Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017/05/01 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA MAY 1, 2017 (Councilmember Lindberg Absent) 6:15 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Item 1. 6:15 p.m. Debt Model and Upcoming 2017 Bond Issue Review 7:00 p.m. CONVENE LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL & EQUALIZATION – Council Chambers 7:15 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Minutes 3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 3, 2017 3b. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 17, 2017 4. Approval of Agenda 5.Reports 5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements 6.Old Business -- None 7.New Business 7a. Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Recommended Action: •Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the elimination of a parcel from the Elmwood Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District (Hennepin County TIF District No. 1312), within Redevelopment Project No. 1, in the City of St. Louis Park). •Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district) •Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain costs in connection with the administration of the Wooddale Station TIF District. 7b. Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 8.Communications -- None 9.Adjournment Meeting of May 1, 2017 City Council Agenda 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. Bike Month Proclamation 2b. Update from Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman 2c. St. Louis Park High School Students Update on The Nest 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2017 3b. Special Study Session Minutes April 17, 2017 3c. City Council Meeting Minutes April 17, 2017 3d. Special City Council Meeting Minutes April 24, 2017 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 5. Boards and Commissions – None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district). 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution certifying the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) as an adequate examination of the environmental impacts and accepting the Record of Decision, declaring no need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the PLACE redevelopment project. (Requires 4 affirmative votes.) 8b. PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Recommended Action: • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 9 to the Zoning Code and amend the Zoning Map from IG-General Industrial and MX- Meeting of May 1, 2017 City Council Agenda Mixed Use to PUD 9 for the property located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication (requires 4 affirmative votes). 8c. Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA pursuant to proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the conveyance of property from the City of St. Louis Park to the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority pursuant to the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC. 8d. Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Recommended Action: Motion to Approve the first reading of an ordinance establishing a Planned Unit Development for the Shoppes at Knollwood and the construction of a Chick- fil-A restaurant, and to set the second reading for May 15, 2017. 8e. Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution granting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the City of St. Louis Park allowing the excavation of 2,160 cubic yards of material and the import of 500 cubic yards of fill to construct a stormwater treatment facility at 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street, subject to conditions. 8f. Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing a Major Amendment to the Special Permit to allow a building expansion at Benilde-St. Margaret’s (BSM) school with conditions recommended by staff. 9. Communications – None Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting of May 1, 2017 City Council Agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of March 25, 2017 through April 21, 2017. 4b. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending Section 36-268 PUD 7 of the Zoning Code for property located at 4005, 4015, & 4027 County Road 25, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. 4c. Designate Park Construction Company the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $3,228,888.95 for the Texas Avenue Reconstruction- (Project No. 4017-1101). 4d. Approve a Temporary Liquor License for the Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School for their Annual Meeting to be held on June 11, 2017, at the Sabes Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Road in St. Louis Park. 4e. Approve a parking agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC (Louisiana Oaks Apartments) to lease 20 parking spaces to accommodate overnight guests of the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex provided a permit is displayed on the vehicle. 4f. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of March 15, 2017. Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Debt Model and Upcoming 2017 Bond Issue Review RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. In addition to discussing a proposed 2017 bond issue, Staff desires to review with the Council a comprehensive debt modeling tool created by the Finance Division staff. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to proceed with the bond issuance for the 2017 projects? SUMMARY: Annually, as a best practice, staff would like to review a newly created and interactive 10-year debt model for upcoming bond issuances. While things will change, the debt model is flexible enough for long-term planning purposes to forecast future issuances and amounts needed based on identified projects in the capital improvement plan (CIP) and potential impacts. Staff will present the updated debt model and go over assumptions used. 2017 bond issuance amounts are subject to change since not all bids have yet been awarded. The anticipated bond issue in 2017 would include the following: General Obligation Improvement Bonds – Connect the Park (est. $2.5million) General Obligation Utility Revenue Bonds – Filter #4 project (est. $1million) based on anticipated amount expended in 2017 and the remaining will be issued in 2018. General Obligation Utility Revenue Bonds – Water and Sewer capital projects (est. $3.9million) General Obligation Improvement Bonds – SWLRT and Fiber (est. $1million) By staying under $10 million, the bonds will be bank qualified. In addition, Ehlers will examine if the City can refund any existing bonds for interest rate savings. The process to issue the 2017 bonds will begin over the next two months. Future action is on May 15th where the council would be asked to approve the pre-sale report/resolution and on June 19th award the bond sale via resolution. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: 2017 projects are identified in the Capital Improvement Plan and awarded contracts. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: LBAE Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: 2017 St. Louis Park Board of Appeal & Equalization RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to convene the meeting as follows: 1. Convene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization 2. Roll Call of Board Members – Declaration of Quorum 3. Motion to Appoint Chair 4. Acknowledgement of Trained Members (Mavity, Lindberg & Brausen) 5. a. Accept Roster of Appellants b. Call for Any Additional Appellants c. Motion to Close Roster of Appellants (subject to DOR instructions) 6. Motion to set Date and Time for Continued Proceedings (Reconvene) Suggested as May 15, 2017 prior to special study session 7. Instruct Assessor to: a. Inform Appellants of Reconvene Date & Board Process via Telephone and Mail b. Inform Appellants of the County Board Application Date (May 17 deadline) c. Re-Inspect and Re-Appraise Parcels Under Appeal 8. Completion of the Local Board Certification Form 9. Motion to Recess POLICY CONSIDERATION: Local Boards and/or Open Book Meetings are required by law. The Board must conclude its business within 20 days of convening (the convene date of May 1 is day one, May 20 is therefore the deadline for completion). SUMMARY: Minnesota statute requires that all properties are valued at full market value. All property owners, tenants and those having an interest in real property are entitled to appeal their classification and market value. The property classification is determined by the actual use of the property. The market value is an opinion based on records maintained for every property and the market conditions as of the date of assessment (January 2). In most jurisdictions and following our historic practice, the St. Louis Park Board of Appeal and Equalization is accomplished in two meetings. The first meeting is used to convene the Board, set the Board process, accept the roster of appeals and announce that appeals are resolved at the reconvene meeting. The second meeting (reconvene) is used to hear and decide the merit of each appeal. The Local Board process depends on active participation from all parties involved including the board members, the property owner and assessing staff. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable for budgeting from the perspective of the taxing jurisdictions. Changes made by the Board may affect the property owner’s share of the total property tax budget levy in the Pay 2018 tax period. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Summary of Duties & Responsibilities Sample Letter (Sent to each appellant on May 2) Prepared by: Cory Bultema, City Assessor Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Reviewed by: Tom Harmening, City Manager LBAE Meeting of May 1, 2017 Page 2 Title: 2017 St. Louis Park Board of Appeal & Equalization SUMMARY OF DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION Most of the responsibilities listed under the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization are statutory, primarily found in Minnesota Statutes 274.01. • The valuation notices shall be in writing and be sent by ordinary mail at least ten calendar days before the meeting of the board. The valuation notice will include the dates, places and times set for the meetings of the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization as well as the Hennepin County Board of Appeal and Equalization. • The City Clerk shall give published and posted notice of the meeting at least ten days before the meeting. The meetings must be held between April 1 and May 31 including reconvene meetings. The board must complete its work and adjourn within 20 days from the time of convening stated in the notice of the clerk, i.e. calendar days – original date is day one. • The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization is an official public meeting similar to a City Council meeting and cannot convene without a quorum. The local assessor, the county assessor, or one of his/her assistants is required to attend. • At least one member present at each meeting of the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization must be certified as having completed the DOR Board of Appeal and Equalization training. The compliance date is December 1 of the year prior to the current year’s meeting. • The board should run the meeting as a fair and impartial review of the appeals. The property owner is the appellant and the assessing staff act as the respondent. The board may ask questions to clarify facts and background on the appeal. It is suggested that all appeals are heard before the Board begins deliberations on each. • Local Boards of Appeal and Equalization must see that all taxable property is properly valued and classified for the current assessment year only. The board does not have the authority to reopen prior assessments on which taxes are due and payable. The board may add a property to the assessment roll if it has been omitted. • Individual board members cannot participate in actions or discussions of appeals involving their own property, property of relatives, or property in which they have a financial interest. • The Local Board may not increase or decrease all assessments in a district of a given class of property. Changes by class may be made by the County Board of Equalization. • The Local Board may not make a market value or classification change that would benefit the property in cases where the owner or other person having control over the property will not permit the assessor to inspect the property and the interior of any buildings or structures. • Although the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization has the authority to increase or decrease individual assessments, the total of such adjustment must not reduce the aggregate assessment by more than one percent. If the total reductions would exceed one percent, none of the adjustments may be made. The assessor shall correct any clerical errors or double assessments discovered by the board without regard to the one percent limitation. LBAE Meeting of May 1, 2017 Page 3 Title: 2017 St. Louis Park Board of Appeal & Equalization • If an assessment was made after the local board meeting or if a taxpayer can establish not having received the notice of market value at least five days before the meeting, they can appeal to the County Board of Appeal and Equalization. • The board may find instances of undervalued properties. The board must notify the owner of the property that the value is going to be raised. The property owner must have the opportunity to appear before the board if they so wish. • The local boards do not have the authority to address exemption issues. Only the county assessor (and the tax court) has the authority to exempt property. They also have no jurisdiction over special programs for which an application process is required (Veterans Exclusion, Market Value Homestead Exclusion, Green Acres, etc.). • A taxpayer may appear in person, by council, or written communication to present his or her objection to the board. The focus of the appeal must center on the factors influencing the estimated market value or classification placed on the property. • All changes will be entered into the assessment record by the county assessor’s office. • Before adjourning, the local board should prepare an official list of the changes. The law requires that the changes be listed on a separate form. All assessments that have been increased or decreased should be shown on the form along with their market values. • Administrative Rules from the Department of Revenue beginning with the 2013 Local Board of Review: The Assessor may not make administrative changes to the valuation or classification less than 10 days prior to the Board. All contemplated changes should be brought to the Board for review and approval. Each appeal must be ruled on separately. • Directive from the Department of Revenue beginning with the 2015 Local Board of Review: assessing staff from Hennepin County will attend Local Board meetings. • Directive from the Department of Revenue (April 2017) – the Board is required to hear appeals from those who show up at the reconvene meeting. A comment: It has been the practice of the St. Louis Park Board to close the roster at the completion of the published meeting date – the new DOR directive effectively eliminates roster closure until adjourned. To comply with the DOR directive it is recommended that the Board decide last moment appeals on a case-by- case basis which may be as simple as acknowledging the appeal with no change ranging up to hearing the appeal in-depth. • Following each board meeting, a letter is sent to the owner of each property in appeal. The sample letter following the initial convene meeting is attached. • At the convene meeting on May 1, the Board will be given two outlines to assist you in conducting an efficient and productive meeting. One will be the Agenda as the Board process is quite specific in format. The other will be the Board roster which is updated at 4:30 pm. Further reference, if you desire, can be provided via the MN Department of Revenue Board Training Manual (2015 update). This manual gives considerably greater detail as to the process and role of the Board in the assessment process. LBAE Meeting of May 1, 2017 Page 4 Title: 2017 St. Louis Park Board of Appeal & Equalization SAMPLE LETTER TO ALL BOARD ROSTER PROPERTIES Address line 1 May 1, 2017 Address line 2 Address line 3 Re: St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal & Equalization Subject Address Property ID #: xx-xxx-xx-xx-xxxx Dear : The Board convened on May 1 and the above-referenced property has been entered onto the appeal roster. You are receiving both a telephone call and this letter to inform you that the reconvene date has been scheduled for X:XX pm on May 15, 2017 in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416. Appeals will be heard at this meeting. The following are important for you to know: • The property owner may appear in person, by representative, and/or by written communication to the Board. Assessing staff will visit with you or your representative to understand your perspective and explain our perspective as well. • If the Assessing staff has not already inspected your property within the last year, they must complete an interior and exterior inspection to revalue the property. Important: Refusing access precludes the Board from taking action that would benefit the owner (MN statute 274.01). • Assessing staff will then complete their revaluation and contact you prior to the May 15 meeting to inform you of their conclusion. This is an important component of the Local Board process. If the assessing staff and you as the owner can mutually agree to resolve the matter, the agreement will be reported to the Board. While it is common that that the Board ratifies mutual agreement, please note that the Board is the decision maker on the issue. This method of resolution is often preferred by property owners as it is not necessary to speak before the board. • When agreement cannot be reached, the Board hears the case. Past practice has been as follows: You, as the appellant, are allowed about 5-10 minutes to present information supporting your value position. The assessing staff, as the respondent, is allowed about 3-5 minutes to present information and their conclusion. The Board hears the information and decides the market value and/or classification as of January 2, 2017. The Board has full authority to sustain, increase, or decrease individual assessments. The Board does not have authority to reopen prior assessments. The Board does not have authority to change current and past real estate taxes. • The Board appreciates receiving written information before the meeting. We strongly recommend fact based locally competitive market information pertaining directly to your property (competitive sales, appraisals, etc.). National or regional information, while interesting, may not correlate to this specific local market. The assessing staff prepares a LBAE Meeting of May 1, 2017 Page 5 Title: 2017 St. Louis Park Board of Appeal & Equalization written report on all parcels under appeal and submits it to the Board prior to the meeting. If you would like your written documentation to be included in the Board packet, please provide it to my office by 12:00 Noon on Wednesday May 10 to allow time for copying or scanning. Otherwise, please prepare ten (10) copies of your written materials to be brought to the Board meeting on May 15. • Upon completion of the Local Board, you will be notified via letter of the Board action. If you do not agree with the Local Board decision, you are eligible to attend the Hennepin County Board of Appeal & Equalization which convenes in June. An application to appear before the County Board is required no later than May 17, 2017. Please keep in mind that you will not know the determination of the St. Louis Park Board until the reconvene meeting on May 15th. If you have any further questions on the Local Board process, do not hesitate to contact me directly. Cory Bultema, City Assessor Direct Dial 952-924-2536 Meeting: Economic Development Authority Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 3, 2017 1. Call to Order President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:23 p.m. Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Thom Miller, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano. Commissioners absent: None. Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Chief Financial Officer (Mr. Simon), City Attorney (Mr. Knutson), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planner (Ms. Monson), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - None 4. Approval of Agenda It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Lindberg, to approve the EDA agenda as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Reports 5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements Commissioner Brausen stated the primary expenditures for the EDA, this time around, are for art, and he happily moves approval. It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to approve the EDA Disbursements. The motion passed 7-0. 6. Old Business - None 7. New Business 7a. Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of Elmwood Apartments TIF District. Resolution No. 17-05 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 7a. Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of Elmwood Apartments TIF District. Resolution No. 17-05 Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. He noted there is a financial gap in the Elmwood Apartments project proforma which precludes the project from proceeding, and as a result the developer has requested TIF assistance. Calling for a public hearing is the first step in creating a TIF district. The EDA will have the opportunity to consider the business terms of the financial assistance in the near future, and those terms will be incorporated into a redevelopment contract with 36th Street LLC, expected to be brought to the EDA for formal consideration on May 15th, the same evening as the proposed TIF district public hearing. Staff recommends approval. It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-05, requesting the City Council call a public hearing relative to the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district). The motion passed 7-0. 7b. Purchase Agreement with Hennepin County HRA – Wooddale Station Properties. Resolution No. 17-06 Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. He noted this topic has been discussed at multiple study sessions. The non-profit developer PLACE proposes to purchase and redevelop several remnant parcels, which total approximately 4.9 acres on the north side and 2 acres on the south side of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station with a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented, and sustainable development. Regardless of whether the proposed PLACE project proceeds, the EDA has provided direction to acquire the subject parcels so as to assemble sites large enough to spur redevelopment on either side of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. He added that terms of the proposed purchase agreement were provided in a written report for the March 27 study session, and the proposed agreement has been reviewed by the EDA’s legal counsel, who recommends its approval. Commissioner Sanger stated she agrees that purchasing and assembling these properties would be very beneficial for future development in the area; however, she will not support the purchase of these parcels from Hennepin County at this time, as she knows this is to benefit the PLACE project, which she does not support. Commissioner Spano asked if the EDA purchased these properties and the PLACE project did not move forward, if the EDA would still own them. Mr. Hunt stated yes, and then the EDA would seek a new developer. It was moved by Commissioner Lindberg, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-06, approving the Purchase Agreement between EDA and the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HCHRA) relative to four remnant parcels adjacent to the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. The motion passed 6-1 (Commissioner Sanger opposed). Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 7c. Collateral Assignment of E2 TIF Note – Bader Development to Crown Bank. Resolution No. 17-07 Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. He stated this resolution concerns the approval of the collateral assignment of the E2 TIF Note between Bader Development, Mandalay Investment, and their lender, Crown Bank. Mr. Hunt added that if Bader Development were to default, the future TIF payments would be made directly to the lender. Additionally, this assignment is similar to other collateral assignments of TIF notes that the EDA has seen with other development projects supported through tax increments. Commissioner Lindberg stated he will abstain from this vote as his wife’s father works for Crown Bank. It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-07, approving the Collateral Assignment of the E2 TIF Note between Bader Development, Mandalay Investment and their lender, Crown Bank. The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Lindberg abstained). 8. Communications - None 9. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Anne Mavity, President Meeting: Economic Development Authority Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 17, 2017 1. Call to Order President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:24 p.m. Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Thom Miller, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano. Commissioners absent: None. Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Chief Financial Officer (Mr. Simon), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Economic Development Specialist (Ms. Grove), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes March 20, 2017 It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to approve the EDA minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 4. Approval of Agenda It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to approve the EDA agenda as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Reports – None 6. Old Business – None 7. New Business 7a. Grant Applications for the PLACE Project. Resolution No. 17-08, Resolution No. 17-09, and Resolution No. 17-10 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 Ms. Grove presented the grant application report. She noted that PLACE is requesting the EDA submit three grant applications on behalf of the PLACE project. PLACE is requesting the EDA apply for approximately $600,000-800,000 in contamination clean-up grants from the Metropolitan Council and DEED to mitigate costs associated with the clean-up of the contaminated soils on-site. Clean-up grant applications are due May 1, 2017. PLACE is also requesting the EDA apply for an $850,000 Livable Communities Transit Oriented Development grant from the Metropolitan Council to be used for solar, public art, and place making elements. Ms. Grove added that the EDA would be the designated applicant on all three grants but would have no financial obligation other than to serve as a conduit for the grants. Staff would administer all grants if they are awarded. It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-08, authorizing submission of grant application to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf of the PLACE Project. The motion passed 6-1 (Commissioner Sanger opposed). It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-09, authorizing the submission of a grant application to the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf of the PLACE project. The motion passed 6-1 (Commissioner Sanger opposed). It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-10, authorizing a grant application to the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Transit Oriented Development (LCA-TOD) Program for development activities for PLACE. The motion passed 6-1 (Commissioner Sanger opposed) 7b. Excelsior & Monterey Redevelopment. Mr. Walther noted the council had determined it was not in the best interests of the city to sell the 3743 Monterey Drive parcel to the developer at this time, and the appropriate action for the EDA is a motion to deny the TIF application and decline the developer’s offer to purchase the property. It was moved by Commissioner Hallfin, seconded by Commissioner Lindberg, to deny the TIF application and decline the developer’s offer to purchase the property at 3743 Monterey Drive. The motion passed 7-0. 8. Communications - None 9. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Anne Mavity, President Meeting: Economic Development Authority Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 5a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Approval of EDA Disbursements RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Disbursement Claims for the period of March 25, 2017 through April 21, 2017. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA Bylaws? SUMMARY: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information follows the EDA’s Bylaws and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, Accounting Clerk Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, Executive Director 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:21:06R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 406.00CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 448.89DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MEETING EXPENSE 854.89 249.00FINANCE & COMMERCE DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 249.00 10,000.00FRANZEN LAW & POLICY GROUP LLC HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICES 10,000.00 7,461.30HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER DEVELOPMENT - EDA BALANCE SHEE DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 4,446.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A RENT REVENUE 11,907.30 1,546.25HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 1,546.25 13,575.19KENNEDY & GRAVEN MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LEGAL SERVICES 68.00ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A LEGAL SERVICES 13,643.19 244.00LHB INC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 244.00 6,000.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 6,000.00 26,730.06METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 26,730.06 86.73OFFICE DEPOT DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 86.73 5,660.14SEHDEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 5,660.14 885.00THE PARK THEATER COMPANY PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 885.00 Report Totals 77,806.56 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 5a) Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 2 Meeting: Economic Development Authority Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 7a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District RECOMMENDED ACTION: • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the elimination of a parcel from the Elmwood Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District (Hennepin County TIF District No. 1312), within Redevelopment Project No. 1, in the City of St. Louis Park). • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district) • Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain costs in connection with the administration of the Wooddale Station TIF District. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support moving the 5925 Highway 7 property from the Elmwood TIF District and establishing the Wooddale Station TIF District to facilitate the construction of a major mixed use redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave.? SUMMARY: PLACE’s application for Tax Increment Financing assistance in connection with its proposed redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. has been extensively reviewed at multiple study sessions, EDA and City Council meetings where it received consensus support. Constructing the PLACE project is not financially feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. At its March 20th meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 1st for consideration of the proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment TIF District. It is now time to take the final step in the TIF process which is to formally authorize the creation of the Redevelopment TIF district. Such authorization enables the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the completed PLACE redevelopment as partial reimbursement for certain qualified redevelopment costs incurred in connection with the construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Creating the TIF district provides the funding vehicle to reimburse PLACE for a portion of its qualified project costs. The actual terms and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC which is also scheduled for consideration May 1st. Authorizing an Interfund Loan allows the EDA to recoup certain costs in connection with the administration of the new Wooddale TIF District. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion EDA Resolutions TIF Plan Overview Wooddale Station TIF Plan Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 2 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, is proposing to redevelop a 5.2 site (net of easements and rights-of- way) located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. The site is divided by the CP RR line and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and located in the Elmwood Neighborhood. Location of PLACE redevelopment at Wooddale Station CURRENT PROPOSAL: PLACE proposes to acquire the subject nine properties from the EDA and City, raze two structurally substandard buildings, and construct a major mixed-use, mixed- income, transit-oriented, environmentally sustainable development. Current plans depict four buildings split on the north and south sides of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. On April 17 the City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan amendment for the project along with the first reading of the PUD ordinance. The proposed PLACE project consists of the following components: • 2 apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units between them (of which 200 would be affordable and 99 would be market-rate) including 99 mixed-income live/work units. • 110-room hotel • 10,200 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility § Approximately 16,200 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial/retail space for a café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses § 4,000 SF small business co-working hub § Woonerf (Placemaking Plaza) • 447 parking spaces (structured, surface, and street) • 510,778 SF. of total program space • 1 AC “urban forest” with children’s play area and public art Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 3 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District The entire project is being designed to achieve LEED Silver or Gold certification. Developer’s Request for Public Financing Assistance The Total Development Cost (TDC) to construct the proposed PLACE redevelopment is approximately $123 million. There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site. These include: environmental investigation and reporting, asbestos abatement, building demolition, contaminated soil removal and disposal, site preparation, underground stormwater retention, circulation enhancements and structured parking. Altogether, these costs exceed $9.5 million and prevent the PLACE project from achieving financial feasibility. Consequently PLACE applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these costs. Tax increment financing uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain qualified development costs incurred by that project for a limited period of time. Level and Type of Financial Assistance PLACE’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to each component of the PLACE project were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the PLACE project proformas, Ehlers determined that the PLACE project is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $5.66 million in tax increment financing. The assistance would be provided in the form of a TIF Note and would be made available to exclusively reimburse PLACE for a portion of the extraordinary site preparation costs cited above. Upon project completion, tax increment generated from the increased value of the subject property would be provided to PLACE on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the City's TIF Policy. Upon completion, the proposed project would generate the requested assistance in approximately 15 years. TIF Application Review The EDA/City Council reviewed PLACE’s TIF Application for the proposed PLACE project at the February 13th and April 3rd Study Sessions. Following discussion there was consensus support for favorably considering the Developer’s request for tax increment assistance. As a result, staff was directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment TIF District and to begin drafting a formal purchase and redevelopment contract with PLACE. TIF District Approvals At its March 20th meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 1, 2017 for consideration of the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. The EDA will consider the approval of the purchase and redevelopment contract that same evening. The Planning Commission reviewed the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing Plan on April 19th, as required by the MN TIF Act, and determined it was in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Synopsis of the Proposed Wooddale Station TIF District The subject site is located within the boundaries of the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which is the portion of the city where TIF districts may statutorily be established. Inclusion of the proposed project within a designated Redevelopment Project Area allows the EDA/City Council to establish a TIF district so as to enable the EDA to provide the proposed financial assistance to the PLACE project. The proposed Wooddale Station TIF District consists of the following nine parcels as shown in the attached TIF District map. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 4 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District • 5925 State Hwy No 7 • 5815 State Hwy No 7 • 5725 State Hwy No 7 • 3520 Yosemite Ave S • 3565 Wooddale Ave • 3548 Xenwood Ave S • 3575 Wooddale Ave • 5816 36th St W • 5814 36th St W Together, these parcels equal approximately 7 acres including adjacent rights of way. The proposed TIF district is further detailed in the attached TIF District Overview and Wooddale Station TIF Plan. The 5925 Highway 7 property currently lies within the Elmwood TIF District. Therefore, the EDA will be asked to decertify the property from the Elmwood TIF District in order to include it in the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District. Attached is an Overview which summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District. Details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the attached Wooddale Station TIF District Plan. Both the Overview and TIF Plan were prepared by the EDA’s TIF consultant, Ehlers. In a general sense, TIF Plans may be viewed as enabling legislation. They establish the proposed TIF district’s classification, geographic boundaries, maximum duration, maximum budget authority for tax increment revenues and expenditures, fiscal disparities election as well as estimated impact on various taxing jurisdictions along with findings which statutorily qualify the district. The specific mutual obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the precise terms of the financial assistance are contained in the separate Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved in order for redevelopment projects involving tax increment to proceed. Qualifications of the Proposed TIF District Consulting firm LHB was retained to conduct a TIF district feasibility analysis to determine if the subject site qualified as a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, After inspecting and evaluating the subject properties and applying current statutory criteria, LHB made the following findings in its report entitled: Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District: [Highway 7 & Wooddale] Redevelopment TIF District, St. Louis Park, MN dated November 22, 2016): • The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 88.7 percent which exceeds the 70 percent requirement. • 100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which exceeds the 50 percent requirement. • The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District. Thus the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District met both the “Coverage Test” and the “Condition of Buildings Test” and thereby qualifies under Minnesota Statutes Section 479.174, Subdivision 10 as a redevelopment TIF district. Other findings for the qualification of the proposed TIF District are contained in Appendix G of the attached TIF Plan. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 5 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Duration of the Proposed TIF District Under the TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City of the first tax increment is expected to be 2020. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to terminate in 2045. The EDA and City have the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. The City’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper are estimated to be satisfied in approximately 15 years. Once those obligations are satisfied, the City may terminate the District. TIF District Budget The TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to pay for certain qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District should they be necessary. It should be noted that the financing uses and project costs reflected within Subsection 2-10 (Uses of Funds) of the attached TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project budget. Fiscal Disparities Election within the Proposed TIF District The proposed redevelopment will contain commercial property; therefore the proposed TIF District is subject to the fiscal disparities calculation. Consistent with the city’s TIF Policy and past practice, the Wooddale Station TIF District will contribute to fiscal disparities (as opposed to the tax base of the City making the contribution). Recommendation The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the proposed Wooddale Station TIF Plan in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven and staff; all of whom recommend approval of the resolutions eliminating the 5925 Highway 7 property from the Elmwood TIF District, establishing the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District and authorizing an Interfund Loan in connection with the administration of the new Wooddale TIF District. . NEXT STEPS: The Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE which specifies the terms and amount of TIF assistance related to the PLACE project is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA May 1st. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 6 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMCIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ELIMINATION OF A PARCEL FROM THE ELMWOOD VILLAGE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 IN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK. WHEREAS, on August 2, 2004, the City of St. Louis Park (the "City") created its Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within its Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project") by approval of a tax increment financing plan (the "TIF Plan) for the TIF District; and WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) administers the City’s TIF Districts on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, the following property, by property identification number, was included in the TIF District: 16-117-21-31-0071 WHEREAS, the Authority desires by this resolution to amend the TIF Plan to remove the above-described parcel from the TIF District, thereby reducing the size thereof; and WHEREAS, the total current net tax capacity of the parcel to be eliminated from the TIF District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity and, therefore this amendment to the TIF Plan is accomplished pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, clause (e)(2)(A). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Authority that the TIF Plan for the TIF District is hereby amended to remove the described parcel and the Economic Development Coordinator is authorized and directed to notify the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County thereof pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, clause (e). Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President Attest Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 7 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, ESTABLISHING THE WOODDALE STATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. WHEREAS, it has been proposed by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and the City of St. Louis Park (the "City") that the EDA and City adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project Area"), establish the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Plans and presented for the Board's consideration; and WHEREAS, the EDA has investigated the facts relating to the Plans and has caused the Plans to be prepared; and WHEREAS, the EDA has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption of the Plans, and has requested that City Planning Commission provide for review of and written comment on the Plans and that the Council schedule a public hearing on the Plans upon published notice as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows: 1. The EDA hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment district" under Section 469.174, Subd. 10 (a)(1) of the Act, and finds that the adoption of the proposed TIF Plan conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to redevelop an area of the State of Minnesota which is already built up and that the adoption of the proposed TIF Plan will help provide diversified housing opportunities in the State, assist in the preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the City and the State and provide employment opportunities, through the construction of quality affordable and market rate housing, a hotel, a greenhouse/e-generation facility, and/or retail space, thereby serving a public purpose. 2. The EDA further finds that the TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs for the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Project Area by private enterprise in that the intent is to provide only that public assistance necessary to make the private development financially feasible. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 8 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 3. The EDA elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b of the Act, which means the fiscal disparities contribution will be taken from inside the District. 4. Conditioned upon the approval thereof by the City Council following its public hearing thereon, the Plans (including the TIF Plan), as presented to the EDA on this date, are hereby approved, established and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Executive Director of the EDA. 5. Upon approval of the Plans by the City Council, City staff and the EDA's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Board for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. Approval of the Plans does not constitute approval of any project or development agreement with any developer. 6. Upon approval of the Plans by the City Council, the Executive Director of the EDA is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Plans to the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 4a of the Act. 7. The Executive Director of the EDA is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Plans to the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County (the “Manager”) and request that the Manager certify the original tax capacity of the District as described in the Plans, all in accordance with Section 469.177 of the Act. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the Economic Development Authority May 1, 2017 __________________________________ ____________________________________ Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President Attest: __________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 9 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE WOODDALE STATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), intends to establish the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), and will adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project. WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”) has determined to use tax increments from the TIF District to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF Plan, which may include land/building acquisition, site improvements/preparation, utilities, other qualifying improvements, interest and administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"), which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from EDA funds available for such purposes. WHEREAS, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the EDA is authorized to advance or loan money from the EDA's general fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs. WHEREAS, the EDA intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to collectively as the "Interfund Loan"). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority as follows: 1. The EDA hereby authorizes the advance of up to $1,600,000, or so much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs, from any legally authorized EDA fund. The EDA shall reimburse itself for such advances together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal amount from the date of each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is limited to the greater of the rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 as of the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless the written agreement states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate. 2. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on each August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on which the EDA has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by the Executive Director of the EDA, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 10 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 3. Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," which shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid, or as determined by the Executive Director of the EDA, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the property within the TIF District and remitted to the EDA by Hennepin County, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment, and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment. 4. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre- payable in whole or in part at any time by the EDA without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this Interfund Loan. 5. This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the EDA in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the EDA. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The EDA shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date. 6. The EDA may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the Board, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the extent permissible under law. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President Attest Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Tax Increment Financing District Overview City of St. Louis Park Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. More detailed information on each of these topics can be found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan. Proposed action: Ø Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (District) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan). Ø Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 which includes the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District, which represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Ø Removal of a parcel from the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District for inclusion in the District. Type of TIF District: A redevelopment district Parcel Numbers: 16-117-21-31-007 9 16-117-21-31-000 2 16-117-21-34-004 1 16-117-21-34-006 9 16-117-21-34-002 4 16-117-21-31-0078 16-117-21-31-0071 * 16-117-21-34-0042 16-117-21-31-0076 ROW*This parcel is currently in the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District and will be removed for inclusion in the District. Proposed Development : The District is being created to facilitate the construction of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110-room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and an approximately 10,200 square foot greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. Please see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 11 Page 2 Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020. It is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. Estimated annual tax increment: Up to $1,374,529 Authorized uses:The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that may be expended: Land/Building Acquisition .................................................. $6,547,600 Site Improvements/Preparation ........................................... $2,830,000 Public Utilities .................................................................... $1,700,000 Other Qualifying Improvements ......................................... $3,502,336 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ....................................... $2,418,970 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL .............................................. $16,998,906 Interest ................................................................................ $9,609,765 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ........................................... $26,608,671 See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget authorization. Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note, and interfund loan for the land loan. Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified. Interfund Loan Requirement: The EDA will be approving an interfund loan to pay for administrative expenses not covered by the Developer, if any, and for the land loan to the Developer of $1,500,000 that will be incurred prior to receiving the first TIF dollars from the District. 4 Year Activity Rule (§ 469.176 Subd. 6) After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District: •Demolition •Rehabilitation •Renovation •Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and water) If the activity has not been started by approximately May 2021, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the commencement of a qualifying activity. 5 Year Rule (§ 469.1763 Subd. 3) Within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be expended or obligated to be expended. Any obligations in the District made after approximately May 2022, will not be eligible for repayment from tax increments. The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 12 Page 3 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 13 Page 4 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 14 As of April 24, 2017 Draft for Public Hearing Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: May 1, 2017 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 15 Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 ........................................... 1-1 Foreword ............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ....................... 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Foreword............................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority........................................ 2-1 Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 2-2 Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District................................. 2-2 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ........... 2-4 Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 2-4 Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6 Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election.................................. 2-6 Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8 Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions................. 2-8 Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-10 Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District................................ 2-11 Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-11 Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-14 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-14 Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-14 Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment................. 2-15 Subsection 2-28. Summary.............................................. 2-16 Appendix A Project Description ...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District ........................... B-1 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 16 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications..................................... G-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 17 Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 is recommended. It is available from the Economic Development Coordinator at the City of St. Louis Park. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Redevelopment Project No. 1. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 1-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 18 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Subsection 2-1. Foreword The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"), the City of St. Louis Park (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Redevelopment Project No. 1. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the EDA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of nine parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and approximately 10,200 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The EDA has not entered into an agreement but anticipates entering into an agreement with PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a limited liability company. Development is likely to occur in late 2017 or early 2018. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District. Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - The EDA or City currently owns nine parcels of property within the District. The remaining property located within the District may be acquired by the EDA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the EDA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The EDA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 19 relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. The EDA or City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District The EDA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities, as defined in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tank facility: (i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons; (ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or (iii)have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently used; or (4) a qualifying disaster area, as defined in Subd. 10b. (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-2 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 20 (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. (d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements of paragraph (e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor; (2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority; (3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement of paragraph (e) and that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and (4) upon filing the request for certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part of a district, the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph (f). (e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. (f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a). In meeting the statutory criteria the EDA and City rely on the following facts and findings: • The District is a redevelopment district consisting nine parcels. • An inventory shows that parcels consisting of more than 70 percent of the area in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. • An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F). St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-3 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 21 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the EDA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The EDA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The EDA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date, including without limitation pursuant to M.S. 469.176, Subd. 1(b). Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2016 for taxes payable 2017. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2019) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. Change in tax exempt status of property; 2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4. Change in the use of the property and classification; 5. Change in state law governing class rates; or 6. Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the EDA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2017, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2017. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Redevelopment Project No. 1, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The EDA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2020. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-4 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 22 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $1,332,706 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $84,410 Fiscal Disparities Contribution $146,425 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $1,101,871 Original Local Tax Rate 1.24745 Pay 2017 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $1,374,529 Percent Retained by the EDA 100% Tax capacity includes a 3% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in thischart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one isestimated to be $327,802. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the EDA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found some building permits that have been issued in the past 18 months, but none that should increase the original tax capacity. The list of building permits issued within the District in the past 18 months is available in the office of the City Economic Development Coordinator. Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The EDA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a bond issue, pay-as-you-go note, and interfund loan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the EDA or City to incur debt. The EDA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $24,189,701 Interest $2,418,970 TOTAL $26,608,671 The EDA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $16,998,906. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as- St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-5 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 23 you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and approximately 10,200 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. The EDA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The EDA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table. USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $6,547,600 Site Improvements/Preparation $2,830,000 Utilities $1,700,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $3,502,336 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$2,418,970 PROJECT COST TOTAL $16,998,906 Interest $9,609,765 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $26,608,671 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the EDA or City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (within the District) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: (1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-6 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 24 disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. (2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. The EDA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b. According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3: (c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in paragraph (b). Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies The EDA and City will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as amended (the “Business Subsidy Act”) to the extent required. Pursuant to Section 116J.993, Subd. 3 of the Business Subsidy Act, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7) Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-7 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 25 (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature; (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration; and (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The EDA expects that this development will qualify for an exemption under Section 116J.993, Subd. 3(17) of the Business Subsidy Act. Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1a, the county board may require the EDA or City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the EDA or City within forty-five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the EDA and City and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The EDA and City are aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the EDA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-8 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 26 IMPACT ON TAX BASE 2016/Pay 2017 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Upon Completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 1,573,060,731 1,101,871 0.0700% City of St. Louis Park 60,531,990 1,101,871 1.8203% St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 57,161,713 1,101,871 1.9276% IMPACT ON TAX RATES Pay 2017 Extension Rates Percent of Total CTC Potential Taxes Hennepin County 0.440870 35.34% 1,101,871 485,782 City of St. Louis Park 0.478610 38.37% 1,101,871 527,366 St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 0.217400 17.43% 1,101,871 239,547 Other 0.110570 8.86%1,101,871 121,834 Total 1.247450 100.00%1,374,529 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the actual Pay 2017 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2017 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2017 rates, assuming certification of the District is made before June 30, 2017. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $24,189,701; (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. A minor impact of the District on police protection is expected. The City does track all calls for service including property-type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. The City estimates an increase of 50 to 100 calls per year based on development population estimates. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The development will be incorporated into police district operations. The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing buildings, which will be eliminated by the new development, have public safety concerns that will be ameliorated by the new development. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-9 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 27 sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute an estimated $2,485 in sanitary sewer (SAC) fees per unit and $750 in water (WAC) connection fees per WAC unit. The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $4,216,265; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $8,548,640; (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the EDA and City's findings: • Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study (2003) Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-10 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 28 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); 2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; 4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the EDA or City; 5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or 6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the EDA or City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, must be documented in writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the EDA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District. The EDA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the EDA or City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-11 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 29 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits of M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36 percent) of any increment distributed to the EDA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 2-19. Requirement of Qualified Activity Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The EDA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately May 2021 and report such actions to the County Auditor. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-12 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 30 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The EDA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; 2. To finance, or otherwise pay the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082; 3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; 4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; 5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the EDA or City or for the benefit of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by a developer; 6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and 7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the EDA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The EDA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for EDA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. The EDA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the EDA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District. Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The EDA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-13 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 31 following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the EDA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The EDA or City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the EDA or City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the EDA or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the EDA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the EDA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the Economic Development Coordinator. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the EDA or City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon EDA and City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-14 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 32 increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. More detail as to the City’s and EDA’s “but-for” findings is included in Appendix G. Subsection 2-27. Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment 1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of the District. 3. Five-Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments and Six-Year Rule. Tax increments derived from the District shall be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5. 4. Redevelopment District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the EDA or City, including the cost of preparation of the development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-28. Summary The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide diversified housing options in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone (651) 697-8500. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-15 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 33 Appendix A Project Description PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, intends to acquire four properties at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and five properties at the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave., raze two structurally substandard buildings and replace them with a mixed-use, mixed income, transit oriented, and environmentally sustainable development. Project components include: two apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units (200 affordable and 99 market rate), a 110-room hotel, an approximately 10,200 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility, approximately 16,200 SF of commercial/retail space, and a one acre "urban forest". The City intends to issue a PAYGO TIF Note to offset qualified costs related to redevelopment of the site. Appendix A-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 34 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District Appendix B-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 35 ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Wooddale Station TIF District Redevelopment Project Area No 1 Parcels March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 0.45 0 0.450.225 Miles Proposed TIF District Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 36 3575 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0024 5618 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0041 5814 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0042 3565 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0069 3548 Xenwood Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-00765816357558143565 5925 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0071 5815 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0079 5725 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0078 3520 Yosemite Ave PID: 16-117-21-31-0031 5925 5725 5815 3520 3548 36TH ST W HIGHWAY 7HAMILTON ST 37TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SWALKE R S T ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Road Centerlines Parcels Proposed TIF District March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 330 0 330165 FeetWo o d d a l e A v e Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 37 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed below. Parcel Numbers Address Owner 16-117-21-31-0079 5815 State Hwy No. 7 City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-31-0078 5725 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-31-0002 3520 Yosemite Ave S Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-31-0071*5925 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-34-0041 5816 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0042 5814 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0069 3565 Wooddale Ave Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-31-0076 3548 Xenwood Ave S Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-34-0024 3575 Wooddale Ave City of St. Louis Park *This parcel is currently in the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District and will be removed for inclusion in the District prior to the establishment of the District. Appendix C-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 38 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 39 4/21/2017Base Value AssumptionsWoodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType:RedevelopmentDistrict Name/Number:County District #:Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value2018Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,0001.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:3.00%Over $150,0002.00%Interest Rate:4.00%Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/I)2.00%Present Value Date:1-Aug-19Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental)1.25%First Period Ending1-Feb-20Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2017First $115,000 0.75%Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: 2020 Over $115,000 0.25%Years of Tax Increment 26 Non-Homestead Residential (Non-H Res. 1 Unit)Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment2045First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,0001.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio32.6027% Pay 2017 First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate150.0490% Pay 2017 Over $500,0001.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 124.745% Pay 2017 Agricultural Non-Homestead1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.)124.745%Pay 2017 State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes) 45.8020% Pay 2017 Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)0.19126% Pay 2017 Building Total PercentageTax Year Property CurrentClassAfterLandMarket Market Of Value Used Original OriginalTaxOriginalAfterConversionMap # PIDOwner Address Market Value ValueValue for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.11611721310079City of SLP 5815 Hwy 7115,2000 115,200100% 115,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- Exempt- 11611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00027% 669,060 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental8,36311611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00063% 1,561,140 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental11,70911611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00010% 247,800 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,206 11611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50027%11,745 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental147 11611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50063%27,405 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental20611611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50010%4,350 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.65 11611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00070% 1,232,700 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental15,40911611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00030% 528,300 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.9,816 21611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00041% 142,680 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,78431611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00059% 205,320 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,54031611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50041% 140,835 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,76031611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50059% 202,665 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,52031611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental2,95031611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental2,65531611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.3,970 4a1611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.6,330 4b1611721310076HC HRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90041%35,629 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental445 31611721310076HC HRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90059%51,271 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental3853ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40015%48,960 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental612 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40022%71,808 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental5393ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40013%42,432 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.636 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40050% 163,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,514 4b1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50060% 250,500 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,260 4a1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50040% 167,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,590 4b19,408,100 211,000 19,619,1007,100,000084,410Note:1. Base values provided by City Assessor on 3-17-17.Area/ PhaseTax Rates1098 BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)245673Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalEconomic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 40 4/21/2017Base Value Assumptions Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationEstimated Taxable Total Taxable PropertyPercentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value TotalMarketTaxProject Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValueClass Tax CapacityCapacity/Unit 2018201920202021 Payable1Apartments 180,000180,000 66 11,880,000 Rental148,5002,250 50%100%100%100%20211Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 152 24,320,000Aff. Rental 148,200975 50%100%100%100%20211Bike Shop 150150 2,484 372,600 C/I Pref.6,7023 50%100%100%100%20211 Maker Space 150150 2,724 408,600C/I8,1723 50%100%100%100%20212E-Gen2020 10,800 216,000 C/I Pref.3,5700 50%100%100%100%20213Apartments 180,000180,000 285,040,000 Rental63,0002,250 50%100%100%100%20213 Live/Work Apts 180,000180,000 5900,000 Rental11,2502,250 50%100%100%100%20213Live/Work Retail150150 1,250 187,500C/I3,7503 50%100%100%100%20213Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 487,680,000Aff. Rental 46,800975 50%100%100%100%20213 Co-Working 150150 3,986 597,900C/I11,9583 50%100%100%100%20214aHotel85,00085,000 110 9,350,000 C/I Pref. 186,2501,693 50%100%100%100%20214bCafé/Coffee Shop150150 5,817 872,550C/I17,4513 50%100%100%100%2021TOTAL61,825,150655,603Subtotal Residential299 49,820,000417,750Subtotal Commercial/Ind.27,171 12,005,150237,853Note:1. Market values are based upon discussion with Assessor on 1-31-17. The apartment values assume all units have access to the same amenities and features. Total Fiscal Local Local Fiscal State-wide MarketTax Disparities Tax PropertyDisparities PropertyValueTotal Taxes PerNew UseCapacityTax CapacityCapacityTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 148,5000148,500 185,2460022,722 207,968 3,151.03Aff Apartments 148,2000148,200 184,8720046,514 231,387 1,522.28Bike Shop 6,7022,1854,5175,6353,2793,07071312,6965.11Maker Space 8,1722,6645,5086,8713,9983,74378115,3935.65E-Gen 3,5701,1642,4063,0011,7461,6354136,7960.63Apartments 63,000063,000 78,589009,64088,229 3,151.03Live/Work Apts 11,250011,250 14,034001,72115,755 3,151.03Live/Work Retail 3,7501,2232,5273,1531,8351,7183597,0635.65Aff Apartments 46,800046,800 58,3810014,689 73,069 1,522.28Co-Working 11,9583,8998,05910,0545,8505,4771,14422,5245.65Hotel 186,250 60,723 125,527 156,589 91,114 85,30617,883 350,892 3,189.93Café/Coffee Shop17,4515,68911,762 14,6728,5377,9931,66932,8715.65TOTAL 655,603 77,547 578,056 721,097 116,358 108,941 118,247 1,064,643Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factorswhich cannot be predicted.Total Property Taxes1,064,643Current Market Value - Est.7,100,000less State-wide Taxes(108,941)New Market Value - Est.61,825,150less Fiscal Disp. Adj.(116,358) Difference54,725,150less Market Value Taxes(118,247)Present Value of Tax Increment13,561,004less Base Value Taxes(91,312) Difference41,164,146Annual Gross TIF 629,785Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:41,164,146 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF?MARKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSISTAX CALCULATIONSPROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalEconomic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 41 4/21/2017Tax Increment Cashflow Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal CapturedLocal Annual Semi-Annual State Admin.Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% of TaxTax Disparities TaxTax Gross Tax Gross Tax AuditoratNet Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC Capacity Capacity Incremental CapacityRate Increment Increment 0.36%10% Increment Value Yrs. Year Date-- - - 02/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485)(13,413) 120,720 116,033 0.52020 08/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485)(13,413) 120,720 229,790 12020 02/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 490,668 1.52021 08/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 746,431 22021 02/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454) 292,083 1,005,792 2.52022 08/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454) 292,083 1,260,068 32022 02/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,517,885 3.52023 08/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,770,647 42023 02/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,026,894 4.52024 08/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,278,117 52024 02/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,532,771 5.52025 08/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,782,432 62025 02/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,035,471 6.52026 08/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,283,550 7202602/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,534,954 7.52027 08/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,781,430 82027 02/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,031,182 8.52028 08/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,276,036 92028 02/01/29100% 830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,524,118 9.52029 08/01/29100% 830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,767,335 102029 02/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,013,732 10.52030 08/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,255,297 112030 02/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,499,994 11.52031 08/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,739,893 122031 02/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 5,982,878 12.52032 08/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 6,221,099 132032 02/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,462,360 13.52033 08/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,698,891 142033 02/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208) 433,872 6,938,419 14.52034 08/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208) 433,872 7,173,251 152034 02/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,411,036 15.52035 08/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,644,159 162035 02/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421) 462,788 7,880,194 16.52036 08/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421)462,788 8,111,601 172036 02/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,345,878 17.52037 08/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,575,562 182037 02/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 8,808,077 18.52038 08/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 9,036,032 192038 02/01/39100%1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,266,778 19.52039 08/01/39100% 1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,493,001 202039 02/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,721,975 20.52040 08/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,946,460 212040 02/01/41100% 1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,173,660 21.52041 08/01/41100%1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,396,404 222041 02/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,621,827 22.52042 08/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,842,829 232042 02/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,066,473 23.52043 08/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,285,732 24204302/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,507,596 24.52044 08/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,725,111 252044 02/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 11,945,196 25.52045 08/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 12,160,966 262045 02/01/46 Total24,277,098 (87,398) (2,418,970) 21,770,731 Present Value From 08/01/2019 Present Value Rate 4.00%13,561,004 (48,820) (1,351,218) 12,160,966 Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalEconomic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 42 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development) A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's activity by April 1 of the following year. Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFForm.htm for information and forms. Appendix E-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 43 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District Appendix F-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 44 Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District St. Louis Park, Minnesota November 22, 2016 Prepared For the City of St. Louis Park Prepared by: LHB, Inc. 701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 LHB Project No. 160699 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 45 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 2 Purpose of Evaluation ................................................................................ 2 Scope of Work ........................................................................................... 2 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 3 PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS ....... 3 A.Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 3 B.Condition of Buildings Test ................................................................... 4 C.Distribution of Substandard Buildings ................................................... 5 PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED ......................................................................... 6 PART 4 – FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... 6 A.Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 6 B.Condition of Building Test ..................................................................... 7 1.Building Inspection .................................................................... 7 2.Replacement Cost ..................................................................... 7 3.Code Deficiencies ..................................................................... 8 4.System Condition Deficiencies .................................................. 8 C.Distribution of Substandard Structures ................................................. 9 PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS .................................................................................. 10 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 46 PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF EVALUATION LHB was hired by the City of St. Louis Park to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District (“TIF District”) proposed to be established by the City. The proposed TIF District is located at Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue (Diagram 1). The purpose of LHB’s work is to determine whether the proposed TIF District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether two (2) buildings on nine (9) parcels and two (2) right of way parcels, located within the proposed TIF District, meet the qualifications required for a Redevelopment District. Diagram 1 – Proposed TIF District SCOPE OF WORK The proposed TIF District consists of nine (9) parcels and two (2) right of way parcels with two (2) buildings. Two (2) buildings were inspected on September 27, 2016 and October 14, 2016. Building code and Condition Deficiency Reports for the buildings that were inspected are located in Appendix B. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 47 CONCLUSION After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as a Redevelopment District because: •The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 88.7 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. •100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. •The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed. The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail. PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states: INTERIOR INSPECTION “The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property...” EXTERIOR INSPECTION AND OTHER MEANS “An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard.” DOCUMENTATION “Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1).” QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires three tests for occupied parcels: A.COVERAGE TEST …“parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots…” Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 48 The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures.” B.CONDITION OF BUILDINGS TEST Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a) states, “…and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;” 1.Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, ‘structurally substandard’ shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.” a.We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b) defined as “structurally substandard”, due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. 2.Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: “A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence.” “Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.” LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: •The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. •Chapter 13 of the 2015 Minnesota Building Code states, “Buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the International Energy Conservation Code.” Furthermore, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1305.0021 Subpart 9 states, “References Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 49 to the International Energy Conservation Code in this code mean the Minnesota Energy Code…” •The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. •In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. •Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. In order for an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. C.DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, defines a Redevelopment District and requires one or more of the following conditions, “reasonably distributed throughout the district.” (1)“Parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2)the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3)tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities…” Our interpretation of the distribution requirement is that the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the district as compared to the location of all buildings in the district. For example, if all of the buildings in a district are located on one half of the area of the district, with the other half occupied by parking lots (meeting the required 70 percent coverage for the district), we would evaluate the distribution of the substandard buildings compared with only the half of the district where the buildings are located. If all of the buildings in a district are located evenly throughout the entire area of the district, the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the entire area of the district. We believe this is consistent with the opinion expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 50 PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED LHB inspected two (2) of the two (2) buildings during the day of September 27, 2016 and October 14, 2016. PART 4 – FINDINGS A.COVERAGE TEST 1. The total square foot area of the parcel in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 2.The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 3.The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement was met. FINDING: The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 88.7 percent of the area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70 percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision (a) (1). Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 51 Diagram 2 – Coverage Diagram Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures B.CONDITION OF BUILDING TEST 1.BUILDING INSPECTION The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial walk- thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether or not a building “appears” to have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and photographs code and non- code deficiencies in the building. 2.REPLACEMENT COST The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost. This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot models for 2016. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 52 A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail, residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the costs of construction in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor’s overhead and profit. Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other “soft” costs not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is tabulated in Appendix A. 3.CODE DEFICIENCIES The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings in the State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the proposed TIF District. The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB utilizes the current Minnesota State Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building Code is actually a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted international codes. After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost Works 2016; Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the identified deficiencies. We were then able to compare the correction costs with the replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold. FINDING: Two (2) out of two (2) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c). Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis reports for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be found in Appendix B of this report. 4.SYSTEM CONDITION DEFICIENCIES If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), then in order for such building to be “structurally substandard” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), the building’s defects or Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 53 deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted “substantial renovation or clearance” based on the criteria we outlined above. System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings, floors and doors. The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available information contained in City records, and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider the amount of “service life” used up for a particular component unless it was an obvious part of that component’s deficiencies. After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” FINDING: In our professional opinion, two (2) out of two (2) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of Subdivision 10a(1). C.DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. It is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3). FINDING: The parcels with substandard buildings are reasonably distributed compared to all parcels that contain buildings. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 54 Diagram 3 – Substandard Buildings Shaded green area depicts parcels with buildings. Shaded orange area depicts substandard buildings. PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS Michael A. Fischer, AIA, LEED AP - Project Principal/TIF Analyst Michael has 30 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is a Senior Vice President at LHB and currently leads the Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at MIT and Harvard in 1999, earning Masters degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards and community task forces, including a term as a City Council President and as Chair of a Metropolitan Planning Organization. Most recently, he served as Chair of the Edina, Minnesota planning commission. Michael has also managed and designed several award-winning Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 55 architectural projects, and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. Philip Waugh – Project Manager/TIF Analyst Philip is a project manager with 13 years of experience in historic preservation, building investigations, material research, and construction methods. He previously worked as a historic preservationist and also served as the preservation specialist at the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Currently, Phil sits on the Board of Directors for the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. His current responsibilities include project management of historic preservation projects, performing building condition surveys and analysis, TIF analysis, writing preservation specifications, historic design reviews, writing Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, preservation planning, and grant writing. Phil Fisher – Inspector For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\160699 20161122 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF Report.docx APPENDICES APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 56 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 57 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF DistrictSt. Louis Park, MinnesotaProperty Condition Assessment Summary SheetTIF Map No.PID # Property AddressImproved or VacantSurvey Method UsedSite Area(S.F.)Coverage Area of Improvements(S.F.)Coverage Percent of ImprovementsCoverageQuantity(S.F.)No. of BuildingsBuildingReplacementCost15% of Replacement CostBuilding Code DeficienciesNo. of Buildings Exceeding 15% CriteriaNo. of buildings determined substandardA1611721310071 5925 State Hwy No 7 Improved Exterior 97,84624,41825.0%97,8460B1611721310079 5815 State Hwy No 7 Improved Exterior 23,06010,49745.5%23,0600C1611721310078 5725 State Hwy No 7 Improved Interior/Exterior 77,41063,61682.2%77,4101$3,270,521 $490,578 $970,57511D1611721310002 3520 Yosemite Ave S Vacant Exterior 17,40000.0%00E1611721340069 3565 Wooddale Ave Improved Interior/Exterior28,19825,29489.7%28,1981$1,880,429 $282,064 $373,72911F1611721340024 3575 Wooddale Ave Improved Exterior 15,80314,99694.9%15,8030G1611721340041 5816 36th St W Improved Exterior 16,05316,053100.0%16,0530H1611721340042 5814 36th St W Improved Exterior 10,73510,735100.0%10,7350I1611721310076 3548 Xenwood Ave S Vacant Exterior 34,76400.0%00ROW 1NANAImproved Exterior 164,46955,88134.0%164,4690ROW 2NANAVacant Exterior 3,28600.0%00TOTALS489,024433,574 22288.7%100.0%O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\[160699 20161118 St Louis Park Hwy 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF Summary Spreadsheet.xlsx]Property Info100.0%Total Coverage Percent:Percent of buildings exceeding 15 percent code deficiency threshold: Percent of buildings determined substandard: Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF DistrictLHB Project Number 160699Page 1 of 1Property Condition Assessment Summary SheetEconomic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 58 APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 59 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report November 18, 2016 Map No. & Building Name: Parcel C – Commercial Building Address and Parcel ID: 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road, St Louis Park, MN 55416 PID 16.117.21.31.0078 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): September 27, 2016 12:30 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: -Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. -Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $3,270,521 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $970,575 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 29.68% Defects in Structural Elements 1.Lintels over doors and windows are rusting. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a.There is no ADA code required accessible route into the building. b.There is are ADA code required accessible restrooms. c. There is no water service to the building. d.Exterior glass doors require a 10-inch kick plate per code. e.Interior door hardware is not ADA code compliant. f.Thresholds do not meet ADA code compliance for height. 2.Light and Ventilation a.There is no electrical service to the building. b.There is no code required operable HVAC system. 3.Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a.There is no code required operable emergency lighting system in the building. b.There is no code required sprinkler system in the building. c. Damaged floor tile creates impediment to emergency egress. d.There is no code required emergency notification system within the building. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 60 4.Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a.Interior walls are damaged. b. Interior flooring is damaged and/or removed. c.Interior ceiling tile system is damaged and or missing. d.There is graffiti present throughout the building. e.There is mold present throughout the building. f.Carpet has been removed in numerous places. g.Block walls need to be repaired and repainted. 5. Exterior Construction a.Exterior brick and block work is cracked indicative of differential settlement allowing for water intrusion. b.Exterior mortar joints are missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. c.Windows are damaged or missing allowing for water intrusion. d.The roof is leaking in numerous places. e.Caulking is missing allowing for water intrusion. Description of Code Deficiencies 1.An accessible route into and out of the building needs to be created to meet ADA code. 2.Accessible restrooms need to be installed to meet ADA code. 3.Water service needs to be provided per building code. 4.Electrical service needs to be provided per building code. 5.Exterior glass doors need to have ADA code approved 10-inch kick plates installed. 6.Thresholds need to meet ADA code for height. 7.Install ADA code required door hardware. 8.Lintels that are rusting need to be repaired and painted per building code. 9.An operable HVAC system needs to be installed per mechanical code. 10.An operable emergency lighting system is required per building code. 11.An operable emergency notification should be installed per fire code. 12.An operable sprinkler system should be installed per fire code. 13.Floor tile should be repaired/replaced to create an unimpeded route for emergency egress per code. 14.Exterior brick and concrete block should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 15.Mortar joints should be repaired to prevent water intrusion per building code. 16.Windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 17. Caulking should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 18.Roofing material should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. Overview of Deficiencies This warehouse building has been vacant for several years. Vandalism has occurred inside the building. Electrical services have been stripped along with mechanical service. There are no ADA code required restrooms present in the building. The sprinkler system has been made inoperable. Windows are damaged allowing for water intrusion. The roofing system is compromised allowing for water intrusion. Exterior block and brick work is in need of repair and pointing of the mortar joints. All interior finishes need to be repaired/replaced. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Building Reports\160699 5725 Hwy 7 Condition Report.doc Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 61 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report November 18, 2016 Map No. & Building Name: Parcel E – Commercial Building Address and Parcel ID: 3565 Wooddale Avenue South, St Louis Park, MN 55416 PID 16.117.21.34.0069 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): October 14, 2016 10:00 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: -Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. -Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $1,880,429 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $373,729 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 19.87% Defects in Structural Elements 1.Lintels over doors and windows are rusting. Combination of Deficiencies 1. Essential Utilities and Facilities a.There is no ADA code compliant route to the second floor. b. The stairs leading to the second floor are damaged and a OSHA code hazard. c.Thresholds do not meet the ADA code for height compliance. d.Door hardware is not ADA code compliant. e.Second floor restrooms are not ADA code compliant. 2.Light and Ventilation a.Electrical wiring is exposed. b.HVAC system does not meet current mechanical code. c. Second floor fuse box does not meet current electrical code. 3.Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a.Carpeting is damaged, creating an impediment to emergency egress. 4.Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a.Interior walls are damaged with holes. b.Second floor interior ceiling tile is damaged/missing. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 62 5. Exterior Construction a.Exterior concrete block and mortar joints are cracking/missing and allowing for water intrusion. b.Exterior caulking is missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. c.Windows are broken allowing for water intrusion. d.Second floor window frames are rotting allowing for water intrusion. e. Exterior surfaces need to be repainted. f.Fascia is missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. g.Gutters are damaged and/or missing. h. Exterior doors and frames are rusting. i. Roofing is damaged and allowing for water intrusion. Description of Code Deficiencies 1.Lintels over doors and windows should be repainted to prevent rusting per building code. 2.An ADA code approved accessible route should be created to the second floor. 3. Stairs should be repaired to allow for an unimpeded emergency egress per fire code. 4.Thresholds should be modified to comply with ADA code. 5.Door hardware should be replaced with ADA code compliant hardware. 6.Second floor restrooms should be modified to meet ADA code compliance. 7.Electrical wiring should be concealed per electrical code. 8.HVAC system should be replaced to meet current mechanical code. 9.Fuse boxes should be removed/replaced with electrical code compliant devices. 10.Carpeting should be replaced to allow for a fire code required unimpeded route for emergency egress. 11.Exterior concrete block should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 12.Mortar joints should be re-pointed to prevent water intrusion per building code. 13. Exterior caulking should be removed/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 14.Broken windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 15.Second floor window frames should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 16.Missing fascia should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 17.Exterior doors and frames should be repaired/repainted to prevent water intrusion per building code. 18.Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code. Overview of Deficiencies This retail/warehouse building was constructed in 1947. It has a two-story portion that is not ADA accessible. The second-floor stairs are damaged and not in a safe condition for general use. The ceiling is missing on the second floor and the second-floor restrooms are not ADA compliant. The exterior of the building is predominantly block construction that is failing. There are numerous cracks in the block walls that are indicative of differential settlement. The HVAC system does not meet current mechanical code. The roofing material has been compromised as noted by the numerous water stains throughout the building. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Building Reports\160699 3565 Wooddale Condition Report.doc Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 63 APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 64 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/4/2016 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale City of St Louis Park 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road , St Louis Park , Minnesota , 55416 Building Type: Warehouse with Brick Veneer / Reinforced Concrete Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):24 Floor Area (S.F.):30000 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2016 Quarter 2 Cost Per Square Foot:$109.03 Building Cost:$3,270,521.35 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 9.42% 9.84 295,322.30 A1010 Standard Foundations 1.46 43,791.80 0.97 29,221.54 0.49 14,570.26 A1030 Slab on Grade 6.23 187,024.20 6.23 187,024.20 A2010 Basement Excavation 0.19 5,750.40 0.19 5,750.40 A2020 Basement Walls 1.96 58,755.90 1.96 58,755.90 55.52% 58.03 1,740,840.48 B1010 Floor Construction 7.58 227,334.42 2.98 89,536.26 1.7 50,964.38 1.89 56,721.45 1 30,112.33 B1020 Roof Construction 15.31 459,247.80 15.31 459,247.80 Concrete I beam, precast, 18" x 36", 790 PLF, 25' span, 6.44 KLF superimposed load Cast‐in‐place concrete beam and slab, 7.5" slab, two way, 12" column, 25'x25' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 149 PSF total load Fireproofing, concrete, 1" thick, 8" steel column, 1 hour rating, 110 PLF Precast double T, lightweight, 2" topping, 80' span, 32" deep, 10' wide, 40 PSF superimposed load, 113 PSF total load Cast‐in‐place concrete column, 20", square, tied, minimum reinforcing, 500K load, 10'‐14' story height, 375 lbs/LF, 4000PSI Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 100K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 4' ‐ 6" square x 15" deep Slab on grade, 5" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 30,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 65 B2010 Exterior Walls 23.74 712,204.65 23.74 712,204.65 B2020 Exterior Windows 4.17 125,156.64 4.17 125,156.64 B2030 Exterior Doors 1.33 39,798.28 0.21 6,319.98 0.28 8,293.48 0.84 25,184.82 B3010 Roof Coverings 5.56 166,835.36 1.68 50,523.90 2.93 87,826.50 0.66 19,887.56 0.29 8,597.40 B3020 Roof Openings 0.34 10,263.33 0.03 962.62 0.31 9,300.71 6.22% 6.52 195,059.90 C1010 Partitions 1.52 45,524.82 0.3 9,085.03 0.24 7,267.89 0.58 17,415.62 0.39 11,756.28 C1020 Interior Doors 0.15 4,359.48 0.09 2,555.15 0.06 1,804.33 C2010 Stair Construction 0.97 29,193.70 0.97 29,193.70 C3010 Wall Finishes 0.82 24,465.43 0.21 6,338.75 0.1 2,850.39 0.51 15,276.29 C3020 Floor Finishes 2.28 68,266.26 0.62 18,492.30 1.37 41,074.83 0.29 8,699.13 C3030 Ceiling Finishes 0.78 23,250.21 Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, maximum Vinyl, composition tile, maximum 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator C Interiors Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, no base,3 ‐5/8" @ 24" OC framing, same opposite face, no insulation Gypsum board, 1 face only, exterior sheathing, fire resistant, 5/8" Add for the following: taping and finishing Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8", birch, hollow core Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" Stairs, steel, grate type w/nosing & rails, 20 risers, with landing Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back‐up, 8" thick, perlite core fill, 3" XPS Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3' Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 10'‐0" opening Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐ 0" opening Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, electric operator, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, loosely laid, stone ballast Insulation, rigid, roof deck, extruded polystyrene, 40 PSI compressive strength, 4" thick, R20 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 66 0.78 23,250.21 21.95% 22.94 688,132.75 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures 0.51 15,445.75 0.19 5,829.89 0.04 1,318.56 0.11 3,289.85 0.11 3,243.80 0.06 1,763.65 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution 0.22 6,489.35 0.22 6,489.35 D2040 Rain Water Drainage 0.54 16,257.24 0.4 11,998.58 0.14 4,258.66 D3020 Heat Generating Systems 4.99 149,610.56 4.99 149,610.56 D3050 Terminal & Package Units 0.83 24,813.27 0.83 24,813.27 D4010 Sprinklers 3.96 118,856.70 3.96 118,856.70 D4020 Standpipes 2.32 69,483.60 0.49 14,679.90 1.83 54,803.70 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution 0.55 16,557.38 0.1 2,959.13 0.07 2,189.25 0.38 11,409.00 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring 6.3 189,088.65 2.62 78,696.00 0.15 4,475.25 0.16 4,927.50 0.06 1,874.70 2.49 74,669.85 0.81 24,445.35 D5030 Communications and Security 2.72 81,530.25 2.53 75,795.00 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 100 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Wall switches, 1.0 per 1000 SF Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 2.4 watt per SF, 60 FC, 15 fixtures @ 32 watt per 1000 SF Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 5 per 1000 SF, .6 watts per SF Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 75.5 MBH input, 63 GPH Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 5" diam piping, for each additional foot add Warehouse ventilization with heat system 24,000 CFM Supply and Exhaust Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, offices, 3,000 SF, 9.50 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, grooved steel, black, sch 40 pipe, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, 1 floor Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, additional floors Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support D Services Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 18" x 15" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 67 0.19 5,735.25 1.72% 1.79 53,845.80 E1030 Vehicular Equipment 1.79 53,845.80 0.28 8,496.00 1.51 45,349.80 0%0 0 0%0 0 100% $99.12 $2,973,201.23 10.00% $9.91 $297,320.12 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $109.03 $3,270,521.35 User Fees Total Building Cost F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit E Equipment & Furnishings Architectural equipment, dock boards, heavy duty, 5' x 5', aluminum, 5000 lb capacity Architectural equipment, dock levelers, hydraulic, 7' x 8', 10 ton capacity Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 68 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Commercial Property 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road, St Louis Park, MN 55416 - PID: 16.117.21.31.0078 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Access into and out of building 8.50$ SF 800 6,800.00$ Restrooms Create code required accessible restrooms 0.51$ Ea 30,000 15,300.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with ADA code 100.00$ Ea 15 1,500.00$ Glass doors Install 10-inch kick plates on glass entrance doors per ADA code 150.00$ Ea 6 900.00$ Door hardware Install ADA code required door hardware 250.00$ Ea 30 7,500.00$ Structural Elements Lintels Repair/replace lintels per building code 15.00$ LF 200 3,000.00$ Exiting Flooring Replace damaged VCT to create an unimpeded egress per code 0.29$ SF 30,000 8,700.00$ Fire Protection Sprinkler Install sprinkler system per building code 6.28$ SF 30,000 188,400.00$ Emergency lighting Install operable emergency lighting per building code 250.00$ Ea 25 6,250.00$ Emergency notification Install operable emergency notification system per fire code 2.72$ SF 30,000 81,600.00$ Exterior Construction Brick 4.15$ SF 30,000 124,500.00$ Block 0.25$ SF 30,000 7,500.00$ Caulking Replace caulking to prevent water intrusion per building code 3.75$ LF 1,500 5,625.00$ Repair/replace damaged brick per building code to prevent water intrusion Repair/replace damaged block per building code to prevent water intrusion Modify sidewalk to create an accessible route into and out of building Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 69 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Windows 4.17$ SF 30,000 125,100.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Remove existing roofing 0.95$ SF 30,000 28,500.00$ Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code 5.56$ SF 30,000 166,800.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical Replace HVAC system per mechanical code 5.82$ SF 30,000 174,600.00$ Plumbing Connect water service per building code 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Electrical Install operable electrical service per electrical code 0.55$ SF 30,000 16,500.00$ Total Code Improvements 970,575.00$ Replace damaged windows to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 70 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Photos: Parcel C, 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road Page 1 of 12 P1090722.JPG P1090723.JPG P1090724.JPG P1090725.JPG P1090727.JPG P1090728.JPG P1090729.JPG P1090730.JPG P1090731.JPG P1090732.JPG P1090733.JPG P1090734.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 71 Page 2 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090735.JPG P1090736.JPG P1090737.JPG P1090738.JPG P1090739.JPG P1090740.JPG P1090741.JPG P1090742.JPG P1090743.JPG P1090744.JPG P1090745.JPG P1090746.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 72 Page 3 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090747.JPG P1090748.JPG P1090749.JPG P1090750.JPG P1090751.JPG P1090752.JPG P1090753.JPG P1090754.JPG P1090755.JPG P1090757.JPG P1090758.JPG P1090759.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 73 Page 4 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090760.JPG P1090761.JPG P1090762.JPG P1090763.JPG P1090764.JPG P1090765.JPG P1090767.JPG P1090768.JPG P1090769.JPG P1090770.JPG P1090771.JPG P1090772.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 74 Page 5 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090773.JPG P1090775.JPG P1090776.JPG P1090778.JPG P1090779.JPG P1090780.JPG P1090781.JPG P1090782.JPG P1090784.JPG P1090787.JPG P1090788.JPG P1090789.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 75 Page 6 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090790.JPG P1090791.JPG P1090792.JPG P1090793.JPG P1090794.JPG P1090795.JPG P1090797.JPG P1090798.JPG P1090799.JPG P1090800.JPG P1090801.JPG P1090802.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 76 Page 7 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090803.JPG P1090804.JPG P1090805.JPG P1090806.JPG P1090807.JPG P1090808.JPG P1090809.JPG P1090810.JPG P1090811.JPG P1090812.JPG P1090813.JPG P1090814.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 77 Page 8 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090815.JPG P1090816.JPG P1090817.JPG P1090818.JPG P1090819.JPG P1090820.JPG P1090821.JPG P1090822.JPG P1090823.JPG P1090824.JPG P1090825.JPG P1090826.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 78 Page 9 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090827.JPG P1090828.JPG P1090829.JPG P1090830.JPG P1090831.JPG P1090832.JPG P1090833.JPG P1090834.JPG P1090835.JPG P1090836.JPG P1090837.JPG P1090838.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 79 Page 10 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090839.JPG P1090840.JPG P1090841.JPG P1090842.JPG P1090843.JPG P1090844.JPG P1090845.JPG P1090846.JPG P1090847.JPG P1090848.JPG P1090849.JPG P1090850.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 80 Page 11 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090851.JPG P1090852.JPG P1090853.JPG P1090854.JPG P1090855.JPG P1090856.JPG P1090857.JPG P1090858.JPG P1090859.JPG P1090860.JPG P1090861.JPG P1090862.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 81 Page 12 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090863.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 82 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/17/2016 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale Bldg B City of St Louis Park 3565 Wooddale St Louis Park , Minnesota 55416 Building Type: Warehouse with Brick Veneer / Reinforced Concrete Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):24 Floor Area (S.F.):17200 Labor Type:STD Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2016 Quarter 2 Cost Per Square Foot:$109.34 Building Cost:$1,880,429.01 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 10.82% 12.97 222,985.76 A1010 Standard Foundations 2.29 39,444.59 1.74 29,937.06 0.55 9,507.53 A1030 Slab on Grade 6.8 116,911.84 6.8 116,911.84 A2010 Basement Excavation 0.22 3,709.01 0.22 3,709.01 A2020 Basement Walls 3.66 62,920.32 3.66 62,920.32 61.18% 52.87 909,400.61 B1010 Floor Construction 10.59 182,187.18 5.6 96,319.43 2.78 47,814.47 2.21 38,053.28 B1020 Roof Construction 5.14 88,408.00 5.14 88,408.00 B2010 Exterior Walls 25.10 431,720.00 25.1 431,720.00 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. A Substructure Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 100K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 4' ‐ 6" square x 15" deep Slab on grade, 5" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 30,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Cast‐in‐place concrete column, 20", square, tied, minimum reinforcing, 500K load, 10'‐14' story height, 375 lbs/LF, 4000PSI Concrete I beam, precast, 18" x 36", 790 PLF, 25' span, 6.44 KLF superimposed load Cast‐in‐place concrete beam and slab, 7.5" slab, two way, 12" column, 25'x25' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 149 PSF total load Wood roof, flat rafter, 2" x 12", 16" O.C. Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back‐up, 8" thick, perlite core fill, 3" XPS Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 83 B2020 Exterior Windows 3.50 60,200.00 3.5 60,200.00 B2030 Exterior Doors 1.4 24,020.08 0.23 3,888.13 0.29 4,921.30 0.88 15,210.65 B3010 Roof Coverings 6.51 112,012.97 1.79 30,768.22 3.07 52,830.49 1.15 19,774.66 0.5 8,639.60 B3020 Roof Openings 0.63 10,852.38 0.06 1,017.60 0.57 9,834.78 6.64% 7.96 136,880.19 C1010 Partitions 2.34 40,296.88 0.34 5,820.99 0.27 4,671.04 1.02 17,489.55 0.72 12,315.30 C1020 Interior Doors 0.15 2,646.00 0.09 1,572.36 0.06 1,073.64 C2010 Stair Construction 1.77 30,364.60 1.77 30,364.60 C3010 Wall Finishes 1.26 21,680.99 0.24 4,111.12 0.11 1,840.45 0.91 15,729.42 C3020 Floor Finishes 2.44 41,891.72 0.67 11,609.23 1.45 24,959.33 0.31 5,323.16 21.36% 25.60 440,214.36 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures 0.56 9,644.26 0.21 3,561.19 0.05 865.33 Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 10'‐0" opening Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3' Gypsum board, 1 face only, exterior sheathing, fire resistant, 5/8" Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐ 0" opening Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, electric operator, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, loosely laid, stone ballast Insulation, rigid, roof deck, extruded polystyrene, 40 PSI compressive strength, 4" thick, R20 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator C Interiors Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, no base,3 ‐5/8" @ 24" OC framing, same opposite face, no insulation Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Add for the following: taping and finishing Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8", birch, hollow core Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" Stairs, steel, grate type w/nosing & rails, 20 risers, with landing 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, maximum Vinyl, composition tile, maximum D Services Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 84 0.12 2,098.27 0.12 2,025.47 0.06 1,094.00 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution 0.23 3,952.53 0.23 3,952.53 D2040 Rain Water Drainage 0.7 11,986.62 0.44 7,575.10 0.26 4,411.52 D3020 Heat Generating Systems 5.28 90,858.87 5.28 90,858.87 D3050 Terminal & Package Units 0.95 16,393.54 0.95 16,393.54 D4010 Sprinklers 4.44 76,296.62 4.44 76,296.62 D4020 Standpipes 2.56 43,946.46 0.54 9,278.08 2.02 34,668.38 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution 1.01 17,365.88 0.19 3,190.13 0.14 2,362.50 0.69 11,813.25 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring 6.94 119,416.58 2.91 50,085.54 0.17 2,963.13 0.18 3,023.76 0.07 1,194.02 2.72 46,744.18 0.9 15,405.95 D5030 Communications and Security 2.93 50,353.00 2.73 46,965.46 0.2 3,387.54 0%0 0 E1090 Other Equipment 0 0 0%0 0 0%0 0 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, additional floors Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 18" x 15" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 75.5 MBH input, 63 GPH Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 5" diam piping, for each additional foot add Warehouse ventilization with heat system 24,000 CFM Supply and Exhaust Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, offices, 3,000 SF, 9.50 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, grooved steel, black, sch 40 pipe, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, 1 floor E Equipment & Furnishings Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 5 per 1000 SF, .6 watts per SF Wall switches, 1.0 per 1000 SF Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 2.4 watt per SF, 60 FC, 15 fixtures @ 32 watt per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 100 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit F Special Construction G Building Sitework Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 85 100% $99.40 $1,709,480.92 10.00% $9.94 $170,948.09 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $109.34 $1,880,429.01 Total Building Cost SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 86 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Commercial Property 3565 Wooddale Avenue South, St Louis Park, MN 55416 - PID: 16.117.21.34.0069 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Elevator Install elevator to second floor to comply with ADA code 85,000.00$ Ea 1 85,000.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with ADA code 150.00$ Ea 4 600.00$ Door Hardware Install ADA code compliant hardware 250.00$ Ea 12 3,000.00$ Restrooms Modify second floor restrooms to comply with ADA code 10,000.00$ Ea 2 20,000.00$ Structural Elements Lintels Repaint lintels to prevent rusting per building code 10.00$ LF 100 1,000.00$ Exiting Stairs 75.00$ Ea 15 1,125.00$ Carpet 3.51$ SF 2,000 7,020.00$ Fire Protection -$ -$ Exterior Construction Mortar Joints Re-point mortar joints per building code to prevent water intrusion 2.00$ SF 15,000 30,000.00$ Block 0.25$ SF 15,000 3,750.00$ Caulking 2.75$ LF 1,000 2,750.00$ Windows 3.50$ SF 2,500 8,750.00$ 350.00$ Ea 1 350.00$ Fascia 10.00$ LF 50 500.00$ Replace missing fascia to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace stair treads to allow for unimpeded emergency egress per code Replace carpet to allow for an unimpeded emergency egress per code Repair/replace damaged block per building code to prevent water intrusion Replace caulking to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace damaged windows to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace broken window to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 87 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Doors 350.00$ EA 4 1,400.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Remove existing roofing 0.90$ SF 15,200 13,680.00$ Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code 6.51$ SF 15,200 98,952.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical Replace HVAC system per mechanical code 6.26$ SF 15,200 95,152.00$ Electrical Conceal exposed wiring per electrical code 50.00$ Ea 4 200.00$ Replace fuse box with code approved device 500.00$ Ea 1 500.00$ Total Code Improvements 373,729.00$ Repair/re-paint exterior doors to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel E Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 88 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Photos: Parcel E, 3565 Wooddale Avenue Page 1 of 10 P1090864.JPG P1090866.JPG P1090867.JPG P1090868.JPG P1090869.JPG P1090870.JPG P1090871.JPG P1090872.JPG P1090873.JPG P1090874.JPG P1090875.JPG P1090877.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 89 Page 2 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090878.JPG P1090879.JPG P1090880.JPG P1090881.JPG P1090882.JPG P1090883.JPG P1090884.JPG P1090885.JPG P1090886.JPG P1090887.JPG P1090888.JPG P1090889.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 90 Page 3 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090892.JPG P1090893.JPG P1090894.JPG P1090895.JPG P1090897.JPG P1090898.JPG P1090899.JPG P1090900.JPG P1090901.JPG P1090902.JPG P1090903.JPG P1090904.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 91 Page 4 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090905.JPG P1090906.JPG P1090907.JPG P1090908.JPG P1090909.JPG P1090910.JPG P1090911.JPG P1090912.JPG P1090913.JPG P1090914.JPG P1090915.JPG P1090916.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 92 Page 5 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090917.JPG P1090918.JPG P1090919.JPG P1090920.JPG P1090921.JPG P1090922.JPG P1090923.JPG P1090924.JPG P1090925.JPG P1090926.JPG P1090927.JPG P1090928.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 93 Page 6 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090929.JPG P1090930.JPG P1090931.JPG P1090932.JPG P1090933.JPG P1090934.JPG P1090935.JPG P1090936.JPG P1090937.JPG P1090938.JPG P1090939.JPG P1090942.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 94 Page 7 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090943.JPG P1090944.JPG P1090945.JPG P1090946.JPG P1090947.JPG P1090948.JPG P1090949.JPG P1090950.JPG P1090951.JPG P1090952.JPG P1090953.JPG P1090954.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 95 Page 8 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090955.JPG P1090956.JPG P1090957.JPG P1090958.JPG P1090959.JPG P1090960.JPG P1090961.JPG P1090962.JPG P1090963.JPG P1090964.JPG P1090965.JPG P1090966.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 96 Page 9 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090967.JPG P1090968.JPG P1090969.JPG P1090970.JPG P1090971.JPG P1090972.JPG P1090974.JPG P1090975.JPG P1090976.JPG P1090977.JPG P1090978.JPG P1090979.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 97 Page 10 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090980.JPG Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 98 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of 9 parcels and adjacent ROW, with plans to redevelop the area for housing and commercial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings in the District, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.) 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, including costs associated with demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, and utilities; costs to finance the proposed improvements; and costs to include affordable housing, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the costs of demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, utility improvements and construction of affordable housing add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, the costs of site and public improvements and of the construction of affordable housing in the City have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. Although other projects could potentially be proposed, the City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope can be anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0. Appendix G-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 99 b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $54,725,150. c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $13,561,004. d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $41,164,146 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in diversified housing opportunities and increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Specifically, through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the EDA or City will increase the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City. But-For Analysis Current Market Value 7,100,000 New Market Value - Estimate 61,825,150 Difference 54,725,150 Present Value of Tax Increment 13,561,004 Difference 41,164,146 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 41,164,146 Appendix G-2 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 100 Meeting: Economic Development Authority Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Public Hearing Agenda Item: 7b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct the Public Hearing and motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE E-Generation One, LLC. