votes continuing 2,037
**Total votes cast for this office 2,037
Totally blank 143
Partially defective 2
Exhausted ballots 0
Total ballots cast 2,182
Threshold = 1,019 votes
Jim Engelking received the most votes (1,982), which was more than the threshold.
Jim Engelking was declared the winner in a single round of counting.
*Threshold = ((Total votes cast)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1
**The total votes cast for this office does not include totally blank or partially defective ballots
as defined by City Code Sec. 10-4.
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Council Member Ward 3
Candidate Number of Votes Percent of
Votes
Sue Budd 1,410 71.8%
Miles Lerner 540 27.5%
Undeclared Write-in (UWI) 8 0.4%
Overvote 4 0.2%
Undervote 1 0.1%
Total votes continuing 1,963
**Total votes cast for this office 1,963
Totally blank 30
Partially defective 3
Exhausted ballots 0
Total ballots cast 1,996
Threshold = 982 votes
Sue Budd received the most votes (1,410) which was more than the threshold.
Sue Budd was declared the winner in a single round of counting.
*Threshold = ((Total votes cast)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1
**The total votes cast for this office does not include totally blank or partially defective ballots
as defined by City Code Sec. 10-4.
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Council Member Ward 4
Candidate Number of Votes Percent of
Votes
Sylvie Hyman 914 44.5%
Tim Brausen 1,118 54.5%
Undeclared Write-in (UWI) 15
Overvote 2
Undervote 4
Total votes continuing 2,053
**Total votes cast for this office 2,053
Totally blank 38
Partially defective 1
Exhausted ballots 0
Total ballots cast 2,092
Threshold = 1,027 votes
Tim Brausen received the most votes (1,027) which was more than the threshold.
Tim Brausen was declared the winner in a single round of counting.
*Threshold = ((Total votes cast)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1
**The total votes cast for this office does not include totally blank or partially defective ballots
as defined by City Code Sec. 10-4.
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
2. The number of spoiled ballots, the number of persons registered prior to the election and on
Election Day, the number of voter receipts, the number of absentee ballots, and the total
number of valid votes cast in the city are as follows:
Spoiled ballots 58
Registered at 7 a.m. 34,227
Registered on Election Day 318
Total registered voters 34,545
Voter receipts 6,635
Absentee ballots 2,247
Total voters 8,882
% voting citywide 25.7%
% voting absentee 25.3%
3. The clerk and workers of the election were as follows:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Marcus Harris-Paul, elections specialist
Amanda Scott-Lerdal, deputy city clerk
Brynn Hirsch, elections intern
Ward 1 Election Workers
1-1 Beth El Synagogue 1-2, Wat Thai 1-3, St. Louis Park City Hall
Kelly McHugh Margaret Marek Gerald Gunderson
Mark Schwartz Ross Penna Eitan Grad
Erin Koster Heidi Hogg Jay Jaffee
Christian Irving Chelsa Dominguez Joseph Miatech
Janice Jones-Klausing Leah Hollingsworth Jeanne Stevens
Trina Levin Gena Howard Julie Sweitzer
Theresa Ruttger Lauri Kraft Betsy Abramson
Dana Uhrig-Fox William Obert Richard Erickson
Chaiya Isenberg Stephanie Hendrickson Richard Erickson
Marvin Mohr Matthew Kinney Ellen Hanson
Barry Schwabe Caitlin Lietzau Mary Kundinger
Barbara Wilensky Alison Madson Kelly Munoz Hernandez
Jodie Kalla Jennie Piper-Bichinho Carol Post
Noreen Kaluza LeAnn Sawatzky Todd Kalk
Luiza Kieffer Debra Savitt Sharon Lehrman
Martha Malinski Thomas Zessman Mary Windsor
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 7
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Ward 2 Election Workers
2-4, St. Louis Park Rec
Center
2-5, Vista Lutheran
Church
2-6, St. Louis Park
Municipal Service Center
David Larson Loren Botner Wes Hanson
Jessica Knighton Henry Solmer Christine Johnson
Thomas Connell Amelia Merfeld Rogene Berquist
Karyn Crouse Janet Carpenter Kathy Gremillion
Ellen Lewin Alla Geretz Amy Kaczmarek
Jesse Schingen Dorothy Rand Ernest Tursich
Stephanie Anderson Joy Showalter Meredith McDonald
Mary Flynn Kelly Dahlstrom McCashin Jessolyn Odishaw
Jeffrey Gershone Mark Ennenga Karen Oelschlaeger
Lisa Pannell Tim Lieser Varun Pandit
Ruth Skalman Sylvia Wilson David Richards
Deborah Hill Linda Gibbs Ludwig Lindsay Pierre
Ryan McLaughlin Charles Weingartner Naomi Rockler
Randi Rood
Luke Wagoner
Jody Winger
Ward 3 Election Workers
3-7, St. Louis Park High
School
3-8, Aquila Elementary
School
3-9, Lenox Community
Center
Juli Bergman Julie Manuel Kay Drache
Lonni Ranallo Ishpreet Kohli Nicole Schwieters
Anthony Arnold Karen Tepley Kim Curran-Moore
Nancy Palmer Kyle Hakala Stephan Gipp
Jennifer Witthuhn Kellie Hultgren Laurie Schlueter-Hynes
Bob Dummer Marguerite Krause David Rotert
Kati Helseth Autumn Way Nancy Bartsch
Cynthia Jones-Klausing Kim Bartels Linda Laucher
Sumaya Moalim Susanne Mattison Walter Macewicz
Carole Williams Jean Miller Barbara Ruhl
Peter Ashkenaz Amy Nordstrom Janet Benson
John Crosby Ayan Ali
Larisa Gehmie Lisa Burtch
Khadija Ibrahim Rachel Copple
Stephen Slocum Sydney Ward
Nancy Whittlesey Julee Waterbury
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a) Page 8
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election
Ward 4 Election Workers
4-10, St. Louis Park Middle
School
4-11, Park Harbor
Church
4-12, Westwood
Lutheran Church
Anna Luckow Lawrence Grose Angela Fischels
Rachel Austin Gina Soucheray Melissa Murray
Arzella Howard Jim Brimeyer Gary Berkovitz
Irwin Schreiner Laura Jensen Jill Jewell
Rich Thorne Mary Kay Conway Lynn Orton
Joseph Margolis Paula Engelking RJ Twiford
Barb Osfar Kay Peltier John Cahill
Linda Thompson Meg Steuer Maya Horwath
Alene Walker Anne Vos Rapoport Ann Matko
Helene Freint Julia Davis Kathy McKay
Marjorie Kennedy Cathy Erlien Mary Obert
Jack Smyth Tamara Grodnick Barbara Person
Jennifer Zimmerman Anne Kertes Denise Bliss
Hafsa Shiikh-Ahmed Claudia Oxley Tamora Hartman
Martha Sanville Alexander Hintz
Mary Kay Brokaw Patricia Williams
Shawnee Twiet
4. True copies of the ballots are attached.
5. The post-election review is scheduled for November 20, 2025 at 10 a.m. at St. Louis Park City
Hall.
Now, therefore, be it further resolved by the city council that the following candidates
have been elected to four (4) year terms commencing on the first (1st) regularly scheduled
meeting of 2026:
• Council Member Ward 1 – Daniel Bashore
• Council Member Ward 2 – Jim Engelking
• Council Member Ward 3 – Sue Budd
• Council Member Ward 4 – Tim Brausen
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council November 10, 2025:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-1 P-01
2790
Typ:01 Seq:0216 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 1 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
44
49
54
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 9
St. Louis Park W-1 P-01
2790
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 10
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-1 P-02
2795
Typ:01 Seq:0217 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 1 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
Daniel Bashore
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
46
51
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 11
St. Louis Park W-1 P-02
2795
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 12
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-1 P-03
2800
Typ:01 Seq:0218 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 1 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Daniel Bashore
Jerry Peterson
Sarah M Steffen
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
46
52
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 13
St. Louis Park W-1 P-03
2800
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 14
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-2 P-04
2810
Typ:01 Seq:0219 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 2 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
46
53
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 15
St. Louis Park W-2 P-04
2810
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 16
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-2 P-05
ISD 273
2815-01
Typ:01 Seq:0220 Spl:01
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 2 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
46
54
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 17
St. Louis Park W-2 P-05
ISD 273
2815-01
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 18
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-2 P-05
ISD 283
2815-02
Typ:01 Seq:0221 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 2 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
47
51
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 19
St. Louis Park W-2 P-05
ISD 283
2815-02
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 20
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-2 P-06
ISD 270
2820-01
Typ:01 Seq:0222 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 2 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
47
52
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 21
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public Schools)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
St. Louis Park W-2 P-06
ISD 270
2820-01
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 270
(Hopkins Public Schools)
Vote for Up to Three
Johanna Hyman
Sara Wilhelm Garbers
Eric Mandel
Tim Molepske
Rachel Hartland
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
School District Questions
BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT
QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR
A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE.
To vote for a question, fill in the oval next to the
word "Yes" on that question. To vote against a
question, fill in the oval next to the word "No" on
that question.
School District Question 1
Approval of School District Bond
Issue
Shall the school board of Independent
School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public
Schools) be authorized to issue its
general obligation school building
bonds in an amount not to exceed
$140,000,000 to provide funds for the
acquisition and betterment of school
sites and facilities, including the
construction, acquisition and installation
of safety and security improvements;
the completion of various infrastructure
projects at school district sites and
facilities, including renovations for
Career and Technical Education, ADA
updates, single-use restrooms, parking
lot reconstruction, playgrounds, outdoor
learning areas, indoor and outdoor
athletic enhancements, and
modernization of learning spaces,
including special education
environments?
Yes
No
School District Questions
BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT
QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING TO
RENEW AN EXISTING CAPITAL
PROJECTS REFERENDUM THAT IS
SCHEDULED TO EXPIRE.
School District Question 2
Renewal of Expiring Capital Project
Levy Authorization
The school board of Independent
School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public
Schools) has also proposed to renew
the school district’s existing capital
project levy authorization of 8.7054%
times the net tax capacity of the school
district, which is scheduled to expire
after taxes payable in 2027. The money
raised from the capital project levy
authorization will provide funds for the
acquisition, installation and
maintenance of software, curriculum,
instructional equipment and improved
technology and technology systems in
various school district facilities, musical
instruments, and the purchase of
school-related transportation vehicles.
The proposed capital project levy
authorization will raise approximately
$15,667,898 for taxes payable in 2028,
the first year it is to be levied, and
would be authorized for ten years. The
estimated total cost of the projects to be
funded over that time period is
approximately $156,678,980. The
projects have received a positive
Review and Comment from the
Commissioner of Education.
Shall the capital project levy
authorization proposed by the school
board of Independent School District
No. 270 be approved?
Yes
No
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 22
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-2 P-06
ISD 283
2820-02
Typ:01 Seq:0223 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 2 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Jim Engelking
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
47
53
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 23
St. Louis Park W-2 P-06
ISD 283
2820-02
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 24
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-3 P-07
2830
Typ:01 Seq:0224 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 3 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Sue Budd
Miles Lerner
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sue Budd
Miles Lerner
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sue Budd
Miles Lerner
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
47
54
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 25
St. Louis Park W-3 P-07
2830
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 26
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-3 P-08
2835
Typ:01 Seq:0225 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 3 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
48
51
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 27
St. Louis Park W-3 P-08
2835
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 28
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-3 P-09
2840
Typ:01 Seq:0226 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 3 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Miles Lerner
Sue Budd
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
48
52
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 29
St. Louis Park W-3 P-09
2840
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 30
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-4 P-10
2850
Typ:01 Seq:0227 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 4 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
48
53
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 31
St. Louis Park W-4 P-10
2850
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 32
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-4 P-11
2855
Typ:01 Seq:0228 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 4 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Tim Brausen
Sylvie Hyman
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
48
54
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 33
St. Louis Park W-4 P-11
2855
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
Sarah Davis
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 34
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-4 P-12
ISD 270
2860-01
Typ:01 Seq:0229 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 4 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
49
51
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 35
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public Schools)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
St. Louis Park W-4 P-12
ISD 270
2860-01
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 270
(Hopkins Public Schools)
Vote for Up to Three
Eric Mandel
Tim Molepske
Rachel Hartland
Johanna Hyman
Sara Wilhelm Garbers
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
School District Questions
BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT
QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR
A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE.
To vote for a question, fill in the oval next to the
word "Yes" on that question. To vote against a
question, fill in the oval next to the word "No" on
that question.
School District Question 1
Approval of School District Bond
Issue
Shall the school board of Independent
School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public
Schools) be authorized to issue its
general obligation school building
bonds in an amount not to exceed
$140,000,000 to provide funds for the
acquisition and betterment of school
sites and facilities, including the
construction, acquisition and installation
of safety and security improvements;
the completion of various infrastructure
projects at school district sites and
facilities, including renovations for
Career and Technical Education, ADA
updates, single-use restrooms, parking
lot reconstruction, playgrounds, outdoor
learning areas, indoor and outdoor
athletic enhancements, and
modernization of learning spaces,
including special education
environments?
Yes
No
School District Questions
BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT
QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING TO
RENEW AN EXISTING CAPITAL
PROJECTS REFERENDUM THAT IS
SCHEDULED TO EXPIRE.
School District Question 2
Renewal of Expiring Capital Project
Levy Authorization
The school board of Independent
School District No. 270 (Hopkins Public
Schools) has also proposed to renew
the school district’s existing capital
project levy authorization of 8.7054%
times the net tax capacity of the school
district, which is scheduled to expire
after taxes payable in 2027. The money
raised from the capital project levy
authorization will provide funds for the
acquisition, installation and
maintenance of software, curriculum,
instructional equipment and improved
technology and technology systems in
various school district facilities, musical
instruments, and the purchase of
school-related transportation vehicles.
The proposed capital project levy
authorization will raise approximately
$15,667,898 for taxes payable in 2028,
the first year it is to be levied, and
would be authorized for ten years. The
estimated total cost of the projects to be
funded over that time period is
approximately $156,678,980. The
projects have received a positive
Review and Comment from the
Commissioner of Education.
Shall the capital project levy
authorization proposed by the school
board of Independent School District
No. 270 be approved?
Yes
No
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 36
Official Ballot
City General Election Ballot Judge_______ Judge_______
City of St. Louis Park
November 4, 2025
Ranked Choice Voting Instructions to the Voters:
• Vote from left to right in each office. Your first choice is the candidate you would most like to see elected.
• You are allowed to rank up to three (3) candidates for each office.
• Completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: () Candidate Name
St. Louis Park W-4 P-12
ISD 283
2860-02
Typ:01 Seq:0230 Spl:01
Continue voting on the school
district ballot.
Fill in the oval(s)
completely.
No more than one
oval in a column.
City Offices
Vote front and back of ballot
City OfficesCouncil Member Ward 4 Rank your first, second and third choice candidates in the
columns below. One to be elected.
1 1st Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
2 2nd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
3 3rd Choice, if any.
Select One
Sylvie Hyman
Tim Brausen
write-in, if any
11
21
40
43
45
49
52
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 37
St. Louis Park W-4 P-12
ISD 283
2860-02
General Election Ballot
School District Ballot
Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park)
November 4, 2025
Instructions to Voters:
To vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this:
Vote front and back of ballot
School District Offices
School Board Member
Independent School District No. 283
(St. Louis Park)
Vote for Up to Three
Sarah Davis
Shana R. Kelly
Meta Webb
Patrick Baldwin
Susie Kaufman
Deborah Deutsch
Malai Turnbull
Missy Morken
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
write-in, if any
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 38
City of St. Louis Park Municipal General Election November 4, 2025 UNOFFICIAL RESULTS
Election Statistics Total WARD 1 WARD 2 WARD 3 WARD 4
Votes Total 1 2 3 Total 4 5 6 Total 7 8 9 Total 10 11 12
SPOILED BALLOTS 58 19 9 6 4 15 6 5 4 20 5 7 8 4 0 4 0
REGISTERED AT 7 A.M. 34,227 8,340 2,688 3,125 2,527 9,700 3,962 2,452 3,286 7,687 2,854 2,501 2,332 8,500 2,699 2,681 3,120
REG AT THE POLLS 318 87 26 25 36 101 60 17 24 56 23 20 13 74 30 21 23
TOTAL REGISTERED 34,545 8,427 2,714 3,150 2,563 9,801 4,022 2,469 3,310 7,743 2,877 2,521 2,345 8,574 2,729 2,702 3,143
VOTER RECEIPTS 6,635 1,750 665 669 416 1,625 590 605 430 1,582 637 478 467 1,678 364 605 709
ABSENTEE BALLOTS 2,247 862 493 212 157 557 306 118 133 414 142 114 158 414 91 146 177
% Voting Absentee 25.3% 33% 43% 24% 27% 26% 34% 16% 24% 21% 18% 19% 25% 20% 20% 19% 20%
TOTAL VOTERS 8,882 2,612 1,158 881 573 2,182 896 723 563 1,996 779 592 625 2,092 455 751 886
% Voting citywide 25.7% 31% 43% 28% 22% 22% 22% 29% 17% 26% 27% 23% 27% 24% 17% 28% 28%
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 39
St. Louis Park – Council Member Ward 1
1st Choice Ward Precinct Jerry Peterson Sarah M Steffen Daniel Bashore UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
1 804 654 1105 5 0 44 2612
1 508 201 428 2 0 19 1158
2 175 254 439 0 0 13 881
3 121 199 238 3 0 12 573
2nd Choice Ward Precinct Jerry Peterson Sarah M Steffen Daniel Bashore UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
1 436 797 834 19 1 525 2612
1 213 267 452 8 0 218 1158
2 123 344 223 5 0 186 881
3 100 186 159 6 1 121 573
3rd Choice Ward Precinct Jerry Peterson Sarah M Steffen Daniel Bashore UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
1 611 265 241 61 1 1433 2612
1 213 110 83 41 0 711 1158
2 241 89 91 14 0 446 881
3 157 66 67 6 1 276 573
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 40
St. Louis Park – Council Member Ward 2
1st Choice Ward Precinct Jim Engelking UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
2 1982 45 2 153 2182
4 814 11 1 70 896
5 658 19 1 45 723
6 510 15 0 38 563
2nd Choice Ward Precinct Jim Engelking UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
2 661 39 0 1482 2182
4 208 9 0 679 896
5 275 18 0 430 723
6 178 12 0 373 563
3rd Choice Ward Precinct Jim Engelking UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
2 637 26 0 1519 2182
4 199 6 0 691 896
5 266 13 0 444 723
6 172 7 0 384 563
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 41
St. Louis Park – Council Member Ward 3
1st Choice Ward Precinct Sue Budd Miles Lerner UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
3 1410 540 8 7 31 1996
7 581 177 2 2 17 779
8 400 173 5 4 10 592
9 429 190 1 1 4 625
2nd Choice Ward Precinct Sue Budd Miles Lerner UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
3 475 562 35 3 921 1996
7 179 218 16 1 365 779
8 156 164 8 2 262 592
9 140 180 11 0 294 625
3rd Choice Ward Precinct Sue Budd Miles Lerner UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
3 287 175 30 2 1502 1996
7 117 62 12 0 588 779
8 90 56 5 1 440 592
9 80 57 13 1 474 625
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 42
St. Louis Park – Council Member Ward 4
1st Choice Ward Precinct Sylvie Hyman Tim Brausen UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
4 914 1118 15 3 42 2092
10 205 242 2 1 5 455
11 317 416 6 1 11 751
12 392 460 7 1 26 886
2nd Choice Ward Precinct Sylvie Hyman Tim Brausen UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
4 715 633 36 0 708 2092
10 197 136 3 0 119 455
11 266 214 18 0 253 751
12 252 283 15 0 336 886
3rd Choice Ward Precinct Sylvie Hyman Tim Brausen UWI Overvote Undervote Grand Total
4 251 238 49 0 1554 2092
10 71 55 7 0 322 455
11 94 94 18 0 545 751
12 86 89 24 0 687 886
Special city council meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Canvass results of November 4, 2025 municipal general election Page 43
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Discussion item: 1
Executive summary
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of
Zoning Appeals
Recommended action: None at this time.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: Based on guidance provided by city council members during the Feb. 3, 2025 special
study session, which was focused on establishing protocols for boards and commissions, it was
decided to schedule regular check-ins between boards and commissions and the city council
throughout the year.