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA wish to continue to take the necessary steps to facilitate the PLACE project? SUMMARY: PLACE E-Generation One, LLC (“PLACE”) proposes to purchase nine properties from the EDA and construct a major mixed-use redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site including: environmental investigation and reporting, asbestos abatement, building demolition and disposal, contaminated soil removal, underground stormwater retention, and structured and underground parking. Consequently, PLACE applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these costs so as to enable the project to proceed. PLACE’s TIF application was reviewed at the April 3rd Special Study Session where it received favorable support. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Total Development Cost to construct the PLACE redevelopment is approximately $123 million. According to the analysis of PLACE’s project proforma conducted by the EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, the project is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $5.66 million in tax increment assistance. Such assistance is necessary to offset a portion of the project’s $9.5 million in extraordinary site preparation costs noted above. It is proposed that the EDA enter into a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE under which PLACE agrees to acquire the assembled redevelopment site from the EDA for $6,245,000, construct the project as proposed and then be reimbursed for qualified site improvement costs up to $5,660,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the project over a maximum term of 15 years. Once the TIF Note is retired the additional property taxes generated by the project would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions. To safeguard the EDA/City’s interests, closing on the site will not occur until PLACE provides evidence that financing for the entire project has been fully secured. The EDA’s financial participation in the proposed project would leverage $62 million in new tax base, create 299 residential units (200 affordable and 99 market rate), a hotel, live/work units and generate over 118 new jobs. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion EDA Resolution Purchase and Redevelopment Contract Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 2 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, is proposing to redevelop a 5.2 site (net of easements and rights-of- way) located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. The site is divided by the CP RR line and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and located in the Elmwood Neighborhood. Location of proposed PLACE redevelopment at Wooddale Station The subject site is occupied by two, vacant, structurally substandard buildings (the former McGarvey Coffee plant and a commercial structure formerly leased to Nash Frame) and a municipal parking lot. Overall, the site exhibits low density and is underutilized from a market value perspective given its proximity to the Highway 7 and Wooddale interchange and the multi- story buildings to the south and east. The site has been of keen interest to redevelopers which has become more intense now that planning for SWLRT has been finalized. PLACE has been in discussions and working with the City on a redevelopment proposal for the subject site since 2013. The proposed redevelopment site requires the assemblage of the following nine parcels. • 5925 Highway 7 (EDA-owned property) • 5815 Highway 7 (City-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 5725 Highway 7 (EDA-owned property) • 3520 Yosemite (HCHRA-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 3565 Wooddale (HCHRA-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 3548 Xenwood Ave (HCHRA-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 3575 Wooddale (City-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 5816 36th Street (City-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) • 5814 36th Street (City-owned property to be conveyed to EDA) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 3 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Properties proposed to be purchased by PLACE As indicated on Page 2, the EDA currently owns two of the subject properties and the City owns four. At Monday’s meeting, the City Council will be asked to convey the four City-owned properties to the EDA. On April 3, 2017, the EDA approved a Purchase Agreement with Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HCHRA) to acquire the three remaining remnant parcels. Closing on the transaction is expected to occur prior to June 30, 2017. Under the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE, the EDA would convey the assembled nine parcels to PLACE for $6,245,000. CURRENT PROPOSAL: Upon closing on all its project financing and property conveyance with the EDA, PLACE proposes to raze the two structurally substandard buildings, cleanup the contaminated soils on the site and construct a major mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented, environmentally sustainable development. Development plans in conjunction with the PUD application depict four buildings split on the north and south sides of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. On April 17 the City Council approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the project along with the first reading of a PUD ordinance. The proposed PLACE project consists of the following components: • 2 apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units between them (of which 200 would be affordable and 99 would be market-rate) including 99 mixed-income live/work units. • 110-room hotel § Approximately 16,200 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial/retail space for a café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses § 4,000 SF small business co-working hub • 10,200 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility § Woonerf (Placemaking Plaza) • 447 parking spaces (structured, surface, and street) • 510,778 SF of total program space • 1 AC “urban forest” with children’s play area and public art Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 4 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC The entire project is being designed to achieve LEED Silver or Gold certification. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: Site plans for the proposed PLACE redevelopment are shown below. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 5 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC North Side Components: • Residential/Commercial building • 5 stories • 218 total dwellings • 152 apartments affordable for families with incomes up to 60% AMI, including 10 live/work units ($51,480 per year for a family of four) • 66 market rate apartments (including 8 live/work units) • Retail bike shop and repair: 2,484 sq. ft. • Makers Space: 2,724 sq. ft. • E-Generation/Greenhouse facility • 1 story building with approximately 10,200 total sq. ft. to house • Anaerobic digester and energy balancing equipment. • Vertical greenhouse for urban agriculture • Urban Forest • 1-AC urban retreat with children’s play area and public art • Parking • 216 spaces including underground, surface (with solar canopy) and on-street parking • 5 car-share spaces South Side Components: • Residential/Commercial • 6 stories • 81 total dwellings • 48 live/work apartments affordable for families with incomes up to 60% AMI ($51,480 per year for a family of four) • 33 live/work market rate apartments (including 5 “Type II” live/work units (a special prototype that features an apartment connected to a 250 square foot micro-storefront that allows the household to affordably operate a street-level commercial business) • Cafe: 4,644 sq. ft. • Coffee House: 1,173 sq. ft. • Small business co-working hub: approx.4,000 sq. ft. (split between 2 stories) • Hotel • 6 stories • 48,047 sq. ft • 110 rooms • Proposed type: select service (Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott managed by Aimbridge Hospitality) • Woonerf (Placemaking Plaza) adjacent to light rail station platform • Parking • 231 spaces including underground, structured and surface • 5 car-share spaces Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 6 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Housing Units Both apartment buildings are mixed income with a total of 99 market-rate units and 200 units affordable to households at 60% of the Area Median Income* (AMI) ($51,480 per year in 2016 for a family of four). Of these 299 units, 99 are designated as live/work spaces for creatives (58 affordable and 41 market rate). Estimated Employment Projection There is currently no employment on the subject site. It is estimated that the proposed project would create over 118 new FTE employment positions between all the various components; many of which are expected to be filled by residents living onsite. Project Schedule PLACE hopes to conduct its asbestos abatement, building demolition, contamination cleanup this fall and commence construction by winter. Under the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, PLACE is required to commence construction by May 31, 2018 and substantially complete it by December 31, 2019 which provides PLACE flexibility in the event of any unexpected delays in the project. Redeveloper’s Request for Public Financing Assistance The Total Development Cost (TDC) to construct the proposed PLACE redevelopment is approximately $123 million. There are significant extraordinary costs* associated with redeveloping the subject site. These include the following. Extraordinary Site Improvement Cost Estimates AMOUNT ($) Soil tests, environmental consulting, investigation & permits 171,000 Asbestos abatement, building demolition and disposal (net of grants) 128,700 Soil correction (net of grants) 666,795 Utility design & construction 696,261 Streets and roads 438,297 Structured parking 6,888,860 Woonerf 483,400 TOTAL Extraordinary Costs $9,473,313 *Extraordinary costs are expenses encountered over and above those which a developer would typically expect to incur in a suburban development in order to correct blighted conditions causing the need for redevelopment (e.g. asbestos removal, building demolition, contaminated soil removal and disposal, storage tank removal and disposal, shoring, utility replacement, specialized stormwater management, street improvements, structured parking, etc.) These types of expenses are eligible for reimbursement through Redevelopment TIF districts under the MN TIF Act. The above costs prevent the project from achieving financial feasibility. Consequently PLACE applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these expenses. Tax increment financing uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain qualified development costs incurred by that project for a limited period of time. Pro Forma Analysis and Recommended Level & Type of Financial Assistance PLACE’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to each component of the PLACE project were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the PLACE project proformas, Ehlers determined that the PLACE project is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $5,660,000 in tax Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 7 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC increment financing. Consistent with past practice, the assistance would be provided in the form of a TIF Note. As a reminder, the proposed tax increment would be generated by the project itself and would only be provided once construction has been completed and the Redeveloper supplied statements verif ying it had incurred the specified qualified costs. Statutorily, the proposed tax increment assistance would be made available to exclusively reimburse PLACE for a portion of the extraordinary site preparation costs cited above. The EDA would be obligated to provide assistance to the project only to the extent that the project generates sufficient tax increment to make the semi-annual payments. The City, County and School District would continue to receive the property taxes collected on the subject site’s base value. It will take approximately 18 months to construct the proposed project. Upon project completion, tax increment generated from the increased value of the property would be provided to PLACE on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the City's TIF Policy. It is estimated that the project would generate the proposed tax increment in approximately 15 years. The first increment would be paid in 2020. Once the TIF Note is fully paid, the additional property taxes generated by the project would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions. The Note is currently estimated to bear interest at 5%, which is PLACE’s current proposed financing rate for the entire project. This is subject to revision once all financing commitments are obtained for the project. The size of the TIF Note is based upon no inflationary value in the project (as with all projects). This is more conservative estimating and thus it is anticipated that the pay-as-you-go note will be paid off earlier than estimated. As with most of the EDA’s redevelopment contracts, PLACE will be required to execute a Minimum Assessment Agreement for the value utilized for projecting the amount of TIF assistance available. Property Value and Taxes All the parcels in the proposed redevelopment site are currently tax exempt. The total taxable market value of these parcels (re-estimated for establishing the proposed TIF district’s Base Value) was recently determined to be $7.1 million. The total taxable market value of the site upon redevelopment is projected to be approximately $62 million, at a minimum, and could be higher*. It is estimated that the PLACE project would generate approximately $1,060,000 in annual property taxes. The City, County and School District would receive the property taxes collected on the subject site’s new taxable Base Value. Once the TIF Note is retired, the additional property taxes generated by the project would be paid to the local taxing jurisdictions. *The project could be valued higher once it is assessed for tax purposes. This was a conservative value utilized only for estimating the amount of TIF the project would generate. Should the value of the project at the time of completion be higher than the estimated amount, the principal amount of the TIF Note would be paid sooner than the projected 15 years and local taxing jurisdictions would receive the benefit of having the full value for tax purposes sooner than anticipated. Business Subsidy The proposed TIF assistance provided to PLACE would be exempt from state business subsidy requirements as it relates to housing, pollution control/abatement, and redevelopment (Section 116J.993, Subdivision 3). Therefore, no public subsidy hearing is required; however, the EDA would still be subject to modified reporting requirements. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 8 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC TIF Application Review The EDA/City Council reviewed PLACE’s TIF Application for the proposed PLACE project at the February 13th and April 3rd Study Sessions. Following discussion there was consensus support for favorably considering PLACE’s request for tax increment assistance. As a result, staff was directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment TIF District and to draft a formal purchase and redevelopment contract with PLACE. Proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract A list of specific business terms for selling the subject redevelopment property and providing the proposed financial assistance was provided as a report for the April 24th Study Session. Those terms served as the basis for the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE (“Contract”) (attached). The proposed Contract specifies the property acquisition terms and mutual obligations between the EDA and PLACE as well as the precise terms of the financial assistance to be provided. The Contract is consistent with EDA Policy, past practices and previous discussions with the EDA/City Council. The following are key terms of the proposed Contract. 1. For purposes of the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, the following parcels, the vacated ROW between 3575 Wooddale and 5816 36th Street and adjacent rights-of-way shall together be considered the Redevelopment Property: • 5925 Highway 7 (EDA Property) • 5815 Highway 7 (City Property) • 5725 Highway 7 (EDA Property) • 3520 Yosemite (EDA Property) • 3565 Wooddale (EDA Property) • 3548 Xenwood Ave (EDA Property) • 3575 Wooddale (City Property) • 5816 36th Street (City Property) • 5814 36th Street (City Property) 2. The EDA and City own the Redevelopment Property (consisting of the “EDA Property” and “City Property”) and agree to convey title to and possession of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper by quit claim deed, subject to the terms and conditions of the Contract including: (a) Prior to Closing, the Redeveloper shall prepare and obtain City approval of a Final PUD ordinance for the Redevelopment Property and a Final Plat of the Redevelopment Property at Redeveloper’s cost and subject to all City ordinances and procedures. (b) The EDA will use its best efforts to obtain approval by the City Council before Closing of any amendment to the City zoning ordinance in order to permit construction and use of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property. 3. The purchase price for the nine EDA and City Properties shall be $6,245,000 which includes the EDA and City’s holding costs for the Redevelopment Property. Upon execution of the Contract, the Redeveloper will place $20,000 as earnest money into an escrow account administered by a title company mutually agreeable to the parties to be held and applied to Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 9 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC the Purchase Price on the date of Closing. At Closing the Redeveloper shall pay $5,047,000 of the Purchase Price, less the Earnest Money. The EDA will defer the payment of the remaining $1,500,000 of the Purchase Price, but will be paid over time out of the Minimum Improvements’ available cash flow at the rate of 4% (anticipated to be repaid over a period of ten (10) years). To secure the deferred payment of the Purchase Price, the Redeveloper will provide a mortgage lien on the Redevelopment Property in favor of the EDA in the principal amount of $1,500,000, which shall be subordinate to any mortgage provided under the Contract. Additionally, the EDA will adopt an interfund loan resolution providing for an interfund loan in this amount, plus an additional $100,000 to cover any additional administrative costs not covered by the Redeveloper as permitted under the TIF Act (the “Interfund Loan”). In the event that the Redeveloper fails to make the scheduled payments for the deferred portion of the Purchase price, the Interfund Loan shall be repaid from the Available Tax Increment on a subordinate basis to the payments on the TIF Note. 4. The EDA's obligation to convey the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper is subject to satisfaction of the following terms and conditions: (1) The Redeveloper having closed on permanent financing at or before Closing on transfer of title to the Redevelopment Property from the EDA to the Redeveloper, or having received a binding commitment from a lender to provide financing sufficient for construction of the Minimum Improvements, or having otherwise provided the EDA with proof of funds available to finance construction of the Minimum Improvements. (2) The City having approved the Final Redevelopment Plat and PUD and the Redeveloper having recorded the Redevelopment Plat at or before Closing. (3) The City having approved all necessary zoning variances to the Redevelopment Property. (4) The EDA having approved Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements. (5) The Redeveloper having reviewed and approved (or waived objections to) title to the Redevelopment Property and having obtained a commitment from a title company acceptable to the Redeveloper (the “Title Company”) to issue a suitable owner’s policy. (6) The City having conveyed the City Property to the EDA. (7) The Redeveloper being satisfied with the results of its due diligence inspections and testing with regard to the Redevelopment Property. (8) No events of default under the Contract having occurred. 5. Closing on the Redevelopment Property shall occur within 30 days of satisfaction or waiver of the above conditions but no later than April 30, 2018 unless extended by agreement of the parties. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 10 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 6. The Redeveloper shall have the right to enter the Redevelopment Property at reasonable times for the purpose of inspection and testing and to determine the feasibility of the Redevelopment Property for the Redeveloper’s intended use. The Redeveloper agrees that it shall cause all studies, investigations and inspections performed at the Redevelopment Property to be performed in a manner that does not disturb the Redevelopment Property and that that the Redevelopment Property shall be returned to its original condition after the Redeveloper’s entry, provided that the Redeveloper shall not be responsible for any existing conditions on the Redevelopment Property or for any environmental remediation or response actions required as a result of such investigations and inspections. Except for soil borings and test pits, the Redeveloper shall not conduct or cause to be conducted any physically intrusive investigation, examination or study of the Redevelopment Property (any such investigation, examination or study hereinafter an Intrusive Investigation as part of its inspection or otherwise without obtaining the prior written consent of the EDA. 7. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the EDA makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the Redevelopment Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to the Redeveloper neither implies any responsibility by the EDA or the City for any contamination of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to participate in any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property. 8. The Redeveloper further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the EDA, the City, and their governing body members, officers, and employees, from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on the Redevelopment Property on or after closing. 9. Grant Disbursement. (a) The EDA has obtained, or has covenanted to apply for, the following grants: (1) To finance a portion of the environmental remediation costs on the Redevelopment Property, the EDA has received a County Environmental Response Fund grant in the amount of $92,230 and will apply for a Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development grant and a Metropolitan Council TBRA grant in the aggregate total amount of between $600,000 and $800,000. (2) To finance a portion of the costs for eligible transit-oriented developments, the EDA has received a Metropolitan Council LCA-TOD Pre-Development grant in the amount of $100,000, a Metropolitan Council LCA-TOD grant in the amount of $2,000,000, and a County TOD grant in the amount of $750,000. The Authority will also apply for a Metropolitan Council LCDA-TOD grant for $850,000 relating to public art, solar, and placemaking elements. (3) To finance a portion of the costs relating to the E-Generation Facility Component, the EDA will apply for an MPCA CAP grant in the amount of $2,000,000. (b) The EDA will pay or reimburse the Redeveloper for Grant-Eligible Costs from and to the extent of the grant proceeds received in accordance with the terms of the respective grant agreements and the terms of the Contract. If Grant Eligible Costs exceed the amount to be reimbursed such excess costs shall be the sole responsibility of the Redeveloper (except to the extent reimbursable under the Note). Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 11 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 10. The EDA has determined that, in order to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of: soil testing and investigation, asbestos abatement, building demolition and disposal, environmental remediation and reporting, utility relocations and construction, site preparation, street and plaza improvements, and underground and structured parking related to the Minimum Improvements (the “Public Redevelopment Costs”). The tax increment generated from the Wooddale Station TIF District will be payable to Redeveloper in the form of one tax increment revenue note (the “Note”), which would be structured on the following basis: Ø Issue total: $5,660,000 Ø Type: Pay-as-you-go Ø Term: Until full repayment – not to exceed 15 years Ø Interest Rate: 5% (subject to Redeveloper’s actual financing) Ø Admin Fee: 5% Ø Fiscal Disparities: Paid from within the district The EDA shall issue and deliver the Note upon Redeveloper having: (a) delivered to the EDA one or more certificates containing the following: (i) a statement that each cost identified in the certificate is a Public Redevelopment Cost as defined in the Contract and that no part of such cost has been included in any previous certification; (ii) evidence that each identified Public Redevelopment Cost has been paid or incurred by or on behalf of the Redeveloper; (iii) evidence that Redeveloper has paid all its contractors and subcontractors in full for all work to be reimbursed as a Public Redevelopment Cost; and (iv) a statement that no uncured Event of Default by the Redeveloper has occurred and is continuing under the Agreement.; (b) submitted and obtained EDA approval of finance; and (c) delivered to the EDA an investment letter in a form reasonably satisfactory to the EDA. (d) The EDA acknowledges that the Redeveloper may assign the Note to a third party. The EDA consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon receipt of an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to the EDA. (e) The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that the EDA makes no representations or warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Note. Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared by the EDA or its financial advisors in connection with the TIF District or this Contract are for the benefit of the EDA, and are not intended as representations on which the Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding the principal amount of the Note are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 12 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 11. The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation to verify the requested amount of TIF assistance was justified similar to those conducted on other projects that received TIF assistance. The precise triggers and formula relative to the Minimum Improvements is currently being drafted. 12. Both parties agree that any assistance provided to the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract is not expected to constitute a “business subsidy” under Minnesota Statutes because the assistance is for redevelopment. 13. Redeveloper agrees that it will pay the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained by the EDA in connection with the preparation of the TIF Plan, the establishment of the TIF District, the negotiation and preparation of the Redevelopment Contract and other incidental agreements and documents. Upon termination of the Redevelopment Contract the Redeveloper remains obligated for costs incurred through the effective date of termination. 14. Redeveloper agrees to undertake the Minimum Improvements and Redeveloper Public Improvements as shown in the PUD and Planning Development Contract. In summary, the Redeveloper agrees to remediate the site in compliance with MPCA requirements, construct the Redeveloper Public Improvements, and construct the Minimum Improvements which together consist of the North and South Components in accordance with the PUD and Planning Development Contract. “North Apartments Component” means the approximately 218 apartments, including 152 affordable apartments and 66 market rate apartments. Of these apartments 18 shall be live/work Type I units. “North Commercial Space Component” means the approximately 2,484 square foot retail bike and repair shop and the approximately 2,624 square foot makers space. “E-Generation Facility Component” means the approximately 10,200 square foot facility with an anaerobic digester and energy balancing equipment and a vertical greenhouse for urban agriculture. “North Components” means, collectively, the North Apartments Component, the North Commercial Space Component, the E-Generation Facility Component, and associated parking to be constructed on the north side of the Redevelopment Property. “South Apartments Component” means the approximately 81 apartments, including 48 affordable apartments and 33 market rate apartments. Of these apartments 71 shall be live/work Type I units and 5 shall be Type II units. “South Commercial Space Component” means the approximately 4,644 square foot café, the approximately 1,173 square foot coffee house, and the approximately 4,000 square foot maker/co-working space (work hub) to be constructed on the south side of the Redevelopment Property. “Hotel Component” means the approximately 48,047 square foot hotel with approximately 110 rooms. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 13 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC “South Components” means, collectively, the South Apartments Component, the South Commercial Space Component, the Hotel Component, and associated parking to be constructed on the south side of the Redevelopment Property. 15. Before commencing construction of the Minimum Improvements or Redeveloper Public Improvements, the Redeveloper must submit plans and specifications regarding the Redeveloper Public Improvements for approval by the City Engineer, and must submit Construction Plans regarding the Minimum Improvements for approval by the EDA (together, the “Construction Plans”). Plans related to any environmental remediation, however, do not require approval by the City or EDA. All work on the Redeveloper Public Improvements and Minimum Improvements shall be in accordance with the approved Construction Plans and shall comply with all City requirements regarding such improvements. The parties agree and understand that the City will accept the Redeveloper Public Improvements in accordance with City procedures as specified in the Planning and Development Contract between the City of St. Louis Park and the Redeveloper. 16. If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans after their approval by the EDA, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the EDA for its approval. The term “material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by $500,000 or more. 17. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, Redeveloper agrees to commence construction of the Minimum Improvements by May 31, 2018 and substantially complete them by December 31, 2019. If the Redeveloper anticipates that the above timetable will not be met, Redeveloper shall provide a written and oral presentation to the City Council at a regular City Council meeting at least 45 days prior to the Required Commencement Date or Completion Date. The report must describe the reasons for the expected failure to meet the schedule, evidence of Redeveloper’s due diligence in working toward construction of the relevant Phase, and a detailed revised schedule. Approval of a modified schedule for construction by the Authority shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Failure to timely provide such written and oral report is an Event of Default. 18. The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by the City Council on February 16, 2010 and as such policy may be amended as of the date of issuance of a building permit for the Minimum Improvements, and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to design the Minimum Improvements to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) standards. Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA evidence of certification from LEED and agrees to use good faith efforts to achieve “silver” or “gold” LEED certification status. 19. Promptly after completion of each Component of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Contract relating solely to the obligations of the Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for beginning and completion thereof and the efforts regarding LEED or comparable certification described above), the EDA Representative shall deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate of Completion in recordable form and executed by the EDA. 20. The Redeveloper shall install dedicated wired connections for the Minimum Improvements in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the City Planning Development Contract. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 14 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 21. In addition to construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper shall construct, at the Redeveloper’s sole cost, the Redeveloper Public Improvements, as provided in the PUD and Planning Development Agreement. All Redeveloper Public Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the PUD and Planning Development Agreement. 