The Nov. 10, 2025, check-in will spotlight the Planning Commission/ Board of Zoning Appeals
(BOZA) represented by the current chair, John Flanagan. The staff liaisons to the planning
commission are Sean Walther, planning manager, Gary Morrison, zoning administrator, and
Laura Chamberlin, senior planner.
The planning commission and the board of zoning appeals are statutory boards composed of
the same members. The planning commission serves in an advisory capacity to the city council
on matters where authority is granted to the council by state law or the city charter. These
matters include land use, comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, street modifications and
other general planning issues. Additionally, the board of zoning appeals reviews and makes
recommendations on matters referred to it or as required under the zoning ordinance.
The discussion will cover an overview of the commission's approved work plan, including any
completed tasks, ongoing projects and strategies for addressing unaddressed work plan items.
Additionally, the discussion will include opportunities for council feedback, potential
modifications or additions to the work plan, and any other relevant topics concerning the
commission's activities.
This check-in meeting will serve as the final scheduled meeting between boards and
commissions and city council members for 2025.
Financial or budget considerations: None at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: 2025 Planning Commission/BOZA approved workplan, 2025
accomplishments and 2026 workplan summary, bylaws, current roster
Prepared by: Pat Coleman, community engagement coordinator
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Board and Commission
Annual work plan
Approved by city council: February 18, 2025
1
2025 work plan │ planning commission and board of zoning appeals
1
Initiative name: planning and zoning application review
Initiative type:
☒Staff support (review project,
policy or program and provide
feedback)
☐Independent research project
☒Gather community feedback
☐Lead community event
Initiative origin:
☒Applicant-initiated
☐Staff-initiated
☐Commission-initiated
☐Council-initiated
Legally required (e.g. response to
Legislative changes or Judicial decisions)?
☐Yes
☒No
Commissioner lead(s) name(s):
All commissioners/board members
If joint commission initiative, list other board or commission:
Is this an established work group?
☐Yes
☐No
☒N/A
Initiative description: Review planning and zoning applications from third parties to the city; hold public hearings to help inform
commission recommendations, and BOZA and council decisions.
Strategic Priority: ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3 ☐ 4 ☒ 5 ☐ N/A
Deliverable: ☒ Research report ☒ Summary of community input ☐ Other ☐ N/A
Target completion date: Ongoing
This section to be completed by staff:
Council request (if applicable): ☐ Review and comment or reply ☐ Review and decide ☒ Informational only – no response needed
Budget required: n/a, application fees generally cover city direct costs
Staff support required: plan review, neighborhood meeting support, staff reports, recommendations
Liaison comments: Due to statutory requirements that the city respond to formal applications within 60 days, the volume and effort
involved in this initiative is a primary responsibility and impacts the progress on other initiatives list in the work plan.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2
2
2
Initiative name: Broaden participation
Initiative type:
☒Staff support (review project,
policy or program and provide
feedback)
☐Independent research project
☐Gather community feedback
☐Lead community event
Initiative origin:
☐Applicant-initiated
☐Staff-initiated
☒Commission-initiated
☐Council-initiated
Legally required (e.g. response to
Legislative changes or Judicial decisions)?
☐Yes
☒No
Commissioner lead(s) name(s):
All commissioners/board members
If joint commission initiative, list other board or commission:
Is this an established work group?
☐Yes
☐No
☒N/A
Initiative description: Identify strategies to broaden, and reduce barriers to, public participation.
Strategic Priority: ☒ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3 ☐ 4 ☒ 5 ☒ N/A
Deliverable: ☐ Research report ☐ Summary of community input ☒ Other ☐ N/A
Target completion date: Ongoing
This section to be completed by staff:
Council request (if applicable): ☒ Review and comment or reply ☐ Review and decide ☐ Informational only – no response needed
Budget required: not to brainstorm ideas; but to implement ideas may require resources, yes.
Staff support required: TBD, but most likely, yes.
Liaison comments:
Through the council’s/city’s boards and commissions review process:
•Commissioners have suggested the city offer stipends to reduce barriers to serving on boards and commissions (help offset child
care, transportation, and opportunity costs of serving the community and one way to show participation is valued). Council action
would be required to budget and approve the change.
•Commissioners continue to express interest in allowing people to comment during hearings remotely - like during the pandemic.
Or potentially to accept static voicemail or video comments instead of emphasizing written comments or in-person public
speaking. This requires council review, approvals, budget and additional staff resources for technical support and potentially
hardware, software and subscription services.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3
3
Past suggestions included the commission holding off-site study sessions and inviting residents to attend/participate. This would not
require council action. It would require city staff to organize and support the meetings and may include mailing and printing costs to
advertise the opportunity. Past examples of off-site meetings have included tours of recently completed development projects.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 4
4
3
Initiative name: Finalize updated light rail station plans (Arrive + Thrive)
Initiative type:
☒Staff support (review project,
policy or program and provide
feedback)
☐Independent research project
☐Gather community feedback
☐Lead community event
Initiative origin:
☐Applicant-initiated
☐Staff-initiated
☐Commission-initiated
☒Council-initiated
Legally required (e.g. response to
Legislative changes or Judicial decisions)?
☐Yes
☒No
Commissioner lead(s) name(s):
All commissioners/board members
If joint commission initiative, list other board or commission:
Is this an established work group?
☐Yes
☐No
☒N/A
Initiative description: Finalize updated light rail station plans (Arrive + Thrive).
Strategic Priority: ☐ 1 ☒ 2 ☒ 3 ☒ 4 ☒ 5 ☐ N/A
Deliverable: ☒ Research report ☒ Summary of community input ☐ Other ☒ N/A
Target completion date: Q1 2025
This section to be completed by staff:
Council request (if applicable): ☐ Review and comment or reply ☒ Review and decide ☐ Informational only – no response needed
Budget required: Plan was/is budgeted in community development department planning studies. Implementation steps may be folded
into future budgeting.
Staff support required: Yes. Staff will finalize plan, prepare reports, identify opportunities to advance implementation, and document
progress on the city website.
Liaison comments: Gathering community feedback was completed in 2023-2024, including council initial review of the final draft. Also,
commissioners reviewed public comments already. Having council formally accept the plan is the remaining task for this item. The plan
includes implementation steps that may need to be incorporated into existing commission initiatives and future work plans.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 5
5
4
Initiative name: zoning code update – phase 1
Initiative type:
☒Staff support (review project,
policy or program and provide
feedback)
☐Independent research project
☒Gather community feedback
☐Lead community event
Initiative origin:
☐Applicant-initiated
☐Staff-initiated
☐Commission-initiated
☒Council-initiated
Legally required (e.g. response to
Legislative changes or Judicial decisions)?
☐Yes
☒No
Commissioner lead(s) name(s):
All commissioners
If joint commission initiative, list other board or commission:
Is this an established work group?
☐Yes
☐No
☒N/A
Initiative description: Hold public hearing and make recommendation regarding changes to the zoning map and residential district zoning
standards to better reflect the city’s strategic priorities. This includes, but is not limited to, implementation of the following 2040
Comprehensive Plan housing strategies: allowing two-unit housing (twin homes and duplexes) on appropriately sized lots in low density
residential areas; and increase densities and housing options on high frequency transit routes and near rail stations.
Strategic Priority: ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☒ 3 ☐ 4 ☒ 5 ☐ N/A
Deliverable: ☒ Research report ☒ Summary of community input ☐ Other ☐ N/A
Target completion date: Q1 2025
This section to be completed by staff:
Council request (if applicable): ☐ Review and comment or reply ☒ Review and decide ☐ Informational only – no response needed
Budget required: yes, budgeted in community development budget for planning studies
Staff support required: Yes
Liaison comments: This was an extensive 2-year effort. Remaining tasks to adopt and smooth implementation will also require staff
resources beyond adoption and throughout the year.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 6
6
5
Initiative name: TOD
Initiative type:
☒Staff support (review project,
policy or program and provide
feedback)
☐Independent research project
☒Gather community feedback
☐Lead community event
Initiative origin:
☐Applicant-initiated
☐Staff-initiated
☐Commission-initiated
☒Council-initiated
Legally required (e.g. response to
Legislative changes or Judicial decisions)?
☐Yes
☒No
Commissioner lead(s) name(s):
All commissioners
If joint commission initiative, list other board or commission:
Is this an established work group?
☐Yes
☐No
☒N/A
Initiative description: Transit oriented development (TOD) zoning regulations (Arrive + Thrive implementation)
Strategic Priority: ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3 ☐ 4 ☒ 5 ☐ N/A
Deliverable: ☐ Research report ☐ Summary of community input ☐ Other ☒ N/A
Target completion date: TBD
This section to be completed by staff:
Council request (if applicable): ☐ Review and comment or reply ☐ Review and decide ☒ Informational only – no response needed
Budget required: Yes. May be included (partly) in community development dept. planning studies budget and zoning code phase 2
specifically. May go beyond that scope.
Staff support required: Yes
Liaison comments: Council acceptance of the plan needs to occur first. The plan includes implementation steps that may need to be
incorporated into existing commission initiatives and future work plans/budgets.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 7
7
Initiative Origin Definitions
•Applicant-initiated – Project initiated by 3rd party (statutory boards)
•Staff-initiated – Project initiated by staff liaison or other city staff
•Commission-initiated – Project initiated by the board or commission
•Council-initiated – Project tasked to a board or commission by the city council
Strategic Priorities
1.St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
2.St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
3.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development.
4.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and
reliably.
5.St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement
Modifications
•Work plans may be modified, to add or delete items, in one of three ways:
•Work plans can be modified by mutual agreement during a joint work session.
•If immediate approval is important, the board or commission can work with their staff liaison to present a modified work plan for city
council approval at a council meeting.
•The city council can direct a change to the work plan at their discretion.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 8
8
Future ideas
Initiatives that are being considered by the board or commission but not proposed in the annual work plan. Council approval is needed if the
board or commission decides they would like to amend a work plan.
Initiative Comments
Water conservation and
water recycling
Explore ways to encourage reduced water use, capture and reuse of storm water, and protect ground water
resources.
Housing analysis Explore setting policy targets for different housing types in the city based on present inventory and unmet
demand and promote homeownership opportunities as well as inclusionary housing goals.
Transitional industrial
zoning district
This item was identified in the 2040 comprehensive plan. Several amendments have been made to the existing
industrial districts that reflect elements of this idea through applicant-driven requests in the past few years.
Additional or more specific reforms may be identified in phase 2 of the zoning code updates that further resolves
issues. For this reason, it is a lower priority.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 9
Draft 2026 Work Plan List
2025 Accomplishments
1. Planning and zoning application review. The planning commission held public hearings and
made recommendations for the following projects:
• Terasă mixed-use development: PUD, SP amendment and CUP
• Minnetonka Blvd twin homes: PUD, preliminary plat and final plat
• Knollwood Chipotle: comprehensive plan amendment, preliminary plat and final plat
• Bickham Court apartments: PUD amendment
2. Zoning code updates.
• Phase 1 – Residential zoning districts. Concluded the two-year effort that included a
zoning code audit in 2023, drafting the code in 2024, and reviewing and incorporating
community input through surveys, open houses, and online engagement tools at key
points in the process. In January 2025, the planning commission held the public hearing
and recommended changes to the zoning map and residential district zoning standards.
• Phase 2 – Commercial, office, business park and industrial districts and related zoning
map changes and performance standards. Participated in a consensus workshop to kick-
off phase 2. Since then, the planning commission have participated in six study sessions
focused on the zoning code update, providing guidance on the mixed-use district
approach and performance standards.
3. Review the Arrive + Thrive: St. Louis Park Gateways Plan. The planning commission
discussed and approved the final draft of the Arrive + Thrive plans and gave staff direction
on implementation priorities and developing an implementation tracker. The commission
connected the outcomes of Arrive + Thrive with the work they were doing on the zoning
code update and created the MU-3 zoning district to implement transit oriented
development in the gateway areas.
4. Monitor the St. Louis Park Vision 4.0 and Metropolitan Council Imagine 2050 regional
planning processes. The planning commission received regular updates about Vision 4.0
and were encouraged to participate in engagement events.
5. Broaden participation. The planning commission provided feedback to the city council as
they determined the trajectory for boards and commissions throughout the city. The
planning commission also connected with community members during an off-site meeting
at Union Park Flats, a new, all-affordable housing development in the Elmwood
neighborhood.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 10
2026 Work Plan
1. Planning and zoning application review. Review planning and zoning applications
submitted to the city; hold public hearings to help inform commission recommendations,
and BOZA and council decisions.
2. Zoning code update. Review and recommend changes to the zoning code better reflect the
city’s strategic priorities and implement the comprehensive plan goals, policies and
strategies.
• Phase 2 – Commercial, office, business park and industrial districts and related zoning
map changes and performance standards. In the first quarter of 2026, the planning
commission will hold the public hearing and recommend changes to the zoning map and
non-residential district zoning standards and performance standards.
3. Implementation of Arrive + Thrive: St. Louis Park Gateways Plan. Review the online
implementation tracker and get annual updates on progress.
4. 2050 Comprehensive Plan. Identify how the outcomes of Vision 4.0 can be woven
throughout the comprehensive planning process, expected to last from 2026-2028. Review
selected regional planning documents as they apply to the city. Review policies and
strategies amended in the comprehensive plan and review iterations of the comprehensive
plan chapters. Monitor overall progress until adopted.
5. Broaden participation. Identify strategies to broaden, and reduce barriers to, public
participation.
• Have a joint meeting with other commission(s) on topic of shared
interest/responsibility.
• Hold a planning commission meeting at an off-site location to foster community
relationships. (e.g. study sessions with topics of general interest, development project
tours, etc.)
• Help recruit community members with diverse experiences to apply for vacancies on
boards and commissions, task forces, committees, or other volunteer opportunities.
Future ideas:
• Water conservation and water recycling. Explore ways to encourage reduced water
use, capture and reuse of storm water, and protect ground water resources.
• Housing analysis. Explore setting policy targets for different housing types in the city
based on present inventory and unmet demand and promote homeownership
opportunities as well as inclusionary housing goals.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 11
Planning Commission Adopted August 6, 1969
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Revised June 19, 1989
Revised November 18, 1992
Revised February 21, 2001
Revised May 18, 2005
Revised January 3, 2007
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS
Article I -– The Commission Section 1. The name of the Commission shall be the “Planning Commission”.
Section 2. The planning commission shall have the following powers and duties to:
(1) Prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city to be
submitted to the city council for implementation and to maintain such plan
and recommend its amendment to the city council as may become necessary.
(2) Initiate, direct and review, from time to time, a study of the provisions of the
zoning chapter and the subdivision regulations and to report to the city council
its advice and recommendations accordingly.
(3) Study applications and proposals for amendments to the zoning chapter and
applications for special permits and to advise the city council of its
recommendations.
(4) Study preliminary and final plats and to advise the city council of its
recommendations.
(5) Submit to the city council by April 1 of each year an annual report of the
activities of the commission during the previous year.
(6) Submit an annual work plan to the city council that details activities and
projected timelines for the calendar year. The Community Development
Department will develop the work plan for approval by the commission.
(7) Act in an advisory capacity to the city council in all matters wherein powers
are assigned to the city council by state law or city Charter concerning land
use, comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, changes in streets and other
matters of a general planning nature. Article II - Officers and Their Duties
Section 1. At its first meeting of each calendar year, the Commission shall elect from its
membership a Chair and a Vice-chair. The Chair position shall rotate annually. The staff liaison
shall be the Secretary of the Commission.
Section 2. The Chair and Vice-chair shall take office immediately following their
election and shall hold office for a term of one year and until their successors are elected and
assume office.
Section 3. The Chair shall preside at all meetings, appoint committees, and perform such
other duties as may be ordered by the Commission
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 12
Section 4. The Vice-chair shall act in the capacity of the Chair in the absence of the
Chair. In the event the office of the Chair becomes vacant, the Vice-chair shall become Chair,
and the Commission shall elect a successor to the office of Vice-chair for the unexpired term.
Section 5. A staff liaison to the Planning Commission shall be designated by the city
manager and shall be subject to the administrative rules and regulations of the city. The staff
liaison may facilitate or assist in the meetings and shall be responsible for recording attendance
of commission members. The staff liaison is responsible for keeping the city manager informed
regarding the business of the commission and shall communicate to the city manager any
problems or issues that may arise. The staff liaison shall also be responsible for assisting the
commission in considering their financial needs and, if deemed necessary by the commission,
shall request appropriate funding from the city council through the annual budget process.
Article III-Election of Officers
Section 1. Nomination of officers shall be made by the members of the Commission
present at the annual organization meeting and the elections shall follow immediately thereafter.
Section 2. A candidate receiving the vote of a majority of the entire membership of the
Commission shall be declared elected.
Section 3. Vacancies in offices shall be filled by regular election procedures for the
unexpired term.
Article IV -Meetings
Section 1. All regular and special meetings, records, and accounts shall be open to the
public and conducted in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law.
Section 2. The annual organization meeting of the commission shall be the first regular
meeting of the year at which time elections will be held and the schedule for the following year’s
regular meeting schedule will be considered.
Section 3. The Commission shall hold regular meetings on the first and third Wednesday
of each month at 6:00 p.m., provided however, that when the day fixed for any regular meeting
of the Commission falls upon any of the following holidays: Ash Wednesday, Chanukah,
Christmas, Veterans Day, Independence Day, New Year's Day, Passover (first two nights), Rosh
Hashanah, and Yom Kippur, such meeting shall be held at the same hour on the next succeeding
Wednesday not a holiday. (For Chanukah, Christmas, Passover, Rosh Hashanah and Yom
Kippur, the holiday includes the evening before the holiday.) All regular meetings of the
Commission shall be held in the City Hall of the City or other public building as noticed. The
commission may, by a majority vote, change the regular meeting dates for any reason provided
proper public notice of the changed meeting is provided to the public.
Section 4. The Chair or any two members of the Commission may call a special meeting
of the Commission after having given notice not less than three days in advance of such meeting
to each member of the Commission. Such notice shall provide the date, time, place and purpose
of meeting and be delivered personally to each member or be left at the member's usual place of
residence with a person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or written notice
thereof shall be left in a conspicuous place at the residence if no such person be found there. If
however, all commissioners attend and participate in the meeting, these notice requirements are
not necessary. The presence of any commissioner at a special meeting shall constitute a waiver
of any formal notice unless the commissioner appears for the special purpose of objecting to the
holding of such meeting. Notice of the date, time, place and purpose of a special meeting must
also be posted by the secretary on the principal bulletin board of the city at least three days prior
to the date of the meeting.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 13
Section 5. A quorum shall consist of a simple majority of the members eligible to vote on
matters before the Commission. Without a quorum, the meeting cannot be opened, and Planning
Commission business or voting cannot be conducted. Passage of any matter before the
Commission shall require the presence of a quorum and the affirmative vote of a majority of the
quorum.
Section 6. Voting on regular motions shall be by voice and will be recorded by yeas and
nays unless a roll call is requested by a member of the Commission.
Section 7. In all points not covered by these rules, the Commission shall be governed on
its procedure by Sturgis Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure.
Section 8. All meeting minutes, records and accounts shall be in writing kept in
accordance with MN Statute and Rules regarding preservation of public records and the MN
Data Privacy Act.
Section 9. No member of the Commission shall discuss or vote on any question in which
the member has a direct or indirect financial interest.
Section 10. Commissioners should only communicate on issues pending or before the
Commission during scheduled Commission meetings. If a Commissioner wishes to transmit
information regarding the business of the Commission, the Commissioner should present it to the
Staff liaison or other Community Development Department staff for distribution to the
Commissioners.
Section 11. Any Commissioner that is unable to attend a scheduled meeting of the
Commission may submit written comments pertaining to an item on the agenda to the
Community Development Director or the Secretary of the Commission for distribution to the
Commissioners prior to the meeting or at the meeting and may request that such comments be
attached as an addendum to the minutes of the meeting.
Article V - Order of Business Section 1. The order of business shall be as follows:
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Hearings
4. Unfinished Business
5. New Business
a. Consent Items
b. Other New Business
6. Communications
7. Miscellaneous
8. Adjournment
Section 2. Unless objection is made by motion of the Commission, the Presiding Officer
may modify the foregoing order of business in order to accommodate citizens present or to
expedite the business of the Commission.
Section 3. Unless a reading of the Commission meeting minutes is requested by a
member of the Commission, such minutes may be approved without reading if the secretary has
previously furnished each member with a copy thereof.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 14
Section 4. Unless there is objection from the Commission, Staff or anyone in attendance
at the meeting, Consent Items may be acted upon without discussion.
Section 5. The case before the Commission shall be presented in summary by Planning
staff or a designated member of the Commission and parties in interest shall have privilege of the
floor thereafter. In those instances where the matter is considered non-controversial and does not
warrant a summary, the Presiding Officer may entertain a motion without presentation of the
summary, unless an objection is expressed by anyone present.
Section 6. The Commission may postpone any case or continue any case for further study
and information until the next regular meeting unless otherwise designated.
Section 7. Any person desiring to address the Commission shall first secure the
permission of the Presiding Officer to do so.
Section 8. Each person addressing the Commission, shall, if requested by the Presiding
Officer, step up in front of the rail, shall give his/her name and address in an audible tone for the
records, and unless further time is granted by the Presiding Officer, shall limit his/her remarks to
five minutes. All remarks should be addressed to the Commission as a body and not to any
member thereof. No person, other than the Commission and the person having the floor, shall be
permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Commission,
without the permission of the Presiding Officer. No question shall be asked a Commission
member except through the Presiding Officer .
Section 9. No person, except City Officials and their representatives, shall be permitted
on the elevated portions of the Council Chambers without the express consent of the
Commission.
Article VI - Hearings Section 1. In addition to those required by law, the Commission may, at its discretion, hold public hearings when it declares such hearings will be in the public interest.
Section 2. In the event of a public hearing, notice of such hearing shall be published in
the official newspaper of the municipality not less than ten days before the time of the hearing.
Article VII - Attendance and Performance of Duties
Section 1. Regular attendance at meetings is a requirement for continued membership.
Commission members are expected to attend regular and special commission meetings and
assigned committee meetings. Planned absences communicated to the commission chair or
committee task force chair in advance of the meeting will be deemed excused. Any other
absence will be deemed unexcused. The commission will approve and record the approval of all
excused and unexcused absences.
Section 2. Council will be informed if a member receives three unexcused absences in
any calendar year, if a member attends scheduled meetings irregularly or if a member is
frequently absent from scheduled meetings.
Section 3. Commissioners are expected to adequately prepare for meetings. Commissioners unable to complete an assigned task should notify the commission chair or task force chair as soon as possible. The commission may ask the Council to review a member's appointment based upon its assessment of significant non-performance of duties. Article VIII - By-laws and Rules
Section 1. These by-laws are subject to the City Council’s Rules and Procedures for
Boards and Commissions, amended by Resolution 06-148 on September 18, 2006 and Chapter 2,
Administration, the St. Louis Park City Code.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 15
Section 2. Written notice of proposed changes to the Planning Commission by-laws
shall be provided to Commissioners thirty days prior to formal action by the Commission. These
rules may be amended at any regular or special meeting by an affirmative vote of a majority of
the entire membership. The City Council has thirty days to take action to modify the by-laws or
amendments approved by the Commission.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 16
1
BYLAWS OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Article I — The Board
1.1 Name of Board. The name shall be, THE BOARD OF ZONING
APPEALS, ("Board" or "BOZA").
1.2 Powers. The powers of the Board shall be vested in the Board members
(“Members” or “Commissioners”).
Article II — Officers
2.1 Officers. The officers of the Board shall be Chair and Vice Chair.
2.2 Chair. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board. The Chair
shall have the same voting rights as any other Member and may take an
active role in the debate of all matters, except where such matters involve
the Chair.
2.3 Vice Chair. The Vice Chair shall perform the duties of the Chair in the
absence, incapacity, or resignation of the Chair, who shall serve until the
Board elects a new Chair. In the event that the Board elects the Vice Chair
to serve as Chair, the Board shall then elect a Member to fill the Vice
Chair vacancy.
2.4 Absence. In the absence of the Chair, and Vice Chair, meetings shall be
conducted by the most senior Member present in terms of service.
2.5 Staff Liaison. A Staff Liaison (“Liaison”) to the Board shall be
appointed by the City Manager and shall be subject to the Administrative
Rules and Regulations of the City. The Liaison may facilitate or assist in
the meetings and shall be responsible for recording attendance of Board
members. The Liaison is responsible for keeping the City Manager
informed regarding the business of the Board and shall communicate to the
City Manager any problems or issues that may arise. The Liaison shall
also be responsible for assisting the Board in considering their financial
needs and, if deemed necessary by the Board, shall request appropriate
funding from the City Council through the annual budget process.
2.6 Delegation of Duties. Officers may delegate their respective duties
imposed under these Bylaws to other personnel as the Board may from
time to time deem appropriate.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 17
2
Article III — Election of Officers
3.1 Election of Officers. The Chair and Vice Chair shall automatically be
appointed to the persons actively serving as the Chair and Vice Chair of
the Planning Commission.
Article IV — Meetings
4.1 Meetings. All meetings of the Board shall be conducted in accordance
with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. The proceedings of the meetings
shall be conducted using the then current edition as may have been revised
of the Sturgis Code of Parliamentary Procedure.
4.2 Regular Meetings. The Board shall hold regular meetings on the first
and third Wednesday of each month at 6pm. The Board may, by a
majority vote, change the regular meeting dates for any reason provided
proper public notice of the changed meeting is provided to the public. All
regular meetings of the Board shall be held in the City Hall of the City or
other public building as noticed.
4.3 Holidays. The Board shall hold regular meetings as set forth in Section
4.2. Provided however, that when the day fixed for any regular meeting of
the Commission falls upon any of the council approved holidays.
4.4 Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board may be called by the
Chair or two (2) Board members, or by the City Council, for the purpose of
transacting any business designated in the call. The call for special
meeting shall be delivered in compliance with state law. The Liaison must
deliver to the Board at least three (3) days prior to the meeting a notice of
the date, time, place and purpose of the special meeting. If however, all
Board members attend and participate in the meeting at which the special
meeting was called these notice requirements are not necessary. The
presence of a Board member at the meeting at which the special meeting
was called shall constitute a waiver of any formal notice unless the Board
member appeared for the special purpose of objecting to the holding of the
special meeting. Notice of the date, time, place and purpose of a special
meeting must also be posted by the Liaison on the principal bulletin board
at the city hall at least three (3) days prior to the date of the meeting.
4.5 Emergency Meetings. An emergency meeting may be called by the
Chair due to circumstances which require immediate consideration. The
Liaison shall notify Board members by any means available. A good faith
effort shall be made to provide notice of the meeting to any news medium
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 18
3
that has filed a written request for notice of meetings. The notice shall
include the purpose of the meeting.
4.6 Quorum. The presence of a majority of all currently appointed
Members of the Board eligible to vote on matters before the Board shall
constitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting business, exercising its
powers and for all other purposes. In the event a quorum is not present, a
smaller number of Members may meet informally to discuss the business
of the Board and make informal recommendations, but, the only formal
action that shall be taken is to adjourn the meeting.
4.7 Voting. Voting shall be by voice or hand and must be recorded. Voting
by proxy is not permitted.
Article V — Hearings
5.1 Authority to Conduct Hearings. In addition to those required by law,
the Board may at its discretion hold public hearings when it declares such
hearings will be in the public interest.
5.2 Publication of Notice. In the event of a public hearing, notice of such
hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality not
less than ten days before.
5.3 Meeting Notice. Notice to the applicant or directly affected parties, by
mail, shall be given not less than five days prior to the date of the hearing.
5.4 Presenting the Case. The case before the Board shall be presented in
summary by the appropriate City Staff person or a designated Member of
the Board and parties in interest shall have privilege of the floor thereafter.
5.5 Postpone/Continue Hearing. The Board may postpone any case or
continue any case for further study and information until the next regular
meeting or until a special meeting designated for this purpose.
Article VI — -Agenda and Records of Proceedings
6.1 Agenda Preparation. The agenda for regular and special meetings of
the Board shall be prepared by the Liaison. Items to be placed on the
agenda may be proposed by the Chair, a Board member, the Liaison or at
the request of the City Council. Residents, businesses, or other interested
parties may contact individual board members or the Liaison to request
that an item be placed on the agenda for consideration. All agenda topics
presented by the City Council will be placed on an appropriate agenda;
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 19
4
requests from other parties will be placed on an appropriate future agenda
at the discretion of the Board.
6.2 Order of Business. The order of business shall be as follows:
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Consent Agenda
4. Public Hearing
5. Old Business
6. New Business
7. Communications
8. Miscellaneous
9. Adjournment
6.3 Modifying the Agenda. Unless objection is made by motion of the
Board, the Presiding Officer may modify the foregoing order of business in
order to accommodate citizens present or to expedite the business of the
Board.
6.4 Addressing the Board. Each person addressing the Board shall, if
requested by the Presiding Officer, step up in front of the podium provided
for such purpose, shall give his/her name and address in an audible tone for
the records, and unless further time is granted by the Presiding Officer,
shall limit remarks to five minutes. At the discretion of the Presiding
Officer, those addressing the Board may be allowed to position themselves
in other areas of the room. All remarks should be addressed to the Board
as a body and not to any member thereof. No person, other than the Board
and the person having the floor, shall be permitted to enter into any
discussion, either director or through a member of the Board, without the
permission of the Presiding Officer. No question shall be asked of a Board
member except through the Presiding Officer.
6.5 Record of Proceedings. All minutes and resolutions shall be in writing
and shall be copied in the journal of the proceedings of the Board.
Records shall be kept in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and Rules
regarding preservation of public records and the Minnesota Data Privacy
Act.
Article VII — Attendance and Performance of Duties
7.1 Attendance. Regular attendance at meetings is a requirement for
continued membership. Members are expected to attend regular and
special Board meetings and assigned committee meetings. Planned
absences communicated to the Board Chair, Vice Chair and/or Liaison in
advance of the meeting will be deemed excused. Any other absence will
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 20
5
be deemed unexcused. The Board will approve and record the approval of
all excused and unexcused absences.
7.2 Reporting. Council will be informed if a Member receives three
unexcused absences in any calendar year. Members may be removed with
or without cause by City Council.
7.3 Performance of Duties. Members are expected to adequately prepare
for meetings. Members unable to complete an assigned task should notify
the Board Chair as soon as possible. The Board may ask the Council to
review a Member's appointment based upon its assessment of significant
non-performance of duties.
7.4 Resignation. When a Member resigns, the Liaison shall contact the
Administrative Services Department and forward a copy of any
correspondence that may have been received. Administrative Services will
then initiate recruitment to fill the vacant position. A Member may
continue to serve beyond their expiration date until a successor is
appointed.
Article VIII — Board Activities
8.1 City Council Annual Report. The Board will submit an annual report to
the City Council summarizing the activities for the past year. The report
may highlight issues of concern and other information the Board feels
appropriate to convey to the City Council.
8.1a The Liaison will prepare the report for approval by the Board.
Members may submit signed addenda presenting alternative
conclusions or perspectives.
8.1b The report shall be submitted by February 1 or as soon thereafter as
possible.
Article IX — Bylaws and Rules
9.1 Amendments. These Bylaws may be amended at any regular or special
meeting by a majority vote of the quorum or Members present after
notices, in writing, containing the form of the section as it will appear if
amended as proposed, shall have been given at least five (5) days prior to
the meeting at which such vote will be taken. Such Bylaws and any
amendments shall be deemed to be approved by the City Council unless
the City Council takes action to modify such Bylaws or amendments
within 30 days after submission. Amendments to these procedures can
only be considered at a regular meeting.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 21
6
9.2 City Council’s Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions.
These Bylaws are subject to the City Council’s then current Rules and
Procedures for Boards and Commissions and the then current Chapter 2,
Administration, the St. Louis Park City Code.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 22
Current 2025 Planning Commission/Board of Zoning Appeals Roster
Name Role Terms Expire
John Flanagan Chair May 31, 2027
Mia Divecha Regular Member May 31, 2028
Sylvie Hyman Regular Member May 31, 2026
Matt Eckholm Regular Member May 31, 2027
Sarah Strain Vice Chair May 31, 2028
Tom Weber Regular Member May 31, 2026
Jim Beneke Regular Member May 31, 2028
Tess Machalek Youth Member Aug. 31, 2026
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: Boards and Commissions check-in with city council: Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals Page 23
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Discussion item: 2
Executive summary
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Recommended action: Provide feedback and comments related to recommended changes as
part of the zoning code update project phase 2.
Policy consideration:
Does the city council support staff and planning commission sharing the proposed changes to
the zoning districts, performance standards and administrative procedures with the public in
January 2026? The major changes include:
o Replacing the Office, Business Park and C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning districts
with mixed-use districts.
o Changing the zoning map district boundaries.
o Utilizing density and height bonuses to achieve policy objectives.
o Determining uses that need council review.
o Reducing parking minimum requirements.
o Revising the public hearing process for variances.
Summary: The planning commission provided direction to staff at five study sessions conducted
since May of 2025. Their feedback resulted in the draft summarized in this report. The
amendments to the zoning code propose updates to the administration procedures and zoning
district regulations. It also proposes updates to the special provisions which include parking,
landscaping, signage and architectural design. The amendment will reformat the ordinance into
the format established with the first phase of the update approved earlier this year.
Public outreach: In addition to a project webpage, community wide emails and articles in the
Park Perspective, staff conducted a community survey from May 22, 2025 to Aug. 24, 2025. The
survey was available in English, Spanish and Somali languages. There were 240 respondents
(239 in English, one in Spanish). Staff is conducting a second survey that will focus on the
business community and a third phase of engagement that will include open houses and online
opportunities is planned during January 2026.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion, proposed zoning map, future land use map, survey results,
draft zoning code update tables (principal uses, accessory uses, lot dimensions, site and
building dimensions, parking requirements, procedures).
Prepared by: Jeff Miller, consulting planner with HKGi
Reviewed by: Gary Morrison, zoning administrator
Sean Walther, planning zoning supervisor, deputy CD director
Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Discussion
Background. The second phase of the zoning code touches on the following city’s strategic
priorities:
1. Continue to lead in environmental stewardship. The zoning ordinance provides
opportunities to improve the environment through responsible development and
landscaping.
2. Providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development. The
business and mixed-use districts provide opportunities to create unique housing
conveniently located within the business areas of our city.
3. Providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably,
safely and reliably. Development performance standards within the zoning districts
provide an opportunity to enhance pedestrian experiences in the business areas.
To guide the city in achieving these strategic priorities, the 2040 comprehensive plan
establishes goals for our business, mixed-use and industrial park districts. These goals are
critical to the review of the zoning ordinance moving forward.
Commercial and office goals:
1. Preserve and enhance community commercial centers that offer desirable and
complementary commercial retail and services for the community’s residents, workers
and visitors.
2. Create commercial corridors that are functional, vibrant, environmentally sustainable
and present an aesthetically positive identity for the community.
3. Preserve, revitalize and foster neighborhood commercial nodes that provide essential
neighborhood commercial services, unique neighborhood identity and neighborhood
gathering opportunities.
4. Preserve and enhance office/medical centers to retain and grow the community’s
employment opportunities, tax base and convenient access to desirable services.
Mixed-use goals:
1. Continue to enhance the Park Commons (Excelsior & Grand) area as St. Louis Park’s
“town center.”
2. Pursue redevelopment of future light rail transit station areas as transit-oriented, high
density, well-connected mixed-use centers.
3. Expand the development of mixed-use districts within St. Louis Park to create a more
livable and connected community.
Industrial goals:
1. Protect and enhance the viability of the city’s designated industrial and employment
areas through reinvestment in long-term industrial areas and adaptive reuse and
eventual redevelopment in transitional industrial areas.
2. Promote the development of business park land uses in designated employment areas
as a way to expand the city’s employment base and opportunities, increase the city’s tax
base and meet the changing market and technological needs of the business sector.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Planning commission brainstorming session: To begin the review of the business districts, the
planning commission conducted a brainstorming session on April 16, 2025. The purpose of this
exercise was to generate ideas as to how the city’s zoning standards can better align with the
city’s strategic priorities and comprehensive plan goals listed above. Ideas were categorized
into the following:
• Parking reforms. This includes reducing and, where possible, eliminating parking
minimum requirements, reducing parking surface areas and encouraging structured
parking.
• Prioritizing small commercial businesses. Increasing small commercial corners, allowing
residential and commercial mixed-use more often, and limit areas where big box
commercial can be located.
• Prioritizing pedestrian-oriented development. Make safe routes to connect people to
businesses on foot or bike. Implement bike lanes, implement walkable facades for
businesses.
• Green space/eco space. The commissioners emphasized the need to reduce impervious
surfaces and encouraging native plant landscaping.
• Complete streets/Balanced mobility options. Encourage non-car options by increasing
transit frequency and encouraging bike and pedestrian routes.
• Adaptable reuse. Encourage mixed-use and office conversions along with structured
parking at big box shopping center areas.
• Develop community gathering hubs. Promote neighborhood community locations and
creating more spaces for community interactions was highlighted. The ordinance should
encourage patios and outdoor gathering spaces, city parklets on public streets and a
coffee shop in every precinct.
• Structure and language of zoning districts. The commission suggested renaming the
districts to better identify current and desired living and working patterns.
Pictured (left to right): John Flanagan, Tom Weber, Jan Youngquist, Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm,
Mia Divecha, Sylvie Hyman. Not pictured: Estella Hughes.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Following the April 16, 2025, planning commission brainstorming session, staff continued to
meet with the planning commission to discuss the following topics as part of phase 2 of the
zoning code update project. Each of the topics below incorporates ideas and priorities
generated from the brainstorming session, comprehensive plan goals and council strategic
priorities with the intent of simplifying the ordinance and updating it to today’s business
climate and city’s priorities.
1. Consolidating, reconfiguring and improving the business and mixed-use districts,
including adding a new mixed-use district for transit-oriented development in the light
rail transit (LRT) station areas.
2. Creating tables for principal uses and accessory uses identifying permitted/permitted
with standards/conditional uses, lot size standards and site/building dimensional
standards (e.g. setbacks, building heights). Similar tables were adopted for the new
neighborhood districts in phase 1 of the project.
3. Creating a new article in the zoning code to locate all use specific standards in one place
(for permitted with standards and conditional uses) to eliminate redundancy across
districts and make them easy to find in the code.
4. Updating the zoning map with the new business and mixed-use districts.
5. Reviewing and updating the development standards that apply to all districts,
particularly parking, landscaping, screening and signs.
6. Aligning development procedure requirements with Minnesota State Statutes,
particularly the variance procedure.
7. Incorporate the findings of the Arrive + Thrive plan, South side of Excelsior Boulevard
study and other area studies and plans.
8. Improving the overall structure of the zoning code to make it easier to use and find
regulations.
2040 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed zoning districts are required to be - and are
consistent with - the place type framework and the future land use (FLU) plan designations in
the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The place type framework can be found on pages 5-119 to 5-125
of the 2040 Plan, which includes the attached place type map. The future land use designations
and map can be found on pages 5-125 to 5-129, which includes the attached future land use
map.
Zoning districts and the zoning map. Staff is requesting direction from the council on the
proposal to reduce and consolidate the number of zoning districts as outlined below. And on
the proposed zoning map (attached) that shows the location of the proposed zoning districts.
Zoning Districts: Updating the business and mixed-use districts involves changes to the district
names, purpose statements, allowed uses, dimensional standards and the zoning map. The
update also includes removing and consolidating existing zoning districts and creating new
zoning districts. Updating these districts is intended to achieve alignment with the 2040
Comprehensive Plan and the Arrive + Thrive gateway plans. These changes included:
• Resequencing the two current mixed-use districts (MX-1 and MX-2) to reflect
density/intensity levels, create a third mixed use district, and rename districts from MX
to MU, resulting in:
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
o MU-1 (currently MX-2) Neighborhood Mixed Use
o MU-2 (currently MX-1) Community Mixed Use
o MU-3 (New) TOD Mixed Use
• Consolidate the current office, business park and neighborhood commercial districts
o Consolidate the office (O) district into the MU districts
o Consolidate the business park (BP) district into the MU and I districts
o Consolidate the neighborhood commercial (C-1) district into the MU-1 district
• Reduce the size of the general commercial (C-2) district and rename as the general
business (B-1) district
These changes are illustrated in the table below.
Proposed Consolidation of Districts
Proposed business and mixed use districts Current business and mixed-use districts
MU-1 Neighborhood Mixed Use MX-2, C-1
MU-2 Community Mixed Use MX-1, C-2, BP
MU-3 TOD Mixed Use BP, O, MX-1
B-1 General Business C-2
I-1 Light Industrial I-P
I-2 General Industrial I-G
These proposed changes result in the replacement of the O, BP and C-1 districts with MU
districts.
• Rezoning properties currently zoned Office to mixed-use is consistent with the
comprehensive plan because the office land use designation in the 2040 Plan allows for
mixed use, including residential. Based on the 2040 FLU plan and existing development,
it is appropriate to replace the O district with MU districts.
• The BP Business Park district is primarily located in the LRT station areas. This district,
however, does not allow residential uses. Both the 2040 FLU plan and the Arrive +
Thrive gateway plans guide the LRT station areas for mixed use development, so it is
consistent with the comprehensive plan and the Arrive + Thrive plan to replace the BP
district with MU districts. Additionally, when the BP district was originally established, it
was intended to be a transition district for the LRT station areas as they evolved from
single use, particularly industrial, areas to mixed use areas. So, it is appropriate to
complete the transition by replacing the BP districts with MU districts.
• The C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district facilitates small commercial uses along
commercial corridors such as Excelsior Blvd and Minnetonka Blvd, and small commercial
nodes at various intersections along transportation corridors. The C-1 district currently
allows residential uses in a mixed-use and limited scale, up to three stories. Since the
MU-1 and C-1 districts both allow small commercial uses and up to three-story mixed-
use buildings, it makes sense to consolidate these two districts.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Zoning map: The changes to the zoning districts as described above require amendments to the
zoning map to show where the new proposed zoning districts will be located. The proposed
zoning map, which is attached, shows the following:
• MU-1 Neighborhood Mixed Use district.
o Walker Lake area.
o Properties shown as C-1 on the existing zoning map.
o Portions of the transit areas as consistent with the Arrive + Thrive plan.
• MU-2 Community Mixed Use district.
o Properties shown as MX-1 on the existing zoning map.
o Portions of Park Commons area including Excelsior & Grand, Park Nicollet Clinic, and
Miracle Mile shopping center.
o Office zoned properties on Wayzata Blvd west of Highway 100.
• MU-3 TOD Mixed Use.
o LRT station areas.
o West End.
o Office zoned properties in Shelard Park.
• B-1 General Business district
o Properties currently zoned C-2 general commercial that are occupied with auto-
oriented businesses servicing St. Louis Park and surrounding communities. This
includes uses such as big box retailers and car dealerships.
• I-1 Light Industrial district is a renaming of the I-P district
• I-2 General Industrial district is a renaming of the I-G district
The proposed location of the zoning districts considers:
1. The existing businesses and buildings.
2. Future development as planned for in the comprehensive plan and area plans.
3. Compatibility with the adjacent neighborhood zoning districts.
Compatibility with adjacent zoning districts primarily considers height and density. The tables
below group MU, B, and I districts with compatible N districts to illustrate how similar they are
in height and density limits. For example, the tables show that MU-1 is compatible with the N-1
and N-2 districts in height and density. Note that additional standards are required when the
MU, B, and I districts are adjacent to N districts. Additional standards include larger setbacks,
landscaping, and screening.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Compatible Districts Based on Building Heights
District Building Height Maximum
N-1
Neighborhood
30 ft. (3 stories)
N-2
Neighborhood
40 ft. (4 stories)
MU-1
Neighborhood Mixed Use
3 stories max; 2 stories min
N-3
Neighborhood
75 ft. (6 stories)
B-1
Commercial
75 ft. or 6 stories
MU-2
Community Mixed Use
75 ft. or 6 stories max; 2 stories min
I-1
Industrial Park
75 ft. or 6 stories
I-2
General Industrial
75 ft. or 6 stories
N-4 Neighborhood More than 75 ft. (6 stores)
MU-3
TOD Mixed Use
75 ft. or 6 stories; 2 stories min
POS
Parks & Open Space
None
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Compatible Districts Based on Density
District
2040 Comprehensive
Plan Density Allowed
(dwelling units/acre)
Related Comp Plan FLU designations
N-1
Neighborhood
18 RL Low Density Residential: 3-18
N-2
Neighborhood
30 RM Medium Density Residential: 6-30
MU-1
Neighborhood Mixed
Use
30 RM Medium Density Residential: 6-30
MX Mised Use: 20-75
TOD Transit Oriented Development: 50-
125
N-3
Neighborhood
75 RH High Density Residential: 30-75
B-1
Commercial
50 COM Commercial: 20-50
MU-2
Community Mixed Use
75 RH High Density Residential: 30-75
MX Mixed Use: 20-75
I-1
Industrial Park
N/A IND industrial
I-2
General Industrial
N/A IND Industrial
N-4 Neighborhood 75 RH High Density Residential: 30-75
MU-3
TOD Mixed Use
75 ft or 6 stories;
2 stories min
RH High Density Residential: 30-75
MX Mixed Use: 20-75
TOD Transit Oriented Development: 50-
125
POS
Parks & Open Space
N/A PRK Park & Open Space
Changes from current zoning standards. In addition to the changes to the zoning districts
described above, staff is requesting direction from the city council on the following proposals
that either vary from or expand current regulations.
1. Should the city update the zoning ordinance to simplify and expand the availability of
these bonuses in more districts to further meet the council strategic priorities?
The zoning ordinance currently allows density bonuses in the MX-1 district. Additional
housing is allowed if the site meets one or more of the following:
a. The inclusionary housing policy.
b. Green building policy.
c. Provide on-site renewable energy facilities.
d. Inclusionary commercial space.
e. Travel demand management.
f. Publicly accessible gathering spaces.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 9
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Staff is considering simplifying the bonus review by focusing only on the inclusionary
housing policy and the green building policy. Offering the density bonuses would be an
opportunity for the city to apply the policies to additional projects, provided the
bonuses in the zoning code are optional for applicants to pursue. For example, the
developer of the Achromatic 6013 apartment building recently approved on Cedar Lake
Road was interested in more density, however, the zoning ordinance did not have the
density bonus option. Therefore, the project was approved without the desired
additional density and without the benefit of the city policies. Additionally, using density
bonuses in situations like this would be an opportunity to apply the city policies without
the use of TIF, as the Achromatic 6013 apartment building was approved without TIF
assistance.
2. Should the city amend the manner of approval of the various uses on the attached use
table? Is the council comfortable with administrative approval of developments that
meet all the dimensional requirements such as height, density, yards and only reviewing
conditional use permits for proposals that request density bonuses? Or should the city
establish additional thresholds that require conditional use permits (CUPs) more
frequently? Each of these options are discussed below. Please note that in both options,
specific uses such as in-vehicle service (drive-thru), auto body repair/painting, motor
vehicle service, motor fuel station, car dealership, and similar uses currently do not have
an administrative approval option; all require a CUP. The proposed ordinance will not
change this. They are all proposed to still require a CUP.
While most of the proposed approvals are consistent with existing approvals, and
specific approvals as discussed above will continue to require a CUP, there are
opportunities to approve certain size developments administratively and those that
exceed the established thresholds as a conditional use permit. Thresholds for triggering
a CUP could include:
a. If the proposed development meets the height and density requirements of the
zoning district, then it would be approved administratively. If the development is
requesting density and/or height bonuses, then it would require a conditional
use permit.
b. The city currently uses an “intensity class” table that establishes 7 classes, each
with a list of progressively higher maximum thresholds for height, density,
impervious surface, floor area ratio, trips per day, building area and hours of
operation. Class 1 being the smallest thresholds, class 7 being the highest. The
table is shown below as table 36-115C.
The C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district utilizes this table throughout
the list of uses. The only other district to use it is the Office district which uses it
for a couple specific uses such as office buildings. This table allows the code to
assign a specific class to a specific use as a trigger for a CUP review. For example,
the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district states that a shopping center can be
administratively approved if it does not exceed class 4. Exceeding class 4 requires
a CUP.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 10
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
This table could be updated by adjusting the thresholds and/or removing some
of the categories. For example, the areas of most concern expressed at public
meetings are height, density, and traffic. Therefore, we could keep those
categories but remove the others as they are rarely discussed or are somewhat
redundant such as building height, floor area ratio, and gross building area.
Special Provisions. The Special Provisions article includes parking & loading facilities,
landscaping, screening, signage, outdoor lighting and architectural design. The planning
commission’s discussion was focused on the topics with the most substantial updates, which
are parking, landscaping, and screening.
Parking: Staff is requesting direction from the council as to the extent the proposed ordinance
should reduce parking minimums.
Reductions to minimum parking space requirements to meet current market standards,
particularly for non-residential uses, are being considered. These reductions are consistent with
the feedback received from the community survey which indicated that the public is not
currently experiencing parking shortages in business and mixed use areas. Reductions in the
parking requirements will allow for a wider variety of uses to occupy existing buildings. For
example, inquiries for retail stores, restaurants, coffee shops, and bakery type uses are
frequently denied by the city due to insufficient on-site parking supply. Reducing the minimum
parking requirements will allow more of these uses to occupy existing buildings.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 11
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
The planning commission reviewed the parking standards and potential updates at their
September meeting. Commissioners provided staff direction on the following parking elements:
• Reduce and simplify parking requirements where appropriate. The regulations can be
confusing and should be presented in an easy-to-read and understand format.
• Maintain existing parking requirements for residential uses and apply them consistently
across all areas of the city. The planning commission is not recommending reductions to the
parking minimums for residential uses. They recognize that quality and desirable housing
includes adequate parking for its residents.
• Apply the parking requirements in Table 36-361(b) to the MU-1 district The MU-1 district is
proposed to cover the Historic Walker Lake area and all properties currently zoned C-1
Neighborhood Commercial. Currently, this table, referred to as “table b” establishes
reduced parking minimums to the Historic Walker Lake only. These parking minimums are
applied to new construction and additions to existing buildings only. They do not apply to
existing buildings; therefore, table b includes a parking exception that allows any use to
occupy any building regardless of the number of on-site parking spaces. Table b was created
as an experiment to see how reducing parking minimums can encourage the business
community within Historic Walker Lake. The planning commission noted the success of the
Historic Walker Lake area and is recommending that the use of “table b” be expanded to all
properties in the proposed MU-1 district. If approved, this would allow any use to occupy
any building in the MU-1 district regardless of the number of on-site parking spaces. This
includes all properties currently zoned C-1 in the neighborhood commercial nodes and
corridors such as Excelsior Blvd and Minnetonka Blvd. It is anticipated that this will make it
easier for desirable retail and food service businesses to locate in these neighborhood
commercial areas. The planning commission and staff acknowledge that this may result in
more use of the public on-street parking.
• Eliminate parking requirements in Historic Walker Lake. The planning commission and staff
believe there is sufficient public parking in Historic Walker Lake to facilitate removing
minimum parking requirements in the Historic Walker Lake area. This would be the only
area in the city that would not have minimum parking requirements for existing and
proposed business uses. Removing the parking requirements would allow existing
businesses to expand without having to create additional parking. It would also reduce the
chance that existing buildings are removed to facilitate a parking lot.
• The minimum parking requirements in “table a” apply throughout the city where “table b”
is not applied. There are few changes proposed to this table.
Landscaping: The planning commission indicated a desire for the zoning code to encourage
native vegetation and the consideration of ecological elements in landscape design. In line with
this goal, updates are being considered related to improving the health and resiliency of
vegetation plantings. Updates will be focused on planting requirements, tree diversity
standards, alternative landscaping, and parking lot landscaping.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 12
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Screening: Screening regulations are scattered throughout the code. Staff proposes to
consolidate these regulations into one screening section. Existing screening standards are
required for principal buildings, accessory structures, drive-thru facilities, parking lots, outside
storage areas, utility service structures, mechanical equipment, refuse handling, maintenance
structures and other ancillary equipment. The fencing section will be relocated to the new
screening section.
Currently, screening is required for all development types except single- and two-unit dwellings.
The planning commission discussed the potential for exempting additional housing types from
the screening requirement, e.g. missing middle housing types. As a result, screening will not be
required between other housing types such as apartment buildings, townhomes from
apartment buildings, etc. Screening is proposed to continue to be required when parking lots or
larger developments occur adjacent to the N-1 and N-2 districts.
Article II Administration & Enforcement. There is a proposed change to the process to match
state statutes. Other changes in this article simply reorganize or clarify the content.
A change is proposed to how a public hearing is conducted for variances. Currently the city
conducts public hearings for variances in the same manner as are conducted for conditional use
permits. This entails a notice published in the Sun Sailor and mailed notices to property owners
within 350 feet of the subject property. Minnesota State Statutes, however, do not require
cities to hold public hearings for variances. This gives the city flexibility in how to notify people
of the variance.
The planning commission recommends removing the requirement to post the variance
application in the newspaper. They also recommend reducing the mailed notices to property
owners of adjacent to the subject property, including those on the other side of the street
and/or alley. Staff will continue the informal notifications which include notifying neighborhood
leaders and posting a sign on the subject property notifying those that pass by that a planning
application was submitted and directing them to the city website for additional information.
Overall Zoning Code Structure. The overall structure is being cleaned up and reorganized to
make the code easier to use and find regulations. Some key structure updates are:
• Zoning districts regulations are being converted from a generally narrative format to a
table-based format, which will streamline the information and make it easier to find
regulations
• Standards that are specific to a use are currently located in each district and other places in
the code (e.g. General Provisions, Special Provisions), which results in redundancy for any
use that is allowed in multiple districts; these use specific standards will be located in one
place, a new Use Specific Standards article, and will only need to be stated once
• All general provisions will be located in one place, Article I General Provisions
• Definitions, which are located in multiple code articles/sections currently, will be located in
one place, Article VI Definitions
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 13
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Proposed Structure Current Structure
Article I General Provisions Article I In General + Article III General Provisions
+ Article VI Nonconformities
Article II Zoning Districts Article IV Zoning Districts
Article III Use Specific Standards Article IV Zoning Districts
Article IV Development Standards Article V Special Provisions
Article V Administration and Procedures Article II Administration and Enforcement
Article VI Definitions Article I In General, definitions in multiple spots
Community engagement. At the start of the project (May 2025), staff created a project
webpage with brief information about the zoning code update, a link to sign up for emailed
updates, and links to additional information including a storymap that contains more detailed
information and updates on drafts of the proposed ordinance.
• Park Perspective. Articles about the zoning code update-phase 2 were included in the
summer and fall publications. There is also an article planned for the winter edition. The
Park Perspective is mailed to all residents within the city.
• Three emails were sent to 10,376 people who signed up for notifications about the
zoning code update and general city news. These emails encouraged people to visit the
webpage and take the community survey. Additional emails will be sent throughout the
process.
• Staff attended the Ecotacular event at Parktacular and the fire station open house. Staff
discussed the update and encouraged people to take the community wide survey.
• A community wide survey was conducted from May 22, 2025 to Aug. 24, 2025. The
survey asked questions about the business districts, including topics such as permitted
businesses, pedestrian access, parking, and signage. A copy of the results of the survey
is attached.
• A second survey was conducted that is nearly identical to the first survey, but this one
was hand delivered to each business in St. Louis Park. The intent was to get a response
from the business community so their likes and concerns can be analyzed separate from
the community’s response. This survey closed on Nov. 7, 2025. The results will be
presented to the council at the study session.
• A video will be posted on the project webpage that describes the update. This
informational video is intended to educate people about the update prior to attending
an outreach open house in January 2026.
• Open house meetings will be conducted in January 2026. One meeting will be virtual,
the other in person will be taken in two parts. The first part in the afternoon, the other
in the evening.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 14
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Council considerations and staff/planning commission recommendations: In summary, the
planning commission and staff are asking for direction from the city council on the following:
1. Should the zoning districts be consolidated as outlined above? Planning commission and
staff are recommending the districts be consolidated as outlined above.
2. Should the zoning map be amended as shown, reflecting the location of the proposed
zoning districts? Planning commission and staff are recommending the zoning map be
amended as shown in the report.
3. Should the use of density and height bonuses be expanded into other zoning districts as
outlined above to further meet the council strategic priorities? Planning commission and
staff are recommending the use of density and height bonuses be expanded into the
MU and B districts so that the inclusionary housing policy and the green building policy
can be utilized on some developments that are not requesting financial assistance and
are not part of a planned unit development.
4. Should parking minimums be reduced, and if so, to what extent? Planning commission
and staff are recommending that the parking regulations currently applied to the
Historic Walker Lake area be applied to all properties proposed to be zoned MU-1,
which includes the properties currently zoned C-1 neighborhood commercial. And, to
remove parking minimum requirements for businesses located in the Historic Walker
Lake area only. In all districts, parking minimum requirements for all housing types
would not be reduced from current requirements.
Comments are also welcome on the following:
1. The manner of approval (administrative or conditional use) of the various uses on the
attached use table. Planning commission and staff are recommending that conditional
use permits be required for uses as stated in the proposed use table.
2. Changes to the variance process to match statutory minimum requirements. Planning
commission and staff are recommending changes to the administrative process for
variances to make the process more streamlined while maintaining transparency.
Next steps.
• The consultants and staff will be preparing a complete draft of the updated code by the
end of the year.
• Public input will be solicited on the draft updated zoning code in January 2026.
• The recommended updated zoning code will be presented to the planning commission
in February 2026.
• A public hearing on the recommended updated zoning code will be held by planning
commission in spring 2026 prior to the presentation of the recommended zoning code
to the city council for formal consideration and adoption.
Proposed Zoning Update
IU .¥ C: 0 .... GI C: C: �
-0 > .... u
City of Hopkins
City of Edina 0 0.25
Proposed Zoning
N-1 Neighborhood 1
N-2 Neighborhood 2
N-3 Neighborhood 3
N-4 Neighborhood 4
-POS Park and Open Space
-MU-1 Neighborhood Mixed Use
-MU-2 Community Mixed Use
-MU-3 TOD Mixed Use
-B-1 General Business
1-1 Light Industrial
1-2 General Industrial
-PUD Planned Unit Development
OD
0.5 Miles
.!!! 0 C. IU GI C: C: �
0 > :!:: u
Click here to view an interactive map showing both
proposed and existing zoning.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Page 15
IFFSt. Louis Park IJJ M I N N E S O TA
0pe.t're-nu-l.-lf"f$. ,n fhe-Parl-.
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map
2040 Proposed Land Use
RL -Low Density Residential .. BP -Business Park
RM -Medium Density Residential IND -Industrial
RH -High Density Residential
MX -Mixed Use
CIV-CiVic
.. PRK -Park and Open Space
TOD -Transit Oriented Development ROW -Right of Way
.. COM -Commercial .. RRR -Rall road
.. OFC-Office
0 0.5
Miles
1
Effective: August 19, 2025
Prepared by the City of St. Louis Park
Community Development Department
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion
Page 16
800 Washington Avenue North, Suite 103
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Community Engagement
Summary - August 2025
ST. LOUIS PARK ZONING CODE UPDATE, PHASE 2
This community engagement summary covers the initial engagement efforts for phase 2 of the
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update. As of August 24, the community engagement effort has
included an informational StoryMap, as well as a survey asking for people’s input on existing
neighborhood nodes/corridors and community districts/centers in St. Louis Park. The
informational StoryMap contains links that connect viewers to the survey versions in English,
Spanish, and Somali. The survey is now closed; however, the StoryMap remains active,
providing information to the public. Information on the zoning code project is available on the
city website, which links to the StoryMap and survey. The update and engagement opportunities
have been promoted at City events, through email blasts, and were included in the Park
Perspective newsletter.
Business and Mixed-Use Zoning: Informational StoryMap
A StoryMap is an interactive webpage that guides visitors through information in a sequential
manner. The StoryMap provides background information on the project, descriptions of the
current zoning districts, including uses and standards, and maps of the current business and
mixed-use districts overlayed with Place Type Frameworks. The StoryMap also includes
descriptions of the Place Type Framework and 2040 Comprehensive Plan, explaining their
relevance in the zoning code update. Finally, the StoryMap guides users through discussion
topics that are being considered in the code update and provides additional resources.
Business and Mixed-Use Zoning: Survey
A survey on business and mixed-use areas was the primary tool for collecting direct feedback.
The survey was embedded on the first page of the StoryMap and linked on the project page on
the city website. Respondents were able to select their preferred language (English, Spanish, or
Somali) and click a link to navigate to a separate webpage with the survey.
The survey was open from May 22 to August 24, 2025. There were a total of 240 responses,
239 of which were in English and 1 of which was in Spanish.
Survey Results
Neighborhood Commercial Node and Corridor Questions
1. The neighborhood commercial nodes and corridors that were visited by over half of
survey respondents, in order of most to least visited, were:
»Excelsior Boulevard, east of Highway 100 (81%)
»Texas & Minnetonka (80%)
»Louisiana & Cedar Lake Road (74%)
»Excelsior Boulevard, west of Highway 100 (65%)
»Louisiana & Minnetonka (57%)
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 17
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 2
»Dakota & Minnetonka (51%)
2.When asked about their experience in these areas on a scale from Excellent to
Neutral to Poor, 61% of respondents rated their experience as between neutral and
excellent.
3.55% of respondents said that the City should not allow additional neighborhood
commercial node locations.
»In the open-ended question asking where candidate locations for new nodes and
corridors should be, many respondents did not give a location but shared general
support for mixed-use and walkability.
»Locations that were suggested included:
-Existing transit corridors like light rail stops, bike/pedestrian paths, and bus
routes
-Cedar Lake Trail and North Cedar Lake Trail
-Cedar Lake and Virginia intersection
-Along the major east/west streets, including Minnetonka, Cedar Lake, and
Excelsior
-Louisiana & 27th or 28th, Wooddale & 36th
-Excelsior
-Extend the zone from France to Ottawa on Minnetonka
-Brookside, Creekside
-Alabama & 36th, stretching to Hwy 100
-Texas and Cedar Lake Road, 169 and Cedar Lake Road
-Beltline and 35th
-Minnetonka & Dakota
-Lake and Minnetonka
-Wooddale, south of Excelsior
-Walker Lake
-Around the St. Louis Park branch of the Hennepin County Library
-Texas and Hwy 7
-Excelsior/Brookview
-Texas and Wayzata, Louisiana and Wayzata
-Along 26th or 28th, Cedar Lake Road, or on Wooddale and Morningside
1%4%
35%
51%
10%
0%
20%
40%
60%
Poor Poor/Neutral Neutral Neutral/Excellent Excellent
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 18
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 3
4.When asked if the City should allow taller buildings in business and mixed-use
nodes/ corridors, 68% responded that maximums on building heights should be kept
the same, while 28% said to allow 4-6 stories.
»Comments regarding why respondents were not interested in changing building
height maximums focused on:
-The approachability of areas with shorter buildings
-Maintaining a quaint/small-town vibe, sense of community, historic feel
-Concerns about taller buildings causing higher traffic, parking issues, aesthetic
decline, privacy, crime, and reduced sunlight, visibility, and green space
-Interest in smaller-scale multi-family housing and commercial that blends into
the neighborhood
-Concern about fire safety in taller buildings above 4 stories
-Concern that higher buildings tend to have non-local landlords
»Comments regarding why respondents were interested in allowing some degree
of increased building height options focus on:
-Responds to rising housing needs and affordability
-Greater use and walkability of the area
-Increasing the tax base
-Maximize the remaining space for development
-Creating more retail opportunities
-Interest in matching building height to surrounding uses more directly
5.When asked if zoning for commercial uses nodes and corridors should be more
restrictive or more flexible, the average response skewed slightly towards more
flexible.
6.When asked about the types of commercial uses they would like to see more or
fewer of, many respondents stated they like the mix of uses in these areas as is; they
also mentioned matching parking and traffic flow with uses allowed.
»The types of commercial uses respondents stated they would like to see include:
-Restaurants, coffee shops, ice cream
-Grocery stores, health and wellness, specialty shops
-Alcohol/ places serving alcohol (breweries, wine shops)
-More outdoor seating areas
-Local businesses/ mom and pop shops
-Arts: galleries and performance spaces
-Hobby stores (books, crafts etc.)
-Services (salons, chiropractor)
-Small office-type uses (yoga studio, insurance, tutoring, medical, dental)
-Dispensaries/smoke shops
-Convenience and hardware stores
-Co-working spaces
-Day care
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 19
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 4
»The types of commercial uses respondents stated they would like to see fewer of
were:
-National chains
-Bars and liquor stores
-Dispensaries/smoke shops
-Auto-related uses (gas stations, tire stores, repair shops)
7.When asked if the zoning for commercial nodes and corridors should be more
restrictive or more flexible regarding residential uses, responses on average
skewed slightly towards more flexible.
8.When asked what type of residential uses they would like to see in these areas,
responses included:
»3-story apartment buildings
»Row homes, townhomes, condos (many added owner occupied)
»Housing co-ops
»Mid- to high-density
»Flexible housing for multigenerational living, “mother-in-law” units, ADUs, tiny
houses,
»Duplexs, triplexes, fourplexes
»Affordable mixed with full-priced housing units
»Single family homes
»Senior housing, single-level living options
»Vertical mixed use (commercial on the bottom, residential on top)
»Concerns about affordable and low-income housing
»Concerns about large-scale/high-rise apartments
»General interest in a diversity of housing types
9.When asked if neighborhood commercial node and corridor areas are sufficiently
balanced for pedestrian, bike, and auto access, responses skewed slightly towards
needing to be more oriented for pedestrians and bike.
10.When asked to elaborate on the balance of pedestrian, bike, and auto access in
these areas, responses included:
»A need for parking so visitors can drive to nodes, but a desire for walkability in
and around nodes
»Desire for improved pedestrian and bicycle crossings of major roadways and
intersections
»Mixed experiences: some find areas comfortable to explore as pedestrians or
cyclists once they are at their destination, others feel areas remain too car-centric
»Recognition that pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure has improved
»Concerns over accessibility of sidewalks and bicycle infrastructure in the winter
due to ice and snow
»Preference for bicycle infrastructure that is separate from vehicle traffic over
traditional on-street bike lanes and shared lanes
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 20
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 5
»Discomfort biking on Minnetonka
»Concerns that focusing on bicycle infrastructure creates additional traffic
congestion and reduces car lanes
»Concern that there is too much emphasis on bicycle infrastructure, given
Minnesota’s long winters
11.When asked about parking availability, 66% of respondents felt that there was
enough parking in commercial nodes and corridors; the next most common response
at 16% was that there is too much parking.
12.Regarding support for lower parking minimum requirements and more use of on-
street parking, 53% of people stated either that they would support a change that
reduced parking requirements or a change that eliminated parking requirements.
35% of respondents said that they would not support a change in parking
requirements.
13.The majority of respondents (58%) selected the response “No there is not enough
green space” when asked if there is enough green space integrated into commercial
development in commercial nodes and corridors.
14.The average response to the question regarding whether there was enough signage
to identify a business's location was that there was “just the right amount.”
42.67%
10.67%
12.00%
34.67%
I would support a change that reduced some parking
requirements
I would support a change that eliminated parking
requirements
I would support a change that added a parking maximum
requirement
I would not support a change to parking requirements
15.93%
66.37%
12.83%
4.87%
Yes, I think there is too much parking, and I never have a
problem finding parking
Yes, I think there is enough parking, and I can almost always
find parking when I need it
No, I do not think there is enough parking, and I sometimes
struggle to find parking when I need it
No, I do not think there is enough parking, and I often
struggle to find parking when I need it
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 21
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 6
15.Concerns identified regarding requirements for signage in commercial nodes and
corridors included:
»Signs that are too large can be distracting for drivers
»Don’t want billboards
»Lights on signs can be distracting and/or disruptive for residential neighbors
»If signs are too small, businesses are hard to find, especially for drivers
16.Additional comments regarding zoning changes in commercial nodes and corridors
focused on the following themes:
»Like mixed-use areas that are easy to walk/bike to and around
»Want neighborhood scale to remain and to build on the existing character of
older SLP neighborhoods
»Preference for small-scale, local businesses over box stores and larger
developments
»Adjust parking requirements to make areas more pedestrian-friendly, including
moving parking behind commercial uses, and reducing parking requirements
for commercial uses
»Balancing pedestrian and bicycle improvements with easy access to
businesses and sufficient parking
»Concerns that changes will allow too much multi-family housing
17.When given the choice to finish the survey or continue the survey, 77% of
respondents chose to continue the survey.
Community District and Center Questions
18.The Community Districts and Centers that over half of respondents stated they
visited, in order of most to least, were:
»Knollwood (92%)
»The West End (90%)
»Parks Commons West (84%)
»Park Commons (52%)
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 22
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 7
19.When asked about their experience in these areas on a scale from Excellent to
Neutral to Poor, 49% of respondents rated their experience between neutral and
excellent, and 42% rated their experience as neutral.
20.When asked if the City should allow taller buildings in community districts and
centers, 61% responded that restrictions on building height should be kept the same,
20% support allowing 7-9 stories, and 13% support allowing 10+ stories. 10% said to
reduce the maximum height to less than 6 stories.
»Comments regarding why respondents were not interested in changing building
height maximums focused on:
-Smaller buildings feel more walkable and approachable, so the height shouldn’t
be changed
-Want to preserve feel of St. Louis Park, increasing building heights will change
that
-Provide good mix of uses and density as it is
-Don’t want to lose sunlight, views, sight lines
-Don’t want increased density in the area
»Comments regarding why respondents were interested in allowing some degree
of increased building height maximumx focus on:
-Allowing increased density
-Recognizing that these existing areas are the best place for density and taller
buildings
-Small building height increase to allow for additional housing and more housing
affordability In some areas, it makes sense to increase it, e.g. near highways
and the West End, where there is more separation from lower density
residential areas
-Flexibility, not everywhere should allow more than 6 stories, but some areas
can accommodate it
3.8%5.7%
41.5%40.3%
8.8%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
Poor Poor/Neutral Neutral Neutral/Excellent Excellent
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 23
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 8
21.When asked if zoning for commercial uses in community districts and centers
should be more restrictive or more flexible, the average response skewed slightly
towards more flexible.
22.When asked about the types of commercial uses they would like to see more or
fewer of in community districts and centers, many respondents identified specific
uses.
»The types of commercial uses respondents would like to see more of include:
-Locally run businesses/ mom and pop shops
-Restaurants, coffee shops, ice cream, health food and specialty shops
-Leisure locations open later (coffee shops, breweries, wine shops)
-Arts and entertainment (performance spaces, movie theaters)
-Hobby stores (books, crafts etc.)
-Neighborhood services, (small groceries, convenience stores, hardware stores)
-Retail, clothing, specialty shops
-Green spaces
»The types of commercial uses respondents would like to see fewer of include:
-National chains
-Bars and liquor stores
-Dispensaries/smoke shops
-Fast food
-Amazon warehouses
-Fewer auto-oriented uses
-Businesses that produce noise or odors outside of regulation hours
23.When asked if the zoning for community districts and centers should be more
restrictive or more flexible regarding residential uses, responses on average
skewed towards more flexibility.
24.When asked what type of residential uses they would like to see in these areas,
responses included:
»More condos, opportunities for first-time homeowners
»Row homes, townhomes, condos (many added owner occupied)
»Apartments are well-suited to community districts
»Medium density rentals over high density apartments buildings
»Duplexs, triplexes, fourplexes
»Affordable mixed with full-priced housing units
»More options for affordable housing
»Single family homes
»Senior housing, single-level living options, care facilities
»Vertical mixed use (commercial on the bottom, residential on top)
»Concerns about affordable and low-income housing
»Concerns about large-scale/high-rise apartments
»General interest in a diversity of housing types
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 24
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 9
25.When asked if community district and center areas are sufficiently balanced for
pedestrian, bike, and auto access, responses skewed slightly towards needing to be
more oriented for pedestrians and bikes.
26.When asked to elaborate on the balance of pedestrian, bike, and auto access in
these areas, responses included:
»Large parking lot areas in the West End (Costco parking lot), and other areas are
very unfriendly for pedestrians and bicyclists
»Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure is important, but car travel is essential and
will always be needed (accessibility, winters, seniors, parents with kids), so need
a balance in these areas
»Within these areas, often walkable, but not easy to get to them by walking or
biking
»Will not see an increase in bicyclists or pedestrians without further infrastructure
improvements, people will not walk if they do not feel safe the entire journey they
go on – last mile access is an issue
»Parking is available but unevenly distributed across these sites, especially the
West End
»Does not feel safe to bike to West End or Knollwood
»Not enough bike storage at final destinations
»Adding more bike lanes will make things worse for drivers
27.When asked about parking availability, 66% of respondents felt that there was
enough parking in community districts and centers; the next most common response
at 20% was I think there is too much parking.
3.0%
11.4%
65.7%
19.9%
0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%
No, I do not think there is enough parking, and I often
struggle to find parking when I need it
No, I do not think there is enough parking, and I
sometimes struggle to find parking when I need it
Yes, I think there is enough parking, and I can almost
always find parking when I need it
Yes, I think there is too much parking, and I never have a
problem finding parking
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 25
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 10
28.Regarding support for lower marking minimum requirements and more use of on-
street parking in community districts and centers, 45% of people stated that they
would not support a change in parking requirements. 44% of people said they would
support a change that reduced parking requirements or a change that eliminated
parking requirements.
29.The majority of respondents (60%) selected the response “No there is not enough
green space” when asked if there is enough green space integrated into commercial
development in community districts and centers.
30.The average response to the question regarding whether there was enough signage
to identify a business's location in community districts and centers was that there is
“just the right amount.”
31.Concerns identified regarding requirements for signage in community districts and
centers included:
»Dislike for billboards
»If requirements are too stringent, there can be adverse consequences, signs
should be large enough that drivers can see them from the road
»Signs should be visible enough for drivers to see them
32.Additional comments regarding zoning changes in community districts and centers
focused on the following themes:
»Requests for more pedestrian-friendly design, slower traffic, and safer
crossings.
»Interest in increasing density to support vibrant communities.
»Desire for small-scale community destinations that are walkable, such as
coffee shops and restaurants
»Accessibility and mobility need to be considered
»Car charging infrastructure, dark sky requirements for lighting
»Street parking doesn’t seem like a viable option in these areas, need to ensure
there is adequate off-street parking
44.8%
11.0%
12.3%
31.9%
0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%
I would not support a change to parking
requirements
I would support a change that added a parking
maximum requirement
I would support a change that eliminated parking
requirements
I would support a change that reduced some
parking requirements
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 26
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 11
Demographic Questions
Questions 33-38 asked about the demographics of respondents.
Race: 92% of respondents identified as White, 3% African American or Black, 3% as Asian, 3%
as Other, and 1.5% as Hispanic or Latinx.
Gender: Gender skewed more female (60%) than male (37%), 2% of respondents identified as
non-binary
Age: The largest groups of respondents (61%) were between 35-64.
Housing Type: 88% of respondents live in single-unit detached houses, 8% live in an apartment
or condo, 3% live in a townhouse or rowhouse, and 1% live in a duplex or twin-home.
Rent or Own: Respondents were majority homeowners (94%).
White Hispanic or Latino
African American or Black Asian
American Indian/Alaska Native Other (please specify)
17 and under, 0.0%
18 –34, 12.6%
35 –49, 31.2%
50 –64, 30.2%
65 and over, 26.1%
0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 27
8/29/2024
St. Louis Park Zoning Code Update, Phase 2
Community Engagement Summary 12
Household Size: Most respondents (56% have a household size of 2-3 individuals.
1
individual,
20%
2-3 individuals,
56%
4-6
individuals,
25%
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 28
Commercial Parks and
Open Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
Residential
Household Living
Dwelling, three-unit PS PS
Dwelling, four-unit PS PS
Dwelling, apartment (low-rise)PS PS PS PS
Dwelling, apartment (mid-rise)PS PS PS
Dwelling, apartment (high-rise)PS PS
Dwelling, live/work unit PS PS PS PS
Manufactured home park CCC C
Dwelling, existing single-unit detached PS PS PS
Dwelling, existing multiple unit PS PS PS
Group Living
State-licensed residential facility PS PS PS PS
Nursing home PS PS PS
Lodging
Hotel/motel PS PS PS
Public, Social, & Institutional
Uses exceeding intensity classification 4 C
Adult day care PS / C (I4)PS PS PS PS
Business/trade school/college PS PS PS P
Child care center PS PS PS PS
Community center P
Educational (academic) facility PS PS PS C
Hospital PS
Medical/dental clinic or office PS / C (I4) PS / C(I6) PS / C(I6) PS / C(I6)
Municipal, county, state, or federal administrative or
service facility PPPPP P
Place of assembly P / C (I4) P P P P P
St Louis Park DRAFT Principal Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
Page 1
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 29
Commercial Parks and
Open Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
St Louis Park DRAFT Principal Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
Commercial Uses
Personal Services and Businesses
Uses exceeding intensity classification 4 C
Animal handling PS PS PS PS PS PS
Animal handling, limited
Appliance, small engine and bicycle repair PS PS PS PS PS
Bank C (I4) PS PS PS
Cannabis retailer PS PS PS
Catering PS PS P
Dry cleaning or laundering facility PS PS PS PS
Food service PS PS PS PS
Funeral home PS P
In-vehicle sale or service CCC C
Liquor store PS PS PS PS
Lower potency hemp edible retailer PS PS PS PS
Motor fuel station CC
Motor vehicle sales C
Motor vehicle service and repair CPS
Autobody/painting PS
Parcel delivery service PP
Pawnshop C
Payday loan agency and currency exchange C
Retail or service establishment less than 8,000 SF PPP P PS
Retail or service establishment between 8,000 SF - 20,000
SF PP P
Retail or service establishment over 20,000 SF CC C
Restaurant PPSPSPSPS
Self-storage facility PS PS
Page 2
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 30
Commercial Parks and
Open Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
St Louis Park DRAFT Principal Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
Sexually-oriented business, high impact PS
Sexually-oriented business, limited impact PS PS PS PS
Shopping center PS P P PS/C
Showroom PSPPPPP
Studio PS PS P P PS P
Vendor market PS PS PS PS
Recreation
Commercial entertainment, indoors CPSPS PS
Commercial entertainment, outdoors PP
Country club P
Golf course P
Park/open space PPPPPPP
Park/recreation PS PS PS PS P P
Professional
Uses exceeding intensity classification 4 C
Office PPPPPPS*
Office where intensity classification exceeds 6 C
Medical, optical and dental laboratory PS PS PS P PS
Research and development PS PS PS P
Industrial
Uses exceeding intensity classification 4 C
Anaerobic digester C
Cannabis operation/hemp processor PS
Composting operation PS
Manufacturing/processing, light PS PS PS
Manufacturing/processing PS P
Microbrewery PS PS PS PS P
Microdistillery PS PS PS PS P
Page 3
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 31
Commercial Parks and
Open Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
St Louis Park DRAFT Principal Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
Outdoor storage PS
Printing facility PS P P PS
Printing facility, industrial P
Recycling operation P
Warehouse/storage PS P
Transportation and Utilities
Communication tower PS/C PS/C PS/C PS/C PS/C C
Freight terminal P
Parking ramp PS PS PS C PS
Public service structure PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Transit station PPPPPPP
Utility substation PS PS PS PS PS PS
Page 4
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 32
Commercial
Parks and
Open
Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
Accessory Uses
Accessory building PPP P P PP
Accessory office PPP P PPSP
Accessory retail sales PS PS P
Adult day care in a religious institution, community center, or
nursing home PS PS PS PS PS
Auto body/painting PS PS
Bar PS PS PS PS
Boarders or roomers PS PS PS PS
Cannabis retailer C
Catering PS PS PS PS PS
Communication antenna PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Community garden PS PS PS PS PS PS P
Food service PS PS PS PS PS PS P
Gardening and other horticultural uses PPP P P PP
Group day care/nursery school in a religious institution,
community center, or educational (academic) institution PS PS PS PS PS PS
Heliport CC C C C
Home occupation PS PS PS PS
Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a
permitted principal use PS PS PS PS P P
Mikvah pool PS PS PS PS
Motor fuel station PS
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
St Louis Park DRAFT Accessory Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
Page 1
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 33
Commercial
Parks and
Open
Space
Use Type MU-1 MU-2 MU-3 B-1 I-1 I-2 POS
P = permitted; PS = permitted with standards; C = permitted with CUP; Blank cell = not permitted
St Louis Park DRAFT Accessory Non-Residential Use Table
Mixed Use Industrial
Motor vehicle service repair PS PS PS
Off-street parking area PPP P P PP
Outdoor sales (display)PS PS
Outdoor seating and service of food and beverages PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Outdoor storage PS PS
Parking ramp PS PS PS
Property management or rental office PS PS PS PS
Public service facility P
Public service structure PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Public transit stop/shelter PPP P P PP
Railroad spur PP
Residential swimming pool, whirlpool, sport court PS PS PS PS
Service and retail facilities, private PPP P
Showroom PS PS
Solar energy system PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Utility substation PPP P P PP
Visitor lodging associated with residential care facilities PPP P
Warehouse/storage PS PS PS PS
Wind energy conversion system (WECS)PS PS PS PS PS PS PS
Page 2
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 34
Lot width
minimum
with alley (ft)1
Lot width
minimum w/o
alley (ft)1
Net lot area
minimum with
alley (sq ft)1
Net lot area
minimum w/o
alley (sq ft)1
Parks and Open
Space POS None None None None
Commercial B-1 None None None None
I-1
I-2
MU-1 None None None None
MU-2 None None None None
MU-3 None None None None
Table notes: 1Except where subdivisions for the purpose of establishing condominium ownership result in lot sizes smaller than the established minimum.
Mixed Use
District
Table 36-XXX(x). Lot Dimensional Standards
Industrial
75' for building heights up to 25'
100' for building heights 26' - 45'
150' for building heights 46' - 75'
50' for building heights up to 25'
75' for building heights 26' - 45'
100' for building heights 46' - 75'
15,000 sf for building heights up
to 25'
18,000 sf for building heights 26' -
45'
22,500 sf for building heights 46 -
75'
5,000 sf for building heights up to
15'
5,500 sf for building heights 16' -
25'
7,500 sf for building heights 26' -
45'
10,000 sf for building heights 46' -
75'
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 35
Building height
maximum (feet )
Front yard
minimum (feet)
Side yard
abutting street
minimum (feet)
Side yard interior with
alley minimum (feet)
Side yard interior without
alley minimum (feet)
Rear yard minimum
(feet)
Distance between
buildings minimum
(feet)
Perimeter yard
minimum (feet)
DORA
minimum
Principal
building
coverage
maximum
Impervious surface
coverage maximum
Parks and Open
Space POS
Commercial B-1
6 stories or 75 ft. whichever is
less; 50% increase possible
with conditions1
10 ft. minimum;
20 ft. maximum 5
None for buildings under 35'
in height and not abutting N
district.
For buildings under 35 ft. in
height abutting N district,
setback is 15 ft.
For buildings taller than 35
ft. and not abutting N
district, setback is 1/2 the
building height.
For buildings taller than 35
ft. abutting N district,
setback is equal to the
building height.
15 ft. for townhouses; 1/2
the building height for
apartments
To be determined 85%
I-1 40 ft.10 ft. minimum;
20 ft. maximum 20 To be determined 75%
I-2 6 stories or 75 ft. whichever is
less (also see note 1)
10 ft. minimum;
20 ft. maximum 20
None for building heights
less than 45 ft.;
12 ft. for building heights
45 ft. and higher
Buildings up to 45 ft. tall: 12 ft. on
one side and 0 ft. on the other
Buildings 45 - 75 ft. tall: 12 ft. for all
sides
No yard if abutting railroad trackage
10 ft. for building heights up
to 35 ft.;
20 ft. for building heights 36 -
75 ft.
No yard if abutting railroad
trackage
To be determined 75%
Table 36-XXX(x). Site & Building Dimension Standards
Industrial
District
None except for lots abutting N district.
Lots abutting N district: for buildings up to 35 ft. in height,
setback same as the required side yard for the abutting N
district; for
buildings taller than 35 ft., setback is 15 ft. + one foot for each
foot of building height above 35 ft.; the required setback for
buildings over 35 ft. in height may be met
by setting back those stories of the building over 35 ft.
20' for building heights up to 35'
35' for building heights 36' - 75'
20 ft.; no yard if abutting railroad trackage
Each standard shall match the requirement for the adjacent properties. If the adjacent properties are in two or more zoning districts, then the most restrictive requirement applies.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 36
MU-1 3 stories
Build-to-zone: 10 -
15 ft. primary
frontage, 10 - 20 ft.
secondary frontage
None, except for sites
adjacent to N-1 or N-2 zoned
and used districts which have
a 15 ft. minimum
15 ft. for townhouses; 1/2
the building height for
apartments
To be determined 80%
MU-2
6 stories or 75 ft. whichever is
less (minimum of 2 stories);
Sites adjacent to N-1 or N-2
zoned and used districts shall
be limited to
40 ft., although buildings may
exceed 40 ft. if the portion of
the building above 40 ft. is
stepped back a distance equal
to the additional height
Build-to-zone: 10 -
15 ft. primary
frontage, 10 - 20 ft.
secondary frontage
15 ft. for townhouses; 1/2
the building height for
apartments
To be determined 12%85%
MU-3
6 stories or 75 ft. whichever is
less (minimum of 2 stories);
Sites adjacent to N-1 or N-2
zoned and used districts shall
be limited to
40 ft., although buildings may
exceed 40 ft. if the portion of
the building above 40 ft. is
stepped back a distance equal
to the additional height
Build-to-zone: 10 -
15 ft. primary
frontage, 10 - 20 ft.
secondary frontage
15 ft. for townhouses; 1/2
the building height for
apartments
To be determined 12%85%
Table notes: 1The height limit may be increased by 50 percent to permit buildings nine stories or 112.5 feet in height, whichever is the lesser. This greater building height shall only be permitted for buildings which meet the following conditions:
a. The building shall be at least 200 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. (Ord. No. 2248-03, 8-18-03)
b. The building shall not cast a shadow on residential structures between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
c. The building shall be located within travel demand management zones A or B as defined in section 36-322.
Mixed Use
None, except for sites adjacent to N1 or N2 zoned and used districts which have a 15' minimum
None, except for sites adjacent to N-1 or N-2 zoned and used districts which have a
10 ft. minimum
None, except for sites adjacent to N-1 or N-2 zoned and used districts which have a 15' minimum
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 37
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Dwelling, single-unit
Dwelling, two-unit 2 spaces per dwelling unit. Additional
spaces are not required for a boarder or an
accessory dwelling unit
Dwelling, detached courtyard
cottage/bungalow
1.5 spaces per dwelling unit.
Dwelling, three-unit; Dwelling,
four-unit; Dwelling, townhouse;
Dwelling, apartment
Dwelling, live/work unit 1 space per unit plus 1 space per 1,000 SF
of nonresidential gross floor area
1 space per unit plus 1 space per
1,250 SF of nonresidential gross
floor area
1 space per unit plus 1 space per 750
SF of nonresidential gross floor area
Manufactured home park
State-licensed residential
facility
1 space per 3 client rooms 1 space per 4 client rooms 1 space per 3 client rooms
Roominghouse 2 spaces plus 1.25 spaces per guest room 2 spaces plus 1 space per guest
room
2 spaces plus 1.50 spaces per guest
room
Group home 1 space per 3 beds 1 space per 4 beds 1 space per 2 beds
Nursing home 1 space per 5 client rooms 1 space per 6 client rooms 1 space per 5 client rooms
Bed and breakfast 1.25 spaces per guest room
Hostel 1.25 spaces per each dwelling unit,
guestroom, or hotel room
Mixed Use Districts Standards
2 spaces per dwelling unit. Additional spaces are not required for a boarder or an accessory dwelling unit.
Per unit:
• Studio - 1 space
•One bedroom – 1 space
•Two bedroom – 1.5 spaces
• Three bedroom – 2 spaces
• Four bedroom – 2 spaces
An additional 5% of the required parking shall be provided for guest
parking.
2 spaces per dwelling unit
Residential Uses
Group Living
Lodging
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 38
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Hotel/motel 1.25 spaces per each dwelling unit,
guestroom, or hotel room
1 space per each dwelling unit,
guestroom, or hotel room
1.50 spaces per each dwelling unit,
guestroom, or hotel room
Adult day care 2 spaces per each 5 program participants
licensed by state.
2 spaces per each 6 program
participants licensed by state.
2 spaces per each 4 program
participants licensed by state.
Business/trade school/college 1 space per classroom plus 1 space for each
5-person capacity
1 space per classroom plus 1 space
for each 6-person capacity
1 space per classroom plus 1 space for
each 4-person capacity
Child care center 1 space per classroom plus 1 space per 5
students/clients and any additional spaces
necessary to accommodate the parking of
vans and buses used for client transport by
the school or center
1 space per classroom plus 1 space
per 6 students/clients and any
additional spaces necessary to
accommodate the parking of vans
and buses used for client transport
by the school or center
1 space per classroom plus 1 space per
4 students/clients and any additional
spaces necessary to accommodate the
parking of vans and buses used for
client transport by the school or
center
Community center Parking requirement shall be based upon
uses within the building.
Educational (academic) facility Elementary and Junior High: 2 spaces per
each classroom.
High school and post-secondary: 1 space
per each 4 students based on building
capacity, plus 1 space for each 2
High school and post-secondary: 1
space per each 4 students based on
building capacity, plus 1 space for
each 2 classrooms.
High school and post-secondary: 1
space per each 3 students based on
building capacity, plus 1 space for
each 2 classrooms.
Hospital 1 space per each 400 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 450 square feet
floor area.
1 space per each 350 square feet floor
area.
Medical/dental clinic or office 3 spaces per treatment room 2 spaces per treatment room 4 spaces per treatment room
Municipal, county, state, or
federal administrative or
service facility
1 space per 400 SF of gross floor area plus 1
space for each fleet vehicle
1 space per 500 SF of gross floor
area plus 1 space for each fleet
vehicle
1 space per 300 SF of gross floor area
plus 1 space for each fleet vehicle
Place of assembly 1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
Public, Social, & Institutional
Commercial Uses
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 39
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Animal handling
1 space per each 400 square feet of gross
floor area, but not fewer than five spaces
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area, but not fewer than
five spaces
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area, but not fewer than
five spaces
Appliance, small engine and
bicycle repair
1 space per each 500 SF of gross floor area 1 space per each 500 square feet of
gross floor area plus 1 space for
each company-owned vehicle
stored on-site
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area plus 1 space for each
company-owned vehicle stored on-
site
Bank
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Cannabis retailer
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Catering
1 space per each 500 square feet of gross
floor area plus 1 space for each company-
owned vehicle stored on-site
1 space per each 500 square feet of
gross floor area plus 1 space for
each company-owned vehicle
stored on-site
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area plus 1 space for each
company-owned vehicle stored on-
site
Dry cleaning or laundering
facility
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Firearms sales
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Funeral home 1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
In-vehicle sale or service
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 40
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Liquor store
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Lower potency hemp edible
retailer
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Motor fuel station
1 space per 2 fuel pumps. Space adjacent to
fuel pumps does not count towards this
requirement
1 space per 3 fuel pumps. Space
adjacent to fuel pumps does not
count towards this requirement
1 space per 2 fuel pumps. Space
adjacent to fuel pumps does not count
towards this requirement
Motor vehicle sales 1 space per 400 square feet of gross floor
area
Motor vehicle service and 4 spaces per service bay
Autobody/painting 4 spaces per service bay
Parcel delivery service
1 space per 400 square feet of floor area
devoted to office, processing, or service,
plus 1 space for each vehicle kept on the
Pawnshop 1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Payday loan agency and
currency exchange
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Retail or service establishment
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
feet floor area.
1 space per each 500 square feet floor area.
(large merchandise)
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Restaurant 1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
Self-storage facility 1 space per 50 storage compartments
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 41
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Sexually-oriented business, high
impact
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Sexually-oriented business,
limited impact
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Shopping center
1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Maximum: One space per each 200 square
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Showroom 1 space per each 500 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 600 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
Studio 1 space per each 400 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 500 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Vendor market 3 spaces per market vendor
Commercial entertainment,
indoors
1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
Commercial entertainment,
outdoors
50 spaces per field, sports court, or activity
area plus 1 space per 4 fixed seats for
spectator area
Country club
Golf course 2 spaces per hole
Park/open space
Parks/recreation
Office 1 space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
1 space per each 400 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Recreation
Professional
Parking requirement shall be based upon uses on the site
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 42
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Medical, optical, and dental
laboratory
Less than 50,000 square feet floor area: 1
space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Between 50,000 square feet floor area and
200,000 square feet floor area: 1 space per
each 325 square feet of gross floor area
Between 200,000 square feet floor area
and 400,000 square feet floor area: 1 space
per each 350 square feet of gross floor
area
1 space/500 square feet floor area
in excess of 4,000 square feet
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Research and development
Less than 50,000 square feet floor area: 1
space per each 300 square feet of gross
floor area
Between 50,000 square feet floor area and
200,000 square feet floor area: 1 space per
each 325 square feet of gross floor area
Between 200,000 square feet floor area
and 400,000 square feet floor area: 1 space
per each 350 square feet of gross floor
area
1 space/500 square feet floor area
in excess of 4,000 square feet
1 space per each 300 square feet of
gross floor area
Anaerobic digester
Cannabis operation/hemp
processor
1 space per 750 square feet of gross floor
area
Composting operation
Manufacturing/processing, light 1 space per 750 square feet of gross floor
area
1 space per 1,000 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per 750 square feet of gross
floor area
Manufacturing/processing 1 space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor
Microbrewery 1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
Industrial Uses
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 43
Draft Parking Table_SLP
Use Citywide Standard
Minimum Standard Minimum Standard Maximum Standard
Mixed Use Districts Standards
Microdistillery 1 space per 4 persons of the maximum
occupancy
1 space per 4 persons of the
maximum occupancy
1 space per 6 persons of the maximum
occupancy
Outdoor storage 1 space per each 20,000 square feet of area
devoted to outdoor storage
Printing facility 1 space per 750 square feet of gross floor
area
1 space per 1,000 square feet of
gross floor area
1 space per 750 square feet of gross
floor area
Printing facility, industrial 1 space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor
area
Recycling operation
Warehouse/storage 1 space per each 2,000 square feet of gross
floor area
Communication tower
Freight terminal 1 space per 300 square feet of office space
plus 1 space per 20,000 SF outdoor yard
Parking ramp
Public service structure
Transit station
Utility substation
Key:
Red text is new/updated
Use is proposed in at least one
MU District
Uses within Walker Lake don't require parking.
Transit deduction is part of MU-3.
For a site with multiple uses, add requirements together
Transportation and Utilities
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 44
Procedures Table_SLP
Published Mailed Distance
Planning
Commission Council Administrative
Planning
Commission City Council City
Council Courts
PUD (Prelim) Optional X X 350' X Recommend X Resolution
PUD (Final) No XOrdinance
PUD (Admin Amend) No X
PUD (Major Amend)
CUP No X X 350' X Recommend X Resolution
CUP (Minor amend) No XResolution
CUP (Major Amend) Same as initial CUP X X 350' X X Resolution
CUP (Admin Amend) No XLetter
Variance - with CUP or subdivision No X X 350' X Recommend X (BOZA) Resolution
Variance (other) No X X 350' BOZA X (BOZA) X Resolution
Zoning Amendment No X X 350' X Recommend X Ordinance
Comprehensive Rezoning No X X Recommend X Ordinance
Comprehensive Plan &
Amendments No X
X (if amendment
is related to the
map)
500' X Recommend X Resolution (2/3 vote)
Appeal of Admin Decision No X X To applicants BOZA BOZA
Appeal of BOZA decision X 350' X X
Go through prelim and final process again
Appeal
Final Action (Letter,
Resolution, Ordinance)Application
Pre-Application
Meeting with Staff
Required (Yes/No)
Public Notice Required Public Hearing Decision
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 2)
Title: Zoning code updates, phase 2 discussion Page 45
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Written report: 3
Executive summary
Title: Conveyance of EDA owned land to the City of St. Louis Park – all wards
Recommended action: No action required at this time. The economic development authority
(EDA) and city council will be asked to consider resolutions authorizing conveyance of various
EDA property to the city on Dec. 1, 2025.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to transfer property ownership from the EDA to the
City of St. Louis Park for public purposes and/or long-term land holding?
Summary: The EDA owns 21 properties throughout the city, acquired for various public use and
redevelopment purposes. Under current guidelines, the EDA may hold properties tax-exempt
for up to eight years; beyond that period, any remaining parcels become taxable.
To preserve the tax-exempt status of these properties, staff recommend conveying them to the
city for continued public use and/or long-term holding until redevelopment occurs.
A detailed summary and a map of the 21 properties are provided in this report. EDA owned
properties that are not approaching the eight-year deadline are not recommended to be
transferred at this time and are not included in this report.
Financial or budget considerations: The EDA will incur legal and title work costs to record the
conveyance. The city will then file the necessary paperwork to reapply for tax-exempt status
after the transfer. If the EDA retains ownership, the parcels will become taxable.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion; Map of EDA owned properties for city conveyance
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, economic development manager
Reviewed by: Cory Bultema, assessing office
Sean Walther, community development deputy director
Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Conveyance of EDA owned land to the City of St. Louis Park – all wards
Discussion
Background: The EDA owns 21 properties throughout the city acquired for various public use
and redevelopment purposes. Under current guidelines, the EDA may hold properties tax-
exempt for up to eight years; beyond that period, any remaining parcels become taxable.
Present considerations: To preserve the tax-exempt status of these properties, staff
recommend conveying the following properties to the city for continued public use and/or
long-term holding until redevelopment occurs. A summary of the properties is provided below.
EDA owned properties that are not approaching the eight-year deadline are not recommended
to be transferred at this time and are not included in this report.
Property 1-4: 3815 Grand Way, 3825 Grand Way, 4630 Park Commons Drive and 4650 Park
Commons Drive are properties that were acquired by the EDA during the construction of
Excelsior and Grand (Park Commons). These parcels include the greenspace in Grand Way, the
entrance to Wolfe Park and a small sliver of sidewalk on the south edge of Wolfe Park. Staff
recommend transferring the properties for permanent public use.
Property 5: 3741 Monterey Drive was part of a larger property acquired by the EDA to facilitate
the redevelopment of what is now Bridgewater Bank’s Corporate Headquarters. The remnant
piece of property houses the signal cabinet for the traffic signal at Monterey Drive and Excelsior
Boulevard and should be transferred to the city for permanent public use.
Property 6-7: The EDA acquired 3541 Yosemite Avenue and 3548 Xenwood Avenue from the
Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) as part of the larger land acquisition for the
Wooddale Station Development. It is anticipated that these outlots will be developed when the
adjacent properties fronting 35th Street redevelop. These properties should be transferred to
the city until redevelopment occurs.
Property 8-11: 6039 State Hwy 7, 6015 State Hwy 7, 6007 State Hwy 7 and 3506 Wooddale
Avenue were acquired to construct the Wooddale Bridge over Hwy 7. These properties are
utilized as right-of-way for the Hwy 7 exit ramp and the Hwy 7 Frontage Road and should be
transferred to the city for permanent public use.
Property 12: The EDA acquired 7015 Walker Street (formerly Reynolds Welding Supply) in 2010
for potential stormwater retention related to the Wooddale Avenue Bridge project. However,
remediation costs made the plans for stormwater infeasible. As the EDA has no plans to
develop the site in the near term, it is recommended the property be transferred to the city
until redevelopment occurs.
Property 13-14: 7341 State Hwy 7 and 7250 State Hwy 7 were acquired by the EDA when the
Louisiana Avenue and Highway 7 interchange was constructed. The properties sit between
Highway 7 and the Highway 7 Frontage Road. The EDA will eventually redevelop these parcels,
but current efforts are focused on redeveloping sites near the Beltline and Wooddale light rail
stations. In the meantime, these properties are utilized as staging areas for city infrastructure
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Conveyance of EDA owned land to the City of St. Louis Park – all wards
projects. It is recommended these properties be transferred to the city until redevelopment
occurs.
Property 15: 3301 Louisiana Avenue is a remnant parcel of land running parallel to Louisiana
Avenue. The property provides sidewalk access to the Louisiana Avenue pedestrian bridge and
should be transferred to the city for permanent public purposes.
Property 16: The EDA owns 5950 36th Street (formerly Nash Frame). Half the site was acquired
from the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) in 2017, and the city transferred the
adjoining parking lot to the EDA in 2019 to support redevelopment near the Wooddale Avenue
light rail station. Redevelopment is ongoing but delayed. The site remains a municipal parking
lot and should be transferred back to the city until development proceeds.
Property 17: The EDA purchased 6211 Cedar Lake Road in 2020 to secure future access to the
city’s brush drop-off facility. Public works currently leases access to the drop off facility across
the Soo Line Railroad with no changes anticipated. The property should be transferred to the
city for future public use in the event the railroad decides to discontinue allowing access
through its property.
Property 18-21: Beginning in 2018, the EDA acquired 5639, 5643, 5647, and 5707 Minnetonka
Boulevard to assemble a site for an affordable homeownership redevelopment. Vacant and
blighted homes were demolished. While redevelopment is being pursued, the EDA
recommends conveying the properties to the city until the redeveloper is ready to purchase the
properties.
Next steps: On Dec. 1, 2025, the EDA and city council will consider adopting resolutions
authorizing the conveyance of EDA property to the city.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: Conveyance of EDA owned land to the City of St. Louis Park – all wards
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Sewer availability charge (SAC) credit policy
Recommended action: No action recommended at this time. Please provide staff with any
feedback.
Policy consideration: The city council will be asked to consider adopting a sewer availability
charge credit policy in 2026.
Summary: The Metropolitan (Met) Council charges the city of St. Louis Park a one-time SAC fee
when a new business connects to the regional wastewater system (sewer) for the first time and
may also charge a SAC fee when a business expands or the property changes in use. The city
then passes the charge on to the business or property owner.
SAC units are calculated by the Met Council via a SAC Determination Letter and are based on
estimated sewer usage. A SAC determination letter is required to be submitted prior to building
permit issuance. The city collects the required SAC fee on behalf of the Met Council with
building permit fees. The SAC fees are then paid to the Met Council on a monthly basis. The city
retains 1% of all SAC fees to help offset city administrative costs associated with this process.
If a new business moves into an existing commercial space and uses less wastewater capacity
than the previous occupant, the excess SAC units are generally retained by the Met Council.
However, municipalities can adopt a SAC credit policy that allows the city to retain and
redistribute these credits to new or expanding businesses in the community when financial
needs exist. Such a policy enables cities to use retained credits to support business
development efforts by offering partial fee reductions. The city would be responsible for
maintaining records of available credits, tracking how they are used, and reporting this
information to the Met Council.
Financial or budget considerations: This program would add minimal staff time to implement
the policy. Since this program is based on credits, no city funds would be needed to operate this
program.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Jase Pater, economic development specialist
Reviewed by: Jennifer Monson, economic development manager
David Skallet, chief building official
Karen Barton, community development director/interim building & energy
director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Sewer availability charge (SAC) credit policy
Discussion
Background: The Met Council charges the city of St. Louis Park a one-time SAC fee when a new
business connects to the regional wastewater system (sewer) for the first time and may also
charge a SAC fee when a business expands or the property changes in use, due to the potential
increase in demand on the wastewater system. The city then passes the charge on to the
business or property owner.
Non-residential properties require a determination (calculation) for the amount of maximum
potential wastewater capacity needed for the site based on wastewater flow created by the
activities at the location. This is determined if a business is connecting to the regional
wastewater system for the first time or if a business is expanding in size or moving into an
already existing space. This determination will then identify the fee charged to the local
government.
A SAC determination letter is required to be submitted prior to building permit issuance. The
city collects the required SAC fee on behalf of the Met Council with the building permit fees.
The SAC fees are then paid to the Met Council on a monthly basis. The city retains 1% of all SAC
fees to help offset city administrative costs associated with this process. The Met Council sets
the SAC fee annually. The current fee rate is $2,485 per SAC unit.
In the event a business locates to an existing building and requires less SAC units than the
previous use, this creates “excess credits.” The excess credits are currently retained by the
Met Council. However, a municipality can create a credit policy to reallocate those excess
credits to other future uses in the city.
A SAC credit policy would allow St. Louis Park to retain the excess SAC credits and establish a
process by which the community-wide credits may be used to aid in the recruitment and
retention of qualifying small businesses by offering a reduction in total SAC fees. The city would
maintain record of community-wide credits within the community development and building
and energy departments. This would include maintaining a record of captured credits and a
record of businesses which have benefited from this program. The city would then report this
information back to the Met Council as part of the city’s existing monthly reports.
Present considerations: SAC fees can cause a significant financial burden to small businesses
opening their doors or looking to expand. By establishing a SAC credit program, the city can
alleviate some of this financial burden and help these small businesses get established.
Since this program relies on credits, this policy would create a no- to low-cost, low risk, financial
assistance program to help the city’s small business community.
Next steps: Staff will draft a SAC credit policy for the city council’s consideration in 2026.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Written report: 5
Executive summary
Title: Development update Q4 2025
Recommended action: None. The attached report summarizes the status of major
development projects occurring in St. Louis Park.
Policy consideration: Not applicable. Contact staff with any questions.
Summary: The attached report is meant to keep the EDA/city council informed on a quarterly
basis as to the metrics, construction status, and tentative schedule of major development
projects in the city. For clarity:
• Proposed developments: are those that are working through the planning entitlement
process such as platting, PUDs, variances, and have not yet been approved.
• Approved developments: are those whose planning applications have been approved
by the city council and have not yet commenced construction (but whose financial
assistance agreements may or may not yet have been approved).
• Under construction: are those that just started or are actively being constructed.
• Completed developments: are those that have received their final certificates of
occupancy.
More detailed information can be found on the interactive development dashboard on the
city’s website. The dashboard provides project metrics for all major developments or additions
that have been approved, under construction, or completed within the city since 2010. The
dashboard includes website links, market rate and affordable unit counts by bedroom size,
parking information, bike facilities, electric vehicle charging stations, and more.
Additionally, developments receiving financial assistance from the EDA/city are required to
track Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) goals related to business enterprises and workforce
hiring goals. The current goal status for projects under construction and for recently completed
developments is also included in the update.
Financial or budget considerations: Development activity affects the city’s total tax capacity as
reflected in the city’s annual budget and long-range financial plan. It also plays a significant role
in the retention of the city’s AAA bond rating.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Major developments in St. Louis Park – 4th Quarter 2025, DEI report
and development gameboard graphic
Prepared by: Dean Porter-Nelson, redevelopment administrator
Reviewed by: Jennifer Monson, economic development manager; Karen Barton, community
development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Major Developments in St. Louis Park
4th Quarter 2025
Multifamily housing development summary Total Market rate Affordable
Proposed units 0 0 0
Approved units 478 343 135
Units under construction 298 298 0
Recently completed units (last two years) 1,645 1,113 532
All units 2,421 1,754 667
Total Development Costs (TDC)* $812.8 million
*TDC includes all developments in the above categories to the extent known
For additional information please see Development Projects on the city’s web site.
Proposed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Wooddale Station
Redevelopment
5950 36th Street W
TBD
The EDA is seeking qualified developers to deliver the city's
vision for the site. That vision includes building an active,
vibrant and connected development where people can
affordably live, work and recreate. This site is a great
opportunity to take full advantage of proximity to light rail
transit, regional trail and surrounding neighborhood
amenities.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
EDA is seeking
qualified
developers for the
EDA-owned site.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Shops at West End Office
Development
The owner of the Shops at West End, Hempel Real Estate, is
exploring the possibility of redeveloping a vacant corner of
the Shops to have ground floor commercial, with 4-6 stories
of office space above.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
An AUAR update
was approved by
the city council on
Oct. 6, 2025.
Construction
commencement is
TBD.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 2
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Terasa
5401 Gamble Drive
Hempel Real Estate
Redevelopment of the northwest office tower within the
West End Office Towers complex, and construction of up to a
six story, 222-unit mixed-use building with 21,000 square feet
of commercial space, potentially including a grocer,
restaurant, and coffee shop. Development will include
affordable housing units (20% of total), made available to
households earning up to 50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $93.7 million.
EDA approved a
redevelopment
contract on Feb.
18, 2025.
The project could
not raise sufficient
debt and equity, so
the developer has
submitted an
amendment to the
PUD to allow for a
reduced number of
units to make the
project financially
feasible.
An amendment to
the redevelopment
contract is also
proposed for the
EDA and city
council’s
consideration to
reduce the city’s
TIF contribution to
the project.
Construction
commencement
expected Q1 2026
with completion
anticipated June
2028.
Minnetonka Blvd
redevelopment
5707 – 5639
Minnetonka Blvd.
GMHC (Greater
Metropolitan Housing
Corporation) & Homes
Within Reach
Affordable Housing
Land Trust
Construction of four twin homes (eight-units), providing eight
permanently affordable homeownership opportunities on
four vacant EDA-owned lots.
Estimated total development cost: $8 million
The city council
approved a PUD in
March 2025 and
the project is
currently raising
additional grant
funds.
Construction is
expected to start
Q1 2026.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 3
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Knollwood Chipotle
Lindsay Knollwood 2,
LLC Construction of a Chipotle restaurant at the northwest corner
of Highway 7 and Aquila Avenue South, with a drive-thru lane
for pick up orders only.
Estimated total development cost: TBD
The project
required a
conditional use
permit which was
approved on Oct.
6, 2025.
Construction
commencement is
TBD.
Park Place East
5775 Wayzata Blvd.
GW Properties
Proposed is the construction of two retail buildings in the
southeast corner of the parking lot at 5775 Wayzata Blvd. The
new buildings will contain four fast-casual restaurants.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved in
December 2023
and June 2024.
Building permits
are submitted and
construction
commencement is
TBD.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 4
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
2625 Louisiana Avenue
2625 Louisiana Ave.
Web Development LLC
Largely vacant parcel adjacent to North Cedar Lake Regional
Trail to be redeveloped with a 57-unit, four-story, mixed-use
market-rate building with approximately 4,000 square feet of
ground floor commercial space along with underground and
surface parking. Project includes a public path connecting
Louisiana Avenue to the Regional Trail.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved 2022 and
reapproved 2024.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Achromatic 6013
6013 and 6019 Cedar
Lake Rd.
Joshua Aaron Proposed is the redevelopment of two single-family homes
and the construction of a 36 unit, three-story building with
one level of below grade parking.
Estimated total construction costs: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved
March 2024.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 5
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Parkway Residences
W 31st St. between
Inglewood Ave. &
Glenhurst Ave.
Sela Group & Affiliates
Multi-phase redevelopment includes four multi-family
buildings with 211 units. The affordable housing includes 24
rehabilitated units which will be made available to
households earning up to 50% of area median income (AMI),
and six new units which will be made available to households
earning up to 60% AMI.
Phase III: Eleven-story, 73-unit apartment building.
Estimated development cost: $36.2 million.
Estimated total development cost (all phases): $91.4 million.
EDA approved an
extension to the
development
contract February
2024.
Phase III
commencement
TBD.
Under construction
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Beltline Blvd Station
Site
SE quadrant of CSAH 25
& Beltline Blvd.
Sherman Associates Major mixed-use, mixed income, transit-oriented,
multi-phase development adjacent to
SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station.
Building 1 includes:
•Seven-story mixed-use building with six levels of
market rate housing (152 units) and 20,000 square
Planning
applications
approved
April 18, 2022.
Financial assistance
agreements
approved
June 20, 2022, and
July 24, 2023.
Amendments to
financial
assistance.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 6
Under construction
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
feet of neighborhood commercial space.
•A 592-stall parking ramp, which will include 268 park
& ride stalls, 326 residential stalls and approximately
1,850 square feet of commercial space.
•Estimated development cost: $55.7 million.
•Estimated development cost of public ramp: $11.1
million.
Building 2 includes:
•Four-story all affordable apartment building with 82
units, 39 units will be available to households earning
up to 60% of Area Median Income (AMI), 23 units will
be available to households earning up to 50% AMI,
and 20 units will be available to households earning
up to 30% AMI. The project includes twenty-two three
bedroom units, and 44 units two bedrooms units
•Estimated development cost: $28.4 million.
•Note – B2 is not yet under construction as it has not
yet closed on its financing.
Building 3 includes:
•Five-story market rate apartment building with 146
units.
Estimated development cost: $53.5 million.
Altogether, the multi-phase redevelopment will have
380 apartment units of which 82 (21%) would be affordable.
Estimated total development cost: $148.7 million.
approved May 19,
2025.
B2 (affordable
project) received
$14.5 million
allocation of bonds
on July 7, 2025.
Anticipated B2
closing by Dec. 31,
2025.
Anticipated
construction:
•Grading and
dewatering is
complete.
•Utility
relocation and
installation is in
progress.
•Building 1,
Building 3 and
ramp – in
progress.
•Building 2 –
Starting Q1
2026.
•Construction
completion
Q1, 2027.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 7
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Union Park Flats
3700 Alabama Ave. &
6027 37th St. W.
PPL (Project for Pride in
Living)
Redevelopment of the north portion of the Union
Congregational Church property with a three story, 60-unit
affordable apartment building on the north half of the
property. All unit rents have limits ranging between 30%-60%
of area median income (AMI). Union Congregational Church
plans to remain on the south portion of the property.
Estimated total development cost: $28.6 million.
Completed
December 2024.
Mera
(formerly 9920
Wayzata)
9808 & 9920 Wayzata
Blvd.
Bigos Management
Redevelopment of former Santorini’s restaurant property at
northwest quadrant of I-394 & US 169.
Six-story, 233-unit, mixed income apartment building with
20% (47) of the units available to households earning up to
50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $68.6 million.
Completed
August 2024.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 8
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Zelia on Seven
(formerly Via Sol)
SE quadrant Hwy. 7 &
Wooddale Ave.
5855 Hwy. 7
Originally developed by
PLACE
now owned by
Bigos Management
Mixed-income, transit-oriented development including a five-
story, 217-unit apartment building (130 market rate units, 22
units affordable to households earning up to 50% of area
median income (AMI), and 65 units affordable to households
earning up to 60% AMI, solar panels which will be installed
spring 2025 (producing 220AC kW, 275 DC kW and 300,000
KwH total generation), and one-acre urban forest.
Estimated total development cost: $88.4 million.
Completed
May 2024.
Arbor Court
3801 Wooddale Ave. S.
Real Estate Equities LLC
Redevelopment of former Aldersgate Church property
adjacent to Burlington Coat/Micro Center and Highway 100.
All affordable housing development includes 114-units, with
205 parking stalls, of which 117 stalls would be underground.
• 5 units affordable to households earning up to 30% AMI
• 5 units affordable to households earning up to 50% AMI
• 104 units affordable to households earning up to 60%
AMI
Estimated total development cost $30.1 million.
Completed
March 2024.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 9
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Risor
3510 Beltline Blvd.
Roers Company
Six-story, 170-unit apartment building with 4,100 square feet
of ground floor commercial space and 14 ground floor live-
work units. The development is an age restricted (55+)
community with 10% (18) of the units affordable to
households earning up to 50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated construction cost: $56.5 million.
Completed
November 2023.
Rise on 7
8115 Hwy. 7
CommonBond
Redevelopment of former Prince of Peace church property
across from Shops at Knollwood. Includes a four-story,
120-unit, all affordable apartment building with rent and
income restrictions ranging between 30%-60% of AMI along
with a 6,600 square foot “affordable” early childhood center.
Estimated total development cost: $40.7 million.
Completed
November 2023.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 10
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Corsa
(formerly Beltline
Residences)
3440 Beltline Blvd.
Opus Group
Five-story, 250-unit mixed-use, mixed income development
with two retail spaces totaling 7,445 square feet and
six live/work units. 10% of the units (25) are affordable to and
made available to households earning up to 50% of area
median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $78.1 million.
Completed
October 2023.
Bremer Bank
7924 Hwy. 7
Frauenshuh
The retail building containing Knollwood Liquor and Papa
Murphy’s Pizza was removed and replaced with a two-story,
5,850 square foot office building and is occupied by Bremer
Bank.
Completed
October 2023.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 11
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Caraway
(formerly Luxe
Residential)
5235 Wayzata Blvd.
(Phase VI of
Central Park West)
Greystar Real Estate
Partners
Redevelopment of former Olive Garden property in The West
End area.
Luxe Residential is a six-story, 207-unit, apartment building
(including eight units affordable to households earning up to
60% of AMI) along with two levels of underground parking.
The development also includes a new pocket park along 16th
Street and pedestrian improvements connecting the
apartment building to the rest of The West End area.
Estimated construction cost: $51.8 million
Completed
October 2023.
Volo at Texa-Tonka
NE corner Texas Ave. &
Minnetonka Blvd.
Paster Development
Mixed income redevelopment includes 101 apartment units
in a three- to four-story building, and 11 walk-up style
townhome units located in two two-story buildings on the
northern end of the site. Twenty percent (23) of the units
would be affordable to households earning up to 50% AMI.
Estimated total development cost: $26.6 million.
Completed 11
townhome units
December 2022.
Completed 101
multifamily units
May 2023.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 12
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Nordic Ware
expansions
Buildings 8 & 9
5005 CSAH 25
Dalquist Properties LLC
21,853-square-foot warehouse and loading dock addition to
Building 8. 45,000 square foot warehouse and loading dock
addition to Building 9 along with a small café and outdoor
patio on the property’s south side facing the regional trail.
Estimated construction cost: $11.6 million
Completed
Q2, 2022.
Parkway Residences
W 31st St. between
Inglewood Ave. &
Glenhurst Ave.
Sela Group & Affiliates
Multi-phase redevelopment includes four, multi-family
buildings with 211 units. The affordable housing includes 24
rehabilitated units available to households earning up to 50%
of area median income (AMI), and six new units available to
households earning up to 60% AMI.
Phase I:
• Parkway Place: Four-story, 95-unit apartment building.
• Parkway Flats: Six-unit apartment building.
• Rehab of 24 NOAH apartment units.
Estimated development cost: $40.6 million
Phase II: Parkway Commons: Four-story, 37-unit apartment
building.
Estimated development cost: $14.6 million
Parkway Place &
rehab completed
April 30, 2022.
Parkway Flats
completed
October 2022.
Parkway Commons
completed
March 2023.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 13
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hiring Goals
Report – October 1, 2025
Beltline Station Building #1 – Mixed Use Building
Beltline Station #1
QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ACTUAL GOALS
Total number of business enterprises
contracted in development 30
Percentage of women-owned business
enterprises in development 10% 6%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI owned
business enterprises in development 0% 13%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to women-owned business
enterprises in development
3.15% 6%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to BIPOC/AAPI owned business
enterprises in development
0.00% 13%
Total number of construction workers
contracted in development 13
Percentage of women workforce in
development 8% 20%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI workforce in
development 8% 32%
Percentage of total construction hours for
women workforce in development 5.03% 20%
Percentage of total construction hours for
BIPOC/AAPI workforce in development 3.47% 32%
Total number of employees at business
organization 530
Percentage of women employed by
business organization 30.94% 10%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI persons
employed by business organization 32% 13%
*The BIPOC/AAPI workforce demographic data is self-reported, and likely does not fully capture
Hispanic/Latinx individuals.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 14
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hiring Goals
Report – October 1, 2025
Beltline Station Building #3 – Market Rate Housing
Beltline Station #1
QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ACTUAL GOALS
Total number of business enterprises
contracted in development 40
Percentage of women-owned business
enterprises in development 10% 6%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI owned
business enterprises in development 3% 13%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to women-owned business
enterprises in development
4.29% 6%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to BIPOC/AAPI owned business
enterprises in development
0.41% 13%
Total number of construction workers
contracted in development 20
Percentage of women workforce in
development 10% 20%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI workforce in
development 0% 32%
Percentage of total construction hours for
women workforce in development 14.95% 20%
Percentage of total construction hours for
BIPOC/AAPI workforce in development 0.00% 32%
Total number of employees at business
organization 530
Percentage of women employed by
business organization 30.94% 10%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI persons
employed by business organization 32% 13%
*The BIPOC/AAPI workforce demographic data is self-reported, and likely does not fully capture
Hispanic/Latinx individuals.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 15
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hiring Goals
Report – October 1, 2025
Beltline Station Sitework – for all buildings and the parking ramp
Beltline Station #1
QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ACTUAL GOALS
Total number of business enterprises
contracted in development 5
Percentage of women-owned business
enterprises in development 0% 6%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI owned
business enterprises in development 0% 13%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to women-owned business
enterprises in development
0.00% 6%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to BIPOC/AAPI owned business
enterprises in development
0.00% 13%
Total number of construction workers
contracted in development 36
Percentage of women workforce in
development 0% 20%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI workforce in
development 14% 32%
Percentage of total construction hours for
women workforce in development 0.00% 20%
Percentage of total construction hours for
BIPOC/AAPI workforce in development 20.35% 32%
Total number of employees at business
organization 530
Percentage of women employed by
business organization 30.94% 10%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI persons
employed by business organization 32% 13%
*The BIPOC/AAPI workforce demographic data is self-reported, and likely does not fully capture
Hispanic/Latinx individuals.
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update Q4 2025 Page 16
Beltline Station
buildings 1,3, &
ramp
Wooddale Station
Redevelopment
Minnetonka Blvd.
Twin homes
Terasa
Development
2625
Louisiana
Ave.
Achromatic
6013
Park
Place East
Beltline
Station
building 2
Study session meeting of
November 10, 2025 (Item No. 5)
Title: Development update
Q4 2025
Page 17
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 10, 2025
Written report: 6
Executive summary
Title: Minnetonka Boulevard twin homes update - Ward 1
Recommended action: None at this time. A follow-up study session on the project status will be
scheduled in early 2026.
Policy consideration: This written report provides an update on the status of the Minnetonka
Boulevard Twin Homes project.
Summary: On July 6, 2021, the Economic Development Authority (EDA) entered into a
preliminary development agreement (PDA) with the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation
(GMHC) to pursue the development of owner-occupied affordable housing on four vacant EDA-
owned, properties located at 5639, 5643, 5647, and 5707 Minnetonka Boulevard. A planned
unit development (PUD) ordinance for the site was approved on March 17, 2025, allowing
construction of eight twin homes designed as zero-lot-line structures with one shared wall.
Following PUD approval, soil investigations revealed the presence of an unpermitted dump on
the site that predates the former homes built in the early 1930s. This discovery significantly
increased project costs, resulting in a total estimated project cost of $8.2 million.
GMHC, working with a consultant, prepared a Response Action Plan (RAP) and submitted it to
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) in early October 2025. GMHC is collaborating
with city and EDA staff to apply for additional grants to close the project’s financing gap. GMHC
anticipates purchasing the properties from the EDA by April 2026, following final notification of
Metropolitan Council (Met Council) and Hennepin County grant awards. Site cleanup and
construction are expected to begin shortly thereafter, with construction completion anticipated
in late 2026 and home sales to buyers in early 2027.
Financial or budget considerations: The total cost of the project is $8.2 million. The project has
$6.52 million in committed sources, with $1.3 million in grant applications with the
Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County currently pending. GMHC and Homes Within Reach
anticipate requesting $400,000 in Affordable Housing Trust Funds (AHTF) from the city, in
addition to the committed $3 million HUD congressionally directed spending (CDS) grant.
GMHC anticipates acquiring the land from the EDA for the previously appraised value of $1
million. If the project does not receive all grant funds applied for, GMHC anticipates requesting
additional AHTF.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Dean Porter-Nelson, redevelopment administrator
Reviewed by: Jennifer Monson, economic development manager; Karen Barton, community
development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: Minnetonka Boulevard twin homes update - Ward 1
Discussion
Background: On July 6, 2021, the EDA entered into a preliminary development agreement
(PDA) with GMHC to pursue development of owner-occupied affordable housing on four EDA-
owned vacant parcels located at 5639, 5643, 5647 and 5707 Minnetonka Boulevard. A planned
unit development (PUD) ordinance for the site was approved on March 17, 2025 including eight
twin homes constructed as zero lot line structures with one shared wall.
Present considerations: After the city approved the PUD in March 2025, the developer, GMHC,
hired an environmental consultant to study soil conditions at the site. The study found that the
properties had once been used as a dump site prior to the 1930s when single-family homes
were built on the four lots now owned by the EDA. The consultant identified heavy metals,
asbestos and other contaminants. Extensive cleanup will be needed before redevelopment can
move forward.
The consultant prepared a Response Action Plan (RAP) that meets Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) standards and ensures the site will be safe for future residents.
Cleanup costs are now estimated at about $1.3 million—much higher than earlier estimates—
and are the main reason for the project’s overall cost increase. Updated funding sources and
uses are shown below. To close the funding gap, the developer has applied for additional grant
funding from Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council.
The current project budget includes $6.9 million in committed funds and $1.3 million in pending
funds. The project team expects to request $400,000 from the city’s Affordable Housing Trust
Fund (AHTF) to be provided to Home Within Reach to help keep all eight of the homes
permanently affordable. This represents a $100,000 one-time increase over the $300,000 AHTF
annual award that the city typically provides to Homes Within Reach (HWR) which typically
results in the creation of three to four land trust homes in St. Louis Park annually.
In addition, the city signed a grant agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) in July 2025 to use $3 million in congressionally directed spending (CDS)
funds for the project.
Sources and uses of funds (current estimates)
Uses of funds
Land acquisition & construction (including construction of
the eight homes, permits, contingency, certifications and
warranties)
$5,529,381
Alley and site improvements related to vehicle access,
stormwater management and topography (retaining walls)
$525,000
Soil cleanup and other environmental costs $1,287,252
Soft costs (architecture, engineering, soil studies, taxes,
insurance, construction interest, marketing, land trust
administration of long-term affordability, developer fee,
etc.)
$894,936
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 6) Page 3
Title: Minnetonka Boulevard twin homes update - Ward 1
Total uses $8,236,569
Source of funds Amount
Met Council Homeownership Grant (pending) $800,000
Minnesota Brownfields grant (committed) $22,300
Met Council Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA)
cleanup (pending)
$75,700
Hennepin County Accelerator funds (committed) $1,044,665
HUD Congressionally Directed spending (committed) $3,000,000
Met Council Local Housing Incentives Account (LHIA)
(committed)
$257,904
Minnesota Housing Impact Funds (committed) $196,000
Hennepin County Environmental Response Funds (ERF)
cleanup funds (pending)
$440,000
St. Louis Park AHTF to Homes Within Reach (anticipated) $400,000
Construction loan / sale of homes for $250,000 each
(anticipated - homes to be sold below market value)
$2,000,000
Total Sources $ 8,236,569
A project timeline showing recent milestones and next steps through the sale of EDA property
and start of construction is included below. The project team is awaiting grant funding decisions
from Hennepin County and the Met Council. Once those decisions are made, the remaining
funding gap, if any, will be known. If a gap persists, GMHC may request additional AHTF funding
beyond the $400,000 currently anticipated.
Next steps: City staff and representatives from GMHC and the project team will provide
additional information about the project, including details about the homes such as the number
of bedrooms, sustainability features, elevations, and site plans, at the city council study session
in early 2026. Staff and project representatives will also be available to answer questions at
that time.
Project timeline – recent actions Organization Date
Begin geotechnical work GMHC June 16, 2025
Approval of additional brownfield consulting work Hennepin County June 2025
City executed grant agreement with HUD City and HUD July 21, 2025
Geotechnical work including soil corrections plan,
stormwater management, pavement
recommendations, slope stability analysis for
retaining walls and drainage areas was completed
GMHC July – October 2025
Response Action Plan (RAP) was drafted with
environmental consultant
GMHC August & September
2025
EDA approved a resolution to apply for Met Council
affordable homeownership grant program
EDA Sept. 15, 2025
RAP submitted to MPCA GMHC Oct. 10, 2025
Study session meeting of November 10, 2025 (Item No. 6) Page 4
Title: Minnetonka Boulevard twin homes update - Ward 1
Project timeline – recent actions Organization Date
EDA approved application to environmental grants EDA Oct. 20, 2025
GMHC secured updated construction estimates GMHC October 2025
City submitted applications for Met Council TBRA and
Hennepin County ERF funds
City Nov. 3, 2025
EDA receives a written report on Minnetonka
Boulevard project status
EDA Nov. 10, 2025
Project timeline - future actions Organization Date
EDA discusses twin home project at study session EDA/City Council Early 2026
Award decision of Met Council Homeownership and
TBRA contamination funds
Met Council December 2025 to
January 2026
Award decision of Hennepin County ERF
contamination clean up funds
Hennepin County January 2026
Bidding process and completion of drawings GMHC January 2026
GMHC submits applications for public financing to
the city, after receiving notification of various grant
applications
GMHC
February 2026
Purchase and redevelopment agreements considered
by EDA and City of St. Louis Park
EDA and City Council February & March
2026
GMHC submits building permit applications GMHC Feb & March 2026
GMHC closes on any remaining project financing and
purchases property from EDA
GMHC March or April 2026
Contamination clean-up and soil corrections GMHC March or April 2026
Construction commences GMHC April or May 2026
Pre-marketing with Homes Within Reach land trust Homes Within Reach July & August 2026
Construction completes and homes sales occur GMHC and Homes
Within Reach
December 2026