22. The Redeveloper shall provide public art installations curated by the Museum of Outdoor Arts throughout the Redevelopment Property as required under the PUD. 23. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy, as adopted June 1, 2015, including without limitation the following: (a) The Redeveloper agrees to reserve 200 of the apartment units (66.8%) within the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component (collectively, the “Affordable Apartments”) for households earning sixty percent (60%) of Area Median Income (“AMI”) for at least twenty-five (25) years following building occupancy. (b) The monthly rental price for Affordable Apartments shall include rent and utility costs and shall be based on sixty percent (60%) of AMI for the metropolitan area that includes the City adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota Housing in connection with establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program. (c) The size and design of the Affordable Apartments shall be consistent and comparable with the market rate units in the Minimum Improvements and is subject to the approval of the City. The Affordable Apartments shall be distributed throughout the North Apartments Component and the South Apartments Component. (d) The Affordable Apartments shall have a number of bedrooms in the approximate proportion as the market rate units. (e) The Redeveloper agrees to prepare an affordable housing plan as defined in the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy (the “Affordable Housing Plan”). The Affordable Housing Plan shall describe how the Redeveloper complies with each of the applicable requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper and must be approved by the City prior to or in conjunction with delivery of the Certificate of Completion for the North Apartments Component or the South Apartments Component, whichever is earlier. (f) The Redeveloper agrees to design 99 of the units of the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component as live/work units (“Live/Work Units”), comprised of Live/Work Type I and Live/Work Type II units. Approximately 94 Live/Work Type I units will include a large working space within the dwelling unit, but no physical storefront, with approximately 18 Live/Work Type I Units will be located in the North Apartments Component and approximately 76 Live/Work Type I Units located in the South Apartments Component. There will be approximately five Live/Work Type II Units, which will include a large work space within the dwelling unit and a storefront, with all Live/Work Type II Units located in the South Apartments Component. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 15 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 24. Redeveloper agrees that the Minimum Improvements will be professionally managed by a property management company with substantial experience in operating mixed use developments. The Redeveloper’s selection of the property management company is subject to EDA approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. 25. The Redeveloper agrees to file any petition or other document required to participate in the City’s Special Service District No. 6 and to become subject to special service charges levied on all commercial properties in the Special Service District with regard to the South Components. The Redeveloper further waives all rights to veto, appeal or otherwise object to imposition of a service charge levied in accordance with this paragraph, provided that the Redeveloper shall be entitled to raise any objections, appeals or challenges to special district changes upon the termination of the Contract. 26. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the terms of the Maintenance Plan for the Redevelopment Property as specified in the Planning Development Contract. 27. If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan, the City, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice from the EDA to the Redeveloper, may enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the Minimum Improvements. 28. As part of the construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper agrees to construct an approximately 0.88-acre urban retreat parallel to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail as a public amenity, as detailed in the Site Plan and PUD (the “Urban Forest”). The Urban Forest will include play space for younger residents, walking trails and outdoor artwork. 29. The Redeveloper agrees to include the following amenities for the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component of the Minimum Improvements: indoor bicycle storage, exercise rooms, sound proof rooms, storage, laundry facilities, and play structures. The South Components will include a placemaking plaza (the “Plaza”). The Plaza will be located between the Hotel Component and South Apartments Component adjacent to the SWLRT Wooddale Station area platform. The Plaza is intended to be primarily a pedestrian plaza, but will be open to cars and bicyclists. The Plaza will be programmable for hosting outdoor events, and will incorporate native landscaping and artwork. 30. At Closing, the Redeveloper shall, with the Authority, execute one or more Assessment Agreements pursuant to Section 469.177, subd. 8 of the TIF Act, specifying an assessor’s minimum market value for the Redevelopment Property and each of the North Components and the South Components constructed thereon. 31. Before issuance of the TIF Note, the Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA, consultants and agents, evidence reasonably satisfactory to the EDA that Redeveloper has available funds, or commitments to obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants, loans, or other sources sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum Improvements. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 16 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 32. The EDA agrees to subordinate its rights under the Contract to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a mutually- approved subordination agreement. 33. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the Redevelopment Contract or the Redevelopment Property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Completion without the prior written consent of the EDA, except for construction mortgage financing and/or permanent financing. The EDA's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. 34. Redeveloper agrees that any proposed transferee, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the EDA, expressly assume all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under this Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred and agrees to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Redeveloper is subject. 35. Redeveloper shall undertake all work related to the Minimum Improvements and Redeveloper Public Improvements in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, including without limitation all applicable state and federal Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations. Any subcontractors retained by Redeveloper shall be subject to the same requirements. All Redeveloper Public Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the City Ordinance. 36. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements. 37. The Redeveloper, for itself and its successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction of the Minimum Improvements provided for in the Contract it will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local equal employment and non-discrimination laws and regulations. 38. Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a sexually-oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-cashing business, payday loan agency, a tattoo business, or a gun business, and that such restrictions may be placed in the Redevelopment Deed. 39. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements. 40. The Redeveloper agrees not to discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the construction and maintenance of the Minimum Improvements and Public Improvements as well as lease, rental, use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected thereon. 41. EDA may exercise a right of reverter against the Redevelopment Property in specified circumstances. This means EDA may retake possession and fee ownership of the Redevelopment Property if there is an event of default. If right of reverter is exercised, the EDA must use its best efforts to sell the Redevelopment Property to a qualified purchaser. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 17 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC When sold, proceeds are used to reimburse EDA for expenses related to resale, then to reimburse Redeveloper for original purchase price/completed improvements. Note that the right of reverter is likely to be subordinated to the mortgage for acquisition of the Redevelopment Property and/or construction of the Minimum Improvements. Any proposed subordination agreement must be approved by the EDA. The practical effect of subordination is that EDA may exercise its right of reverter in the case of a default by Redeveloper, but would have to pay off the mortgage to do so, so is unlikely to choose this remedy. The above terms are subject to further definition, revision and/or refinement provided they do not alter the substance of the transaction. Summary The EDA has been in discussion with PLACE relative to the subject redevelopment site for nearly four years. Selling the subject redevelopment site and providing TIF assistance to the proposed project makes it possible to remove two structurally substandard buildings, clean up contaminated soils along one of the city’s primary multi-modal transportation corridors and construct a major mixed use, mixed income, highly sustainable, and transit-oriented development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Elmwood Land Use and Transportation Study. The project will provide the community with 299 expanded life-cycle housing opportunities (both affordable and market rate), 99 live/work spaces for creatives, additional retail spaces, as well as a small business hub. Economically it will create over 118 new employment positions (the majority of which could be filled by people living onsite) and bring the currently tax exempt properties to optimal market value by generating $62 million in additional tax base. Additionally, the LEED-certified redevelopment will generate the majority of the project’s energy from renewable sources and grow organic produce for the community. Furthermore it will provide a public plaza adjacent to the future light rail station, a 1 acre “Urban Forest” as well as children’s play area, numerous pieces of public art and other features. The EDA’s financial participation in the proposed project will leverage approximately $123 million in new investment. The ratio of private to public investment in the project is nearly $22 to $1. Finally, the PLACE project will revitalize the currently vacant site and bring additional economic vibrancy to the Elmwood neighborhood, Cedar Lake Regional Trail and future SWLRT Wooddale Station. Recommendation PLACE’s proposed redevelopment meets the City’s objectives for the provision of Tax Increment Financing as specified in the City’s TIF Policy. The project meets all the Minimum and Desired Qualifications for providing TIF assistance and received a final grade of “A” according to the Project Report Card within the TIF Policy. Given the above findings, staff supports selling the subject properties to PLACE for $6,245,000 and providing it with up to $5,660,000 in pay-as-you - go tax increment generated by the project as reimbursement for qualified site preparation costs so as to advance the redevelopment. The EDA’s legal counsel in consultation with staff prepared the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE and recommends its approval. The attached resolution of approval allows for modifications to the Contract that do not alter the substance of the transaction without bringing the Contract back to the EDA for amendment. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 18 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING A PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY, AND AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ITS TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE TO PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) as follows: Section 1. Recitals; Approval and Authorization; Award of Sale. 1.01. Recitals. (a) The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have heretofore approved the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project. (b) To facilitate the redevelopment of certain property within the Project and TIF District, the Authority and PLACE E-Generation One LLC (the “Owner”) have negotiated a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Agreement”) which provides for the conveyance of certain property described in Exhibit A hereto (the “Property”) to the Owner, the construction by the Owner of a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development, including rental housing, and associated parking on the Property, and the issuance of the Authority’s Tax Increment Revenue Note (the “Note”) to the Owner. (c) On April 19, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City reviewed the proposed conveyance of the Property and found that such conveyance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. (d) The Authority has on this date conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the conveyance of the Property to the Redeveloper, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard. (e) The Board has reviewed the Agreement and finds that the execution thereof and performance of the Authority’s obligations thereunder, including the conveyance of the Property to the Redeveloper, are in the best interest of the City and its residents. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 19 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 1.02. Approval of Agreement. (a)The Agreement as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director, and subject to approval by the City Council of the conveyance of the City Parcels (as defined in the Agreement) to the Authority, provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval. (b)Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the Authority’s obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution of any documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, and any deed or other documents necessary to acquire the City Parcels from the City and the County Parcels from the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and to convey the Property to Redeveloper, all as described in the Agreement. 1.03. Authorization of Note. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell the Note to the Owner for the purpose of financing certain Public Redevelopment Costs of the Project, subject to all terms and conditions of the Agreement. 1.04. Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a)The Authority hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to issue the Note in accordance with the Agreement. All capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning provided in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise. (b)The Note shall be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $5,660,000 to the Owner in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner under the Agreement, shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum from the date of issue to the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Note will be issued in the principal amount of Public Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordance with Section 3.8 of the Agreement. The Note is secured by Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of the Note herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive Director the determination of the date on which the Note is to be delivered, in accordance with the Agreement. Section 2. Form of Note. The Note shall be in substantially the following form, with the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal amount adjusted as of the date of issue: Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 20 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC UNITED STATE OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY No. R-1 $_____________ TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE SERIES 20__ Date Rate of Original Issue 5.0% _________________ The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) for value received, certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to PLACE E-Generation One LLC, or registered assigns (the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate of 5.0% per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings provided in the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the Authority and the Owner, dated __________, 2017 (the “Agreement”), unless the context requires otherwise. 1.Payment s. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 2020 and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 2035 (the “Payment Dates”) in the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of issue through and including February 1, 2020 shall be compounded semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of each year and added to principal. Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts. 2.Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal, commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360 days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid. 3.Available Tax Increment. (a)Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in the six months preceding each Payment Date on the Note. (b)The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure of the Authority to pay principal or interest on this Note on any Payment Date shall not constitute a default Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 21 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest hereon to the extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on February 1, 2035. 4.Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event of Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid, without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written notice to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement. 5.Prepayment. (a)The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Note is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise required to be made under this Note. (b)Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the Participation Amount as described in Section 3.9 of the Agreement, one hundred percent (100%) of such Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note. Upon request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the outstanding principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this paragraph. 6.Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of $_________________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly adopted by the Authority on __________, 2017, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto. 7.Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the principal office of the Chief Financial Officer of the City, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such transfer or exchange and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 22 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same dates. Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.8(d) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such transfer. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Thomas K Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 23 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC REGISTRATION PROVISIONS The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register of the Chief Financial Officer, in the name of the person last listed below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Chief Financial Officer PLACE E-Generation One LLC Federal Tax I.D. No. ___________ [End of Form of Note] Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery. 3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note numbered R-1. The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the Chief Financial Officer to perform the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a)Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of transfers and exchanges of the Note. (b)Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each Payment Date and until such Payment Date. (c)Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority. (d)Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 24 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount, maturity dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Note prior to payment. 3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement. Section 4. Security Provisions. 4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Note. Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution. 4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority irrevocably agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the Available Tax Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available Tax Increment, whichever is less. Any Available Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 25 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund shall be transferred to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the Note in accordance with its terms. 4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the pledge on the Note. Section 5. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein. Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President Attest Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 26 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC EXHIBIT A Property Authority Parcels: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. AND Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 27 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. City Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 28 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. AND Tract A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No, 517068. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Tract B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of Lot 6 and the East line of Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Together with that part of the East 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 29 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC County Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) AND Tract A: That part of the following described property: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 29, extended Northerly. Tract B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, ''Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot 9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 30 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. AND Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence North 00 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds East, 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 183.14 feet; thence North 24 degrees 38 minutes 46 seconds West, 20.57 feet; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence North 39 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds West, 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 17 minutes 59 seconds East, 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 31 Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence North 01 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds East, 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property) The Redevelopment Property will be replatted as Lot 1, Blocks 1, 2 and 3, and Outlots A, B, and C, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Third Draft April 26, 2017 PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT By and Between ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC Dated: _____________, 2017 This document was drafted by: KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered (MNI) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 337-9300 http://www.kennedy-graven.com Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 32 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................................................... 1 ARTICLE I Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions .................................................................................................................... 3 ARTICLE II Representations and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority ................................................................................. 8 Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper ................................................... 9 ARTICLE III Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs Section 3.1. Conveyance of the Property ....................................................................................... 11 Section 3.2. Purchase Price; Provisions for Payment; Deferral ..................................................... 11 Section 3.3. Conditions of Conveyance ......................................................................................... 12 Section 3.4. Place of Document Execution, Delivery and Recording ........................................... 13 Section 3.5. Title ............................................................................................................................. 14 Section 3.6. Environmental Conditions .......................................................................................... 15 Section 3.7. Grant Disbursement .................................................................................................... 16 Section 3.8. Issuance of Note ......................................................................................................... 17 Section 3.9. TIF Lookback ............................................................................................................. 19 Section 3.10. Business Subsidy ........................................................................................................ 20 Section 3.11. Payment of Authority Costs ....................................................................................... 20 ARTICLE IV Construction of Minimum Improvements Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements ................................................................................... 22 Section 4.2. Construction Plans ...................................................................................................... 22 Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction ..................................................... 23 Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion ........................................................................................... 24 Section 4.5. Records ....................................................................................................................... 24 Section 4.6. Connectivity ................................................................................................................ 24 Section 4.7. Redeveloper Public Improvements ............................................................................ 25 Section 4.8. Public Art .................................................................................................................... 25 Section 4.9. Inclusionary Housing .................................................................................................. 25 Section 4.10. Property Management ................................................................................................ 26 Section 4.11. Special Service District; Maintenance ....................................................................... 26 Section 4.12. Urban Forest ............................................................................................................... 27 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 33 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ii Section 4.13. Other Amenities .......................................................................................................... 27 ARTICLE V Insurance Section 5.1. Insurance ..................................................................................................................... 28 Section 5.2. Subordination .............................................................................................................. 29 ARTICLE VI Tax Increment; Taxes Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes ............................................................................. 30 Section 6.2. Review of Taxes ......................................................................................................... 30 Section 6.3. Assessment Agreements ............................................................................................. 30 ARTICLE VII Other Financing Section 7.1. Generally ..................................................................................................................... 32 Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage ...................................................... 32 Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination ...................................................................................... 32 ARTICLE VIII Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification Section 8.1. Representation as to Development ............................................................................. 33 Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement .......................................................................................... 33 Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants .................................................................... 34 ARTICLE IX Events of Default Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined .......................................................................................... 36 Section 9.2. Remedies on Default .................................................................................................. 36 Section 9.3. Revesting Title in Authority Upon Happening of Event Subsequent to Conveyance to Redeveloper ....................................................................................... 37 Section 9.4. Resale of Reacquired Property; Disposition of Proceeds .......................................... 38 Section 9.5. No Remedy Exclusive ................................................................................................ 39 Section 9.6. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver ........................................................ 39 Section 9.7. Attorneys’ Fees ........................................................................................................... 39 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 34 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 iii ARTICLE X Additional Provisions Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable ................................. 41 Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity ................................................................................ 41 Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use ..................................................................................................... 41 Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed ............................................................................ 41 Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections .................................................................................... 41 Section 10.6. Notices and Demands ................................................................................................. 41 Section 10.7. Counterparts ................................................................................................................ 42 Section 10.8. Recording .................................................................................................................... 42 Section 10.9. Amendment ................................................................................................................ 42 Section 10.10. Authority Approvals ................................................................................................... 42 TESTIMONIUM .............................................................................................................................. S-1 SIGNATURES ................................................................................................................................. S-1 SCHEDULE A Redevelopment Property .............................................................................. A-1 SCHEDULE B Form of Quitclaim Deed .............................................................................. B-1 SCHEDULE C Authorizing Resolution ................................................................................ C-1 SCHEDULE D Certificate of Completion............................................................................. D-1 SCHEDULE E Form of Subordination Agreement .............................................................. E-1 SCHEDULE F Site Plan ........................................................................................................ F-1 SCHEDULE G Form of Assessment Agreement .................................................................. G-1 SCHEDULE H Form of Declaration of Restrictive Covenants ............................................ H-1 SCHEDULE I Form of Draw Request .................................................................................. I-1 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 35 1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT THIS PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, made as of the ______ day of ___________, 2017 (the “Agreement”), by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of Minnesota (the “Authority”), and PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Authority was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081, as amended (the “Act”), and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a resolution of the City Council of the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority has undertaken a program to promote the development and redevelopment of land which is underutilized within the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), and in this connection created Redevelopment Project No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”) in an area (hereinafter referred to as the “Project Area”) located in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, as amended (the “HRA Act”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority is authorized to acquire real property, or interests therein, and to undertake certain activities to facilitate the redevelopment of real property by private enterprise; and WHEREAS, the Authority has acquired certain property within the Project as described in Schedule A hereto (the “Authority Parcels”) and will acquire additional property owned by the City (the “City Parcels”) and by the County HRA (the “County Parcels”) within the Project, and the Redeveloper intends to acquire the Authority Parcels, the City Parcels, and the County Parcels (together, the “Redevelopment Property”) for the development of a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development, including rental housing, and certain improvements described herein (collectively, the “Minimum Improvements”); and WHEREAS, the Authority has established the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended (the “TIF Act”), made up of property in the Project Area including the Redevelopment Property; and WHEREAS, to assist in the financing of the Minimum Improvements, the Authority will provide tax increment assistance to the Redeveloper and has also agreed to defer a portion of the purchase price of the Redevelopment Property; and WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of this Agreement, are in the vital and best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and in Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 36 2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable state and local laws and requirements under which the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 37 3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE I Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context, the following terms shall have the following defined meanings: “Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081, as amended. “Affiliate” means with respect to any entity (a) any corporation, partnership, limited liability company or other business entity or person controlling, controlled by or under common control with the entity, and (b) any successor to such party by merger, acquisition, reorganization or similar transaction involving all or substantially all of the assets of such party (or such Affiliate). For the purpose hereof the words “controlling,” “controlled by,” and “under common control with” shall mean, with respect to any corporation, partnership, limited liability company or other business entity, the ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the voting interests in such entity or possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of management policies of such entity, whether through ownership of voting securities or by contract or otherwise. “Affordable Apartments” has the meaning provided in Section 4.9 of this Agreement. “Agreement” means this Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended, or supplemented. “Assessment Agreement” means any Assessment Agreement entered into pursuant to Section 6.3 hereof. “Authority” means the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State, its successors and assigns. “Authority Parcels” means the real property so described in Schedule A of this Agreement. “Authority Representative” means the Executive Director of the Authority, or any person designated by the Executive Director to act as the Authority Representative for the purposes of this Agreement. “Authorizing Resolution” means the resolution of the Authority, substantially in the form of attached Schedule C to be adopted by the Authority to authorize the issuance of the Note. “Available Tax Increment” means ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by the County in the six months preceding each Payment Date on the Note. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 38 4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 “Business Day” means any day except a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, a day on which the City is closed for business, or a day on which banking institutions in the City are authorized by law or executive order to close. “Business Subsidy Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as amended. “Certificate of Completion” means the certification provided to the Redeveloper pursuant to Section 4.4 hereof. “City” means the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota. “City Parcels” means the real property so described in Schedule A of this Agreement. “Closing” has the meaning assigned in Section 3.3(c) hereof. “Construction Plans” means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents on the construction work to be performed by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property which (a) shall be as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which are submitted to the appropriate building officials of the City, and (b) shall include at least the following for each building: (1) site plan; (2) foundation plan; (3) underground parking plans; (4) floor plan for each floor; (5) cross-sections of each (length and width); (6) elevations (all sides); (7) landscape plan; and (8) such other plans or supplements to the foregoing plans as the Authority and Redeveloper mutually agree are necessary to allow the issuance of a construction permit. “County” means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota. “County Parcels” means the real property so described in Schedule A of this Agreement. “Declaration” means the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants attached as Schedule H hereto. “Deed” means the quitclaim deed from the Authority to the Redeveloper for the Redevelopment Property, in substantially the form attached hereto as Schedule B. “Development Pro Forma” means the financial pro forma for the Minimum Improvements on file at the office of the Authority and incorporated herein by reference. “E-Generation Facility Component” means the approximately 10,200 square foot facility with an anaerobic digester and energy balancing equipment and a vertical greenhouse for urban agriculture to be constructed on the north side of the Redevelopment Property as part of the Minimum Improvements. “Environmental Reports” means the following reports relating to the environmental condition of the Redevelopment Property and all amendments, modifications and supplements thereto: ___________________________. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 39 5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 “Event of Default” means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article IX hereof. “Grant-Eligible Costs” means the costs eligible for funding under the various grant agreements related to the Redevelopment Property. “Holder” means the owner of a Mortgage. “Hotel Component” means the approximately 48,047 square foot hotel with approximately 110 rooms to be constructed on the south side of the Redevelopment Property as part of the Minimum Improvements. “HRA Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, as amended. “Live/Work Unit” has the meaning provided in Section 4.9 of this Agreement. “Maturity Date” means the date that the Note has been paid in full or terminated in accordance with its terms, whichever is earlier. “Minimum Improvements” means, collectively, the North Components and the South Components. “Mortgage” means any mortgage made by the Redeveloper that is secured, in whole or in part, with the Redevelopment Property and that is a permitted encumbrance pursuant to the provisions of Article VIII hereof. “MPCA” means the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. “North Apartments Component” means the approximately 218 apartments, including 152 Affordable Apartments and 66 market rate apartments, to be constructed on the north side of the Redevelopment Property as part of the Minimum Improvements. “North Commercial Space Component” means the approximately 2,484 square-foot retail bike and repair shop and the approximately 2,624 square-foot makers space to be constructed on the north side of the Redevelopment Property as part of the Minimum Improvements. “North Components” means, collectively, the North Apartments Component, the North Commercial Space Component, the E-Generation Facility Component, and associated parking as required pursuant to the PUD. “Note” means the Tax Increment Revenue Note, substantially in the form contained in the Authorizing Resolution, to be delivered by the Authority to the Redeveloper in accordance with Section 3.8 hereof. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 40 6 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 “Planning Development Contract” means the agreement to be negotiated and executed by the City and the Redeveloper, providing for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure within the Redevelopment Property. “Project” means the Authority’s Redevelopment Project No. 1. “Project Area” means the geographic area within the boundaries of the Project. “Public Redevelopment Costs” has the meaning provided in Section 3.8(a) hereof. “PUD” means the Planned Unit Development for the Redevelopment Property, as preliminarily approved by the City on April 17, 2017 and as finally approved on _____________. “Redeveloper” means PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, or its permitted successors and assigns. “Redeveloper Public Improvements” means public infrastructure as provided in the PUD and Planning Development Contract. “Redevelopment Plan” means the Redevelopment Plan for the Project. “Redevelopment Property” means the real property described in Schedule A of this Agreement, consisting of the Authority Parcels and the City Parcels. “South Apartments Component” means the approximately 81 apartments, including 48 Affordable Apartments and 33 market rate apartments, to be constructed on the south side of the Redevelopment Property as part of the Minimum Improvements. “South Commercial Space Component” means the approximately 4,644 square-foot café, the approximately 1,173 square-foot coffee house, and the approximately 4,000 square-foot maker/co-working space (work hub) to be constructed on the south side of the Redevelopment Property. “South Components” means, collectively, the South Apartments Component, the South Commercial Space Component, the Hotel Component, and associated parking as required pursuant to the PUD. “State” means the State of Minnesota. “Tax Increment” means that portion of the real property taxes that is paid with respect to the Redevelopment Property and that is remitted to the Authority as tax increment pursuant to the Tax Increment Act. “Tax Increment Act” or “TIF Act ” means the Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 41 7 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 “Tax Increment District” or “TIF District” means the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District created by the City and the Authority. “Tax Increment Plan” or “TIF Plan” means the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the TIF District approved by the City Council on May 1 , 2017, and as it may be amended. “Tax Official” means any County assessor, County auditor, County or State board of equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or any State or federal district court, the tax court of the State, or the State Supreme Court. “Transfer” has the meaning set forth in Section 8.2(a) hereof. “Unavoidable Delays” means delays beyond the reasonable control of the party seeking to be excused as a result thereof which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, prolonged adverse weather or acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements, litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action, directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the Authority in exercising its rights under this Agreement), including without limitation condemnation or threat of condemnation of any portion of the Redevelopment Property, which directly result in delays. Unavoidable Delays shall not include delays experienced by the Redeveloper in obtaining permits or governmental approvals necessary to enable construction of the Minimum Improvements by the dates such construction is required under Section 4.3 hereof, so long as the Construction Plans have been approved in accordance with Section 4.2 hereof and the Redeveloper has otherwise timely submitted application for such permits and/or applicable governmental approvals. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 42 8 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE II Representations and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority. (a)The Authority is an economic development authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the provisions of the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority has the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder. (b)The Authority will use its best efforts to facilitate development of the Minimum Improvements, including but not limited to cooperating with the Redeveloper in obtaining necessary administrative and land use approvals and construction financing pursuant to Section 7.1 hereof. (c) The Authority and the City have approved the establishment of the TIF District pursuant to the Tax Increment Act. (d)The Authority is the holder of marketable fee simple and record title to the Authority Parcels, free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances and restrictions except those which are recorded against the Authority Parcels. (e)To the best of the Authority’s knowledge, the City is the holder of marketable fee simple and record title to the City Parcels, free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances and restrictions except those which are recorded against the City Parcels. (f)To the best of the Authority’s knowledge, the County Housing and Redevelopment Authority is the holder of marketable fee simple and record title to the County Parcels, free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances and restrictions except those which are recorded against the County Parcels. (g)The Authority will convey the Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and following the acquisition of the City Parcels and County Parcels, the Authority will convey the City Parcels and County Parcels to the Redeveloper, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (h)The Authority will issue the Note, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (i)The activities of the Authority are undertaken for the purpose of fostering the redevelopment of certain real property that is occupied by substandard and obsolete buildings, which will revitalize this portion of the Project Area, increase tax base, and increase housing opportunities. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 43 9 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (j)There are no parties other than the Authority in possession of any portion of the Authority Parcels, nor are there any leases (oral or written) applicable to or affecting the Authority Parcels. (k)No third party has an option to purchase, right of first refusal, right of first offer or other similar right with respect to all or a portion of the Authority Parcels and the Authority has not entered into any other contracts for the sale of all or any portion of the Authority Parcels with any third party. (l)The Authority is not aware of any methamphetamine production occurring on the Redevelopment Property. This representation is intended to satisfy the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 152.0275, subd. 2(m). (m)To the best of the Authority’s knowledge, information, and belief: (i)There are three MPCA monitoring wells on the Redevelopment Property. Well Disclosure Certificate No. 287647 is currently on file and the Authority will record an updated well disclosure certificate or certificates if required. (ii)There is no individual sewage treatment system, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 115.55, subd. 1, on the Redevelopment Property. This representation is intended to satisfy the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 155.55, subd. 6. Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper represents and warrants that: (a)The Redeveloper is a limited liability company duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization or operating agreement, is duly qualified as a limited liability company and authorized to transact business within the State, has power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution, delivery, and performance of this Agreement by proper action of its members. (b)If the Redeveloper acquires the Redevelopment Property in accordance with this Agreement, the Redeveloper will construct, operate and maintain the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan and all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, building code, energy-conservation and public health laws and regulations). (c)The Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to secure all permits, licenses and approvals necessary for construction of the Minimum Improvements. (d)The Redeveloper has delivered the Environmental Reports to the Authority. (e)The Redeveloper has received no written notice or other written communication from any local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper or the Authority in the Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 44 10 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Project Area may be or will be in violation of any environmental law or regulation (other than those notices or communications of which the Authority is aware). Subject to the contents of the Environmental Reports, the Redeveloper is aware of no facts the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of or give any person a valid claim under any local, State or federal environmental law, regulation or review procedure. (f)Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of, the terms, conditions or provisions of any corporate restriction or any evidences of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Redeveloper is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. (g)The proposed development by the Redeveloper hereunder would not occur but for the tax increment financing assistance being provided by the Authority hereunder. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 45 11 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE III Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs Section 3.1. Conveyance of the Property. (a)The Redevelopment Property consists of the Authority Parcels, the City Parcels, and the County Parcels, as described in Schedule A attached hereto. (b)The Authority owns the Authority Parcels and will convey title to and possession of the Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper, or its successor in interest hereunder, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The City owns the City Parcels but, on or before Closing, will convey title to and possession of the City Parcels to the Authority for conveyance to the Redeveloper, or its successor in interest hereunder, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The County HRA owns the County Parcels but has entered into a Purchase Agreement with the Authority for acquisition by the Authority of the Authority Parcels. The Authority will acquire the County Parcels on or before Closing and will convey the County Parcels to the Redeveloper, or its successor in interest hereunder, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. (c)On or before Closing, the Redeveloper shall prepare and use its best efforts to obtain final City approval of the PUD, and a plat or a registered land survey of the Redevelopment Property (the “Redevelopment Plat”) at the Redeveloper’s cost and subject to all City ordinances and procedures and otherwise reasonably acceptable to the Redeveloper. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit the City’s authority in reviewing the preliminary plat, or to preclude revisions requested or required by the City, provided such review and requested or required revisions are consistent with preliminary approvals by the City. (d)The Authority will use its best efforts to obtain approval by the City Council before Closing of any amendment to the City zoning ordinance necessary to permit construction and use of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property. Section 3.2. Purchase Price; Provisions for Payment; Deferral. The purchase price to be paid to the Authority by the Redeveloper in exchange for the conveyance of the Redevelopment Property shall be $6,245,000 (the “Purchase Price”). Upon execution of this Agreement, the Redeveloper will place $20,000 as earnest money (the “Earnest Money”) into an escrow account administered by a title company mutually agreeable to the parties (the “Title Company”), to be held and applied to the Purchase Price on the date of Closing. At Closing the Redeveloper shall pay $4,745,000 of the Purchase Price, less the Earnest Money. The Redeveloper will pay the remaining $1,500,000 of the Purchase Price, plus interest to accrue at the rate of 4.0% per annum (the “Financed Purchase Price”), in regular semiannual installments of principal and accrued interest, over a period of ten (10) years. To secure the full payment of the Financed Purchase Price, the Redeveloper will provide a mortgage lien on the Redevelopment Property in favor of the Authority in the principal amount of Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 46 12 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 $1,500,000, which shall be subordinate to any mortgage provided under the terms of Section 7.3 hereof. Additionally, the Board of Commissioners of the Authority has adopted an interfund loan resolution providing for an interfund loan in the amount of $1,500,000 as permitted under Section 469.178, subd. 7 of the TIF Act (the “Interfund Loan”). In the event that the Redeveloper fails to make the scheduled payments for the Financed Purchase Price, the Interfund Loan shall be repaid from the Available Tax Increment on a subordinate basis to the payments on the TIF Note. Section 3.3. Conditions of Conveyance. (a)The Authority shall convey title to and possession of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper by quit claim deed substantially in the form set forth on Schedule B to this Agreement (the “Deed”), modified as may be necessary to enable issuance of a suitable owner’s policy in a form acceptable to the Redeveloper and its successors and assigns. The Authority’s obligation to convey the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper, and the Redeveloper’s obligation to acquire the Redevelopment Property, are subject to satisfaction of the following terms and conditions: (1)The Redeveloper having closed on permanent financing at or before Closing on transfer of title to the Redevelopment Property from the Authority to the Redeveloper, or having received a binding commitment from a lender to provide financing sufficient for construction of the Minimum Improvements, or having otherwise provided the Authority with proof of funds available to finance construction of the Minimum Improvements. (2)The City having approved the Redevelopment Plat and PUD in accordance with Section 3.1 hereof, and the Redeveloper having recorded or filed the Redevelopment Plat at or before Closing. (3)The City having approved all necessary zoning variances to the Redevelopment Property in accordance with Section 3.1 hereof. (4)The Authority having approved Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements in accordance with Section 4.2 hereof. (5)The Redeveloper having reviewed and approved (or waived objections to) title to the Redevelopment Property and having obtained a commitment from a title company acceptable to the Redeveloper (the “Title Company”) to issue a suitable owner’s policy, as set forth in Section 3.5 hereof. (6)The City having conveyed the City Parcels to the Authority, and the County having conveyed the County Parcels to the Authority. (7)The Redeveloper being satisfied with the results of its due diligence inspections and testing with regard to the Redevelopment Property as further described in Section 3.3(b) hereof. (8)There existing no uncured Event of Default under this Agreement. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 47 13 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Conditions (1) and (4) are solely for the benefit of the Authority and may be waived by the Authority. Conditions (5), (6), and (7) are solely for the benefit of the Redeveloper and may be waived by the Redeveloper. Conditions (2), (3), and (8) are for the benefit of both parties and may be waived by both parties. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to failure to meet or waive any of conditions (1) through (7), the Earnest Money shall be returned to the Redeveloper and neither party shall have any further rights or obligations under this Agreement, except for the Redeveloper’s continuing obligation under Section 3.11 hereof. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to condition (8), the provisions of Article IX hereof shall apply. (b)The closing on conveyance of the Redevelopment Property from the Authority to the Redeveloper (the “Closing”) shall occur within thirty (30) days of satisfaction or waiver of conditions (1) through (7) specified in Section 3.3(a) hereof, and subject to the continued satisfaction at Closing of condition (8), but no later than April 30, 2018 (the “End Date”), which End Date shall be subject to extension upon mutual agreement of the parties. Section 3.4. Place of Document Execution, Delivery and Recording. (a)Unless otherwise mutually agreed by the Authority and the Redeveloper, the execution and delivery of all deeds, documents and the payment of any purchase price shall be made through a closing escrow established with the Title Company or at such other location to which the parties may agree. (b)The Deed shall be in recordable form and shall be promptly recorded in the proper office for the recordation of deeds and other instruments pertaining to the Redevelopment Property. At Closing, the Redeveloper shall pay all recording costs in connection with the conveyance of the Redevelopment Property; title insurance commitment fees and premiums, if any; and Title Company closing fees, if any. The Authority shall pay costs of recording any instruments used to clear title encumbrances; State deed tax; and any special assessments outstanding or levied against the Redevelopment Property as of the date of Closing. The parties agree and understand that the Redevelopment Property is exempt from property taxes for taxes payable in 2017. (c)At Closing, the Authority shall deliver to the Redeveloper: (1)The executed Deed; (2)All certificates, instruments and other documents necessary to permit the recording of the Deed; (3)A standard Seller’s Affidavit with respect to judgments, bankruptcies, tax liens, mechanics liens, parties in possession, unrecorded interests, encroachment or boundary line questions and related matters; Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 48 14 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (4)If applicable, the owner’s duplicate certificate of title (the Authority need not provide an abstract of title if the property is classified as abstract property); (5)An affidavit that the Authority is not a “foreign person” within the meaning of Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code; and (6)One or more Assessment Agreements. (d)At Closing, the Redeveloper shall deliver to the Authority: (1)The balance of the Purchase Price, plus or minus pro rata costs between the Authority and Redeveloper as set forth herein, less the Financed Purchase Price of $1,500,000; and (2)One or more Assessment Agreements. Section 3.5. Title. (a)As soon as practicable after the date of this Agreement, the Redeveloper, at the Redeveloper’s sole expense, shall obtain a commitment for the issuance of an ALTA Owner’s Title Insurance Policy (2006 form) for the Redevelopment Property. The Redeveloper may, at the Redeveloper’s expense, obtain a survey of the Redevelopment Property. The Redeveloper shall have twenty (20) days from the date of its receipt of such commitment and the survey to review the state of title to the Redevelopment Property and to provide the Authority with a list of written objections to such title. Upon receipt of the Redeveloper’s list of written objections, the Authority shall proceed in good faith and with all due diligence to attempt to cure the objections made by the Redeveloper. In the event that the Authority has failed to cure objections within sixty (60) days after its receipt of the Redeveloper’s list of such objections, the Redeveloper may by the giving of written notice to the Authority (i) terminate this Agreement, upon the receipt of which the Earnest Money shall be refunded to the Redeveloper and this Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall have any liability hereunder, other than Redeveloper’s obligations under Section 3.11 hereof; or (ii) waive the objections and proceed to Closing. The Authority shall have no obligation to take any action to clear defects in the title to the Redevelopment Property, other than the good faith efforts described above. If this Agreement is not terminated as hereinabove permitted, the Title Company shall be instructed to provide to Redeveloper an updated Title Commitment appropriately addressing the matters set forth above for the issuance of a title policy in the amount of the Purchase Price and otherwise in form and content acceptable to the Redeveloper. (b)The Authority shall take no actions to encumber title to the Authority Parcels between the date of this Agreement and the time the Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper. (c)The Redeveloper shall take no actions to encumber title to the Authority Parcels or the City Parcels between the date of this Agreement and the time the Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper expressly agrees that it will not cause or permit the attachment of any mechanics’, attorney’s, or other liens to the Redevelopment Property prior to Closing. Notwithstanding termination of this Agreement prior to Closing, Redeveloper is obligated to pay all Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 49 15 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 costs to discharge any encumbrances to the Redevelopment Property attributable to actions of Redeveloper, its employees, officers, agents or consultants, including without limitation the architect, the contractor and the Redeveloper’s engineer. Section 3.6. Environmental Conditions. (a)The Redeveloper shall have the right to enter the Redevelopment Property at reasonable times for the purpose of inspection and testing and to determine the feasibility of the Redevelopment Property for the Redeveloper’s intended use. The Redeveloper hereby covenants and agrees that it shall cause all studies, investigations and inspections performed at the Redevelopment Property to be performed in a manner that does not disturb the Redevelopment Property and that that the Redevelopment Property shall be returned to its original condition after the Redeveloper’s entry, provided that the Redeveloper shall not be responsible for any existing conditions on the Redevelopment Property or for any environmental remediation or response actions required as a result of such investigations and inspections. Except for soil borings and test pits, the Redeveloper shall not conduct or cause to be conducted any physically intrusive investigation, examination or study of the Redevelopment Property (any such investigation, examination or study hereinafter an “Intrusive Investigation”) as part of its inspection or otherwise without obtaining the prior written consent of the Authority. “Intrusive Investigation” shall mean any investigation, examination or study that disturbs or disrupts the Redevelopment Property, including, but not limited to, grading, but not including soil borings or test pits. The Redeveloper and the Redeveloper’s representatives shall, in performing its inspection, comply with any and all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The Redeveloper shall, at the Redeveloper’s sole cost, restore the Redevelopment Property to the same condition as before the Redeveloper’s entry for inspection or any Intrusive Investigation; provided that the Redeveloper shall not be responsible for any existing conditions or environmental remediation or response actions required as a result of existing conditions or such entry, inspection or Intrusive Investigation. (b)The Redeveloper acknowledges that the Authority makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the Redevelopment Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to the Redeveloper under this Agreement neither implies any responsibility by the Authority or the City for any contamination of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to participate in any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property. (c)Without limiting its obligations under Section 8.3 hereof, the Redeveloper further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Authority, the City, and their governing body members, officers, and employees (collectively, the “Indemnitees”), from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on or in the Redevelopment Property on or after the date of Closing, unless and to the extent that such hazardous wastes or pollutants are present as a result of the actions or omissions of the Indemnitees. Nothing in this section will be construed to limit or affect any limitations on liability of the City or Authority Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 50 16 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 under State or federal law, including without limitation Minnesota Statutes, Sections 466.04 and 604.02. Section 3.7. Grant Disbursement. (a)The Authority has obtained, or has covenanted to apply for, the following grants: (1)To finance a portion of the environmental remediation costs on the Redevelopment Property, the Authority has received a County Environmental Response Fund grant in the amount of $92,230 and will apply for a Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development grant and a Metropolitan Council TBRA grant in the aggregate total amount of between $600,000 and $800,000. (2)To finance a portion of the costs for eligible transit-oriented developments, the Authority has received a Metropolitan Council LCA-TOD Pre-Development grant in the amount of $100,000, a Metropolitan Council LCA-TOD grant in the amount of $2,000,000, and a County TOD grant in the amount of $750,000. The Authority will also apply for a Metropolitan Council LCDA-TOD grant for $850,000 relating to public art, solar, and placemaking elements. (3)To finance a portion of the costs relating to the E-Generation Facility Component, the Authority will apply for an MPCA CAP grant in the amount of $2,000,000. (b)The Authority will pay or reimburse the Redeveloper for Grant-Eligible Costs from and to the extent of the grant proceeds received in accordance with the terms of the respective grant agreements and the terms of this Section. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, if Grant-Eligible Costs exceed the amount to be reimbursed under this Section, such excess shall be the sole responsibility of the Redeveloper (except to the extent reimbursable under the Note). (c)All disbursements will be made subject to the conditions precedent that on the date of such disbursement: (1)The Authority has received a written statement from the Redeveloper’s authorized representative certifying with respect to each payment: (a) that none of the items for which the payment is proposed to be made has formed the basis for any payment previously made under this Section (or before the date of this Agreement); (b) that each item for which the payment is proposed is a Grant-Eligible Cost, including a statement specifying which grant is the eligible funding source; and (c) the Redeveloper reasonably anticipates completion of the Grant-Eligible Costs and the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. (2)No Event of Default under this Agreement or event which would constitute such an Event of Default but for the requirement that notice be given or that a period of grace or time elapse, shall have occurred and be continuing. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 51 17 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (3)No license or permit necessary for undertaking the Grant-Eligible Costs or constructing the Minimum Improvements shall have been revoked or the issuance thereof subjected to challenge before any court or other governmental authority having or asserting jurisdiction thereover. (4)The Redeveloper has submitted, and the Authority has approved, Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements in accordance with Article IV hereof. (d)Whenever the Redeveloper desires a disbursement to be made hereunder, which shall be no more often than biweekly, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority a draw request in the form attached as Schedule I duly executed on behalf of the Redeveloper accompanied by paid invoices or other comparable evidence that the cost has been incurred and paid or is payable by Redeveloper. Each draw request shall constitute a representation and warranty by the Redeveloper that all representations and warranties set forth in this Agreement are true and correct as of the date of such draw request. (c)If the Redeveloper has performed all of its agreements and complied with all requirements theretofore to be performed or complied with hereunder, including satisfaction of all applicable conditions precedent contained in Article III hereof, the Authority shall make a disbursement to the Redeveloper in the amount of the requested disbursement or such lesser amount as shall be approved, within twenty (20) Business Days after the date of the Authority’s receipt of the draw request, or, if later, upon receipt of grant proceeds from the respective agency, as the case may be. Each disbursement shall be paid from the grant designated by the Authority at its discretion, subject to the Authority’s determination that the relevant Grant-Eligible Cost is payable from the designated source under the respective grant agreement. (f)The making of the final disbursement by the Authority under this Section shall be subject to the condition precedent that the Redeveloper shall be in compliance with all conditions set forth in this Section and further, that the following conditions shall have been satisfied: (1)The Redeveloper shall have received a certificate of completion from the MPCA pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 115B.175, subdivision 5, clause (b); and (2)The Authority shall have received a lien waiver from each contractor for all work done and for all materials furnished by it for the Grant-Eligible Costs. (g)The Authority may, in its sole discretion, without notice to or consent from any other party, waive any or all conditions for disbursement set forth in this Article. However, the making of any disbursement prior to fulfillment of any condition therefor shall not be construed as a waiver of such condition, and the Authority shall have the right to require fulfillment of any and all such conditions prior to authorizing any subsequent disbursement. Section 3.8. Issuance of Note. (a)Generally. The Authority has determined that, in order to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of soil testing and investigation, asbestos abatement, building demolition and Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 52 18 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 disposal, environmental remediation and reporting, utility relocations and construction, site preparation, street and plaza improvements, and structured parking related to the Minimum Improvements (collectively, the “Public Redevelopment Costs”), subject to the terms of this Section. (b)Terms. To reimburse the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by Redeveloper, the Authority shall issue and the Redeveloper shall purchase the Note in the maximum principal amount of $5,660,000. The Authority shall issue and deliver the Note upon the Redeveloper having: (i)delivered to the Authority one or more certificates signed by the Redeveloper’s duly authorized representative, containing the following: (1) a statement that each cost identified in the certificate is a Public Redevelopment Cost as defined in this Agreement and that no part of such cost has been included in any previous certification; (2) evidence that each identified Public Redevelopment Cost has been paid or incurred by or on behalf of the Redeveloper; (3) evidence that Redeveloper has paid all its contractors and subcontractors in full for all work to be reimbursed as a Public Redevelopment Cost; and (4) a statement that no uncured Event of Default by the Redeveloper has occurred and is continuing under the Agreement. The Authority may, if not satisfied that the conditions described herein have been met, return any certificate with a statement of the reasons why it is not acceptable and requesting such further documentation or clarification as the Authority may reasonably require; (ii)submitted and obtained Authority approval of financing in accordance with Section 7.1 hereof; and (iii)delivered to the Authority an investment letter in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority. The terms of the Note will be substantially those set forth in the form of the Note shown in Schedule C attached to this Agreement, and the Note will be subject to all terms of the Authorizing Resolution, which are incorporated herein by reference. (c)Termination of Right to Note. In accordance with Section 469.1763, subdivision 3 of the TIF Act, conditions for delivery of the Note must be met within five years after the date of certification of the TIF District by the County. If the conditions are not satisfied by such date, the City has no further obligations under this Section 3.8. (d)Assignment of Note. The Authority acknowledges that the Redeveloper may assign the Note to a third party. The Authority consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon receipt of an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to the Authority. (e)Qualifications. The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that the Authority makes no representations or warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Note. Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared by the Authority or its financial advisors in connection with Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 53 19 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 the TIF District or this Agreement are for the benefit of the Authority, and are not intended as representations on which the Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding the principal amount of the Note are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper. Section 3.9. TIF Lookback. (a)Generally. The financial assistance to the Redeveloper under this Agreement is based on certain assumptions regarding likely costs and expenses associated with constructing the Minimum Improvements. The Authority and the Redeveloper agree that those assumptions will be reviewed at the times described in this Section, and that the amount of Tax Increment assistance provided under Section 3.8 hereof will be adjusted accordingly. (b)Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms have the following definitions: [To be inserted per Ehlers/K&G discussion] (c)Lookback Calculation. [To be inserted per Ehlers/K&G discussion] Section 3.10. Business Subsidy. The Redeveloper warrants and represents that the Redeveloper’s investment in the purchase of the Redevelopment Property and in site preparation equals at least __________% of the County assessor’s finalized market value of the Redevelopment Property for the 2017 assessment year, calculated as follows: Aggregate cost of acquisition of Redevelopment Property .................................$6,245,000 Plus Estimated cost of site preparation ............................................................$__________ Less site preparation costs reimbursed by the Authority .............................. ($__________) Equals net land and site preparation cost .......................................................$___________ Assessor’s finalized market value of Redevelopment Property (2017) ..........................................................$______________ $______________ (net acquisition and site preparation cost) is __________% of $___________ (assessor’s finalized fair market value of the Redevelopment Property for 2017). Accordingly, the parties agree and understand that the financial assistance described in this Agreement does not constitute a business subsidy within the meaning of the Business Subsidy Act. Furthermore, the Minimum Improvements qualify for an exemption under Section 116J.993, subd. 3(17) of the Business Subsidy Act. The Redeveloper releases and waives any claim against the Authority and its governing body members, officers, agents, servants and employees thereof arising from application of the Business Subsidy Act to this Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 54 20 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Agreement, including without limitation any claim that the Authority failed to comply with the Business Subsidy Act with respect to this Agreement. Section 3.11. Payment of Authority Costs. The Redeveloper agrees that it will pay, within fifteen (15) days after written notice from the Authority, the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained by the Authority in connection with any necessary modification of the TIF Plan for the TIF District, and the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement and other incidental agreements and documents contemplated hereunder, including without limitation agreements and documents related to land conveyance, development and financing assistance. The Authority will provide written reports describing the costs accrued under this Section upon request from the Redeveloper, but not more often than intervals of forty-five (45) days. Any amount deposited by the Redeveloper upon filing its application for tax increment financing with the Authority will be credited to the Redeveloper’s obligation under this Section. Upon termination of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, the Redeveloper remains obligated under this Section for costs incurred through the effective date of termination. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 55 21 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE IV Construction of Minimum Improvements Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements. The Redeveloper agrees that it will construct or cause construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property in accordance with the approved Construction Plans and that it will, during any period while the Redeveloper retains ownership of any portion of the Minimum Improvements, operate and maintain, preserve and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the Minimum Improvements to be maintained, preserved and kept with the appurtenances and every part and parcel thereof, in good repair and condition. The Minimum Improvements may be constructed in one or more phases. Section 4.2. Construction Plans. (a)Before commencing construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements. The Construction Plans shall provide for the construction of the Minimum Improvements and shall be in conformity with this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan, the Site Plan attached hereto as Schedule F, and all applicable State and local laws and regulations. The Authority will approve the Construction Plans in writing if (i) the Construction Plans conform to all terms and conditions of this Agreement; (ii) the Construction Plans conform to the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans conform to all applicable federal, State and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; (iv) the Construction Plans provide for construction of the Minimum Improvements; (v) the Construction Plans do not provide for expenditures in excess of the funds available to the Redeveloper for construction of the Minimum Improvements; and (vi) no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing. No approval by the Authority shall relieve the Redeveloper of the obligation to comply with the terms of this Agreement, applicable federal, State and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance therewith. No approval by the Authority shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the Construction Plans is requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of submission, such Construction Plans shall be deemed approved unless rejected in writing by the Authority, in whole or in part. Such rejections shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor based upon the criteria set forth in clauses (i) through (vi) above, and shall be made within twenty (20) days after the date of receipt of final plans from the Redeveloper. If the Authority rejects any Construction Plans in whole or in part, the Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected Construction Plans within twenty (20) days after written notification to the Redeveloper of the rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to approval, rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply until the Construction Plans have been approved by the Authority. The Authority’s approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Said approval shall constitute a conclusive determination that the Construction Plans (and the Minimum Improvements, constructed in accordance with said plans) comply to the Authority’s satisfaction with the provisions of this Agreement relating thereto. The Redeveloper hereby waives any and all claims and causes of action whatsoever resulting from the review of the Construction Plans by the Authority and/or any changes in the Construction Plans requested by the Authority. Neither the Authority, the City, nor any employee Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 56 22 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 or official of the Authority or City shall be responsible in any manner whatsoever for any defect in the Construction Plans or in any work done pursuant to the Construction Plans, including changes requested by the Authority. (b)If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans or any component thereof after their approval by the Authority, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the Authority for its approval. For the purpose of this section, the term “material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by $500,000 or more. If the Construction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the requirements of this Section 4.2 with respect to such previously approved Construction Plans, the Authority shall approve the proposed change and notify the Redeveloper in writing of its approval. Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event, be deemed approved by the Authority unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice by the Authority to the Redeveloper, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall be made within ten (10) days after receipt of the notice of such change. The Authority’s approval of any such change in the Construction Plans will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. (a)Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Minimum Improvements as follows: (i) with respect to the North Components, by May 31, 2018; and (ii) with respect to the South Components, by May 31, 2018. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall complete the construction of the Minimum Improvements as follows: (1) with respect to the North Components, by December 31, 2019; and (2) with respect to the South Components, by December 31, 2019. All work with respect to the Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property shall be in conformity with the Construction Plans as submitted by the Redeveloper and approved by the Authority. If the Redeveloper becomes aware that Redeveloper is not likely to meet the required deadline for commencement and/or completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper agrees to provide a written and oral report to the City Council of the City at a regular City Council meeting prior to the applicable deadline. The report must describe the reasons for the expected failure to meet the applicable deadline, evidence of the Redeveloper’s good faith efforts to construct the Minimum Improvements, and a detailed revised schedule. Approval of a modified schedule for construction by the Authority shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Failure to timely provide such written and oral report is an Event of Default. (b)The Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors, and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, that the Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the development of the Redevelopment Property through the construction of the Minimum Improvements thereon, and that such construction shall in any event be commenced and completed within the period specified in this Section 4.3. After the date of this Agreement and until the Minimum Improvements have been fully leased, the Redeveloper shall make reports, in such detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by the Authority, but no more than monthly, as to the actual progress of the Redeveloper with respect to such construction and leasing. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 57 23 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (c)The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by the City Council on February 16, 2010 and as such policy may be amended as of the date of issuance of a building permit for the Minimum Improvements, and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to design the Minimum Improvements to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) standards. As soon as practicable after receipt of LEED certification, Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority evidence of such certification. Redeveloper agrees to use good faith efforts to achieve “silver” or “gold” LEED certification status. Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion. (a)Promptly after completion of each Component of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely to the obligations of the Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for beginning and completion thereof described in Section 4.3 hereof), the Authority Representative shall deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate in substantially the form shown as Schedule D, in recordable form and executed by the Authority. (b)If the Authority Representative shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.4, the Authority Representative shall, within thirty (30)days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the Redeveloper with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Redeveloper has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the opinion of the Authority, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order for the Authority to issue the Certificate of Completion. (c)The construction of each Component of the Minimum Improvements shall be deemed to be substantially complete upon issuance of a final certificate of occupancy for the applicable Component of the Minimum Improvements, and upon determination by the Authority Representative that all related site improvements on the Redevelopment Property with respect to the applicable Component have been substantially completed in accordance with approved Construction Plans, subject to landscaping that cannot be completed until seasonal conditions permit. Section 4.5. Records. The Authority and the City through any authorized representatives, shall have the right at all reasonable times after reasonable notice to inspect, examine and copy all books and records of Redeveloper relating to the Minimum Improvements. Such records shall be kept and maintained by Redeveloper through the Maturity Date. Section 4.6. Connectivity. The Redeveloper shall install dedicated wired connections for the Minimum Improvements in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the Planning Development Contract. Section 4.7. Redeveloper Public Improvements. In addition to construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper shall construct, at the Redeveloper’s sole cost, the Redeveloper Public Improvements, as provided in the PUD and Planning Development Contract. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 58 24 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 All Redeveloper Public Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the PUD and Planning Development Agreement. Section 4.8. Public Art. The Redeveloper shall incorporate public art installations curated by the Museum of Outdoor Arts (the “Public Art”) throughout the Redevelopment Property. The Public Art will include: (i) community-led art components involving collaboration with local artists, schools, and organizations; (ii) 8 to 10 art installations interwoven into the Urban Forest; (iii) additional pieces to be installed in the Plaza and other publicly accessible pedestrian areas on the Redevelopment Property, as well as affixed to various of the Components; and (iv) multipurpose spaces featuring exhibits and presentations from creatives as well as hosting community gatherings. Section 4.9. Inclusionary Housing. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy, as adopted June 1, 2015, including without limitation the following: (a) The Redeveloper agrees to reserve 200 of the apartment units (66.8%) within the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component (collectively, the “Affordable Apartments”) for households earning sixty percent (60%) of Area Median Income (“AMI”) for at least twenty-five (25) years following building occupancy. (b)The monthly rental price for Affordable Apartments shall include rent and utility costs and shall be based on sixty percent (60%) of AMI for the metropolitan area that includes the City adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota Housing in connection with establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program. (c)The size and design of the Affordable Apartments shall be consistent and comparable with the market rate units in the Minimum Improvements and is subject to the approval of the City. The Affordable Apartments shall be distributed throughout the North Apartments Component and the South Apartments Component. (d)The Affordable Apartments shall have a number of bedrooms in the approximate proportion as the market rate units. (e) The Redeveloper agrees to prepare an affordable housing plan as defined in the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy (the “Affordable Housing Plan”). The Affordable Housing Plan shall describe how the Redeveloper complies with each of the applicable requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper and must be approved by the City prior to or in conjunction with delivery of the Certificate of Completion for the North Apartments Component or the South Apartments Component, whichever is earlier. (f)The Redeveloper agrees to design 99 of the units of the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component as live/work units (“Live/Work Units”), comprised of Live/Work Type I and Live/Work Type II units. Approximately 94 Live/Work Type I units will include a large working space within the dwelling unit, but no physical storefront, with approximately 18 Live/Work Type I Units will be located in the North Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 59 25 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Apartments Component and approximately 76 Live/Work Type I Units located in the South Apartments Component. There will be approximately five Live/Work Type II Units, which will include a large work space within the dwelling unit and a storefront, with all Live/Work Type II Units located in the South Apartments Component. Section 4.10. Property Management. The Redeveloper shall cause the Minimum Improvements to be professionally managed by a property management company with substantial experience in operating mixed-use developments. The Redeveloper’s selection of the property management company is subject to approval by the Authority, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Section 4.11. Special Service District; Maintenance. (a)The Redeveloper agrees to file any petition or other document required to participate in the City’s Special Service District No. 6 and to become subject to special service charges levied on all commercial properties in the Special Service District as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 428A, with regard to the South Components. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 428A, special services will not include any service that is ordinarily provided throughout the City from general fund revenues except to the extent an increased level of service is provided in the Special Service District. The Redeveloper further waives all rights to veto, appeal or otherwise object to imposition of a service charge levied in accordance with this paragraph, provided that the Redeveloper, and its successors and assigns, shall be entitled to raise any objections, appeals or challenges to special district changes upon the termination of this Agreement. (b)Prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Completion under Section 4.4 hereof, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority for review and approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and landscaping improvements located within the Redevelopment Property, other than those included in the Special Service District (the “Maintenance Plan”). The Maintenance Plan shall be in accordance with the Planning Development Contract and must address, at a minimum: snow removal from pedestrian connections and sidewalks; maintenance and replacement of landscaping, irrigation and other streetscaping; snow removal and maintenance of any surface parking; and maintenance of the Public Art (collectively, the “Maintenance”); a description of how the Maintenance costs will be assessed to tenants; and enforcement mechanisms. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Maintenance Plan, the Authority will approve or deny the Maintenance Plan in writing, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, conditioned or denied. If the Authority denies approval of the Maintenance Plan, the denial shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor, and Redeveloper shall submit a new or corrected Maintenance Plan within thirty (30) days after written notification to the Redeveloper of the denial. (c)If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan, the Authority, at its option and following thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Redeveloper, may enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the Minimum Improvements. The Redeveloper, on behalf of itself and Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 60 26 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 its successors and assigns, acknowledges the benefit to the lots within the Redevelopment Property of the Maintenance and consents to such assessment and waives the right to a hearing, notice of hearing, or any appeal. Section 4.12. Urban Forest. As part of the construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper hereby agrees to construct an approximately 0.88-acre urban retreat parallel to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail as a public amenity, as detailed in the Site Plan and PUD (the “Urban Forest”). The Urban Forest will include play space for younger residents, walking trails and outdoor artwork. Section 4.13. Other Amenities. (a) The Redeveloper agrees to include the following amenities for the North Apartments Component and South Apartments Component of the Minimum Improvements: indoor bicycle storage, exercise rooms, sound proof rooms, storage, laundry facilities, and play structures. (b) The South Components will include a placemaking plaza (the “Plaza”). The Plaza will be located between the Hotel Component and South Apartments Component adjacent to the SWLRT Wooddale Station area platform. The Plaza is intended to be primarily a pedestrian plaza, but will be open to cars and bicyclists. The Plaza will be programmable for hosting outdoor events, and will incorporate native landscaping and artwork. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 61 27 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE V Insurance Section 5.1. Insurance. (a)The Redeveloper will provide and maintain at all times during the process of constructing the Minimum Improvements an All Risk Broad Form Basis Insurance Policy and, from time to time during that period, at the request of the Authority, furnish the Authority with proof of payment of premiums on policies covering the following: (i)Builder’s risk insurance, written on the so-called “Builder’s Risk – Completed Value Basis,” in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the principal amount of the Note, and with coverage available in nonreporting form on the so-called “all risk” form of policy. The interest of the Authority shall be protected in accordance with a clause in form and content satisfactory to the Authority; (ii)Comprehensive general liability insurance (including operations, contingent liability, operations of subcontractors, completed operations, and contractual liability insurance) together with an Owner’s Protective Liability Policy with limits against bodily injury and property damage of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence (to accomplish the above-required limits, an umbrella excess liability policy may be used); the Authority shall be listed as an additional insured on the policy; and (iii)Workers’ compensation insurance, with statutory coverage, provided that the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for workers’ compensation. (b)Upon completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements and prior to the Maturity Date, the Redeveloper shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, at its cost and expense, and from time to time at the request of the Authority shall furnish proof of the payment of premiums on, insurance as follows: (i)Insurance against loss and/or damage to the Minimum Improvements under a policy or policies covering such risks as are ordinarily insured against by similar businesses. (ii)Comprehensive general public liability insurance, including personal injury liability (with employee exclusion deleted), against liability for injuries to persons and/or property, in the minimum amount for each occurrence and for each year of $1,000,000, and shall be endorsed to show the City and Authority as additional insureds. (iii)Such other insurance, including workers’ compensation insurance respecting all employees of the Redeveloper, in such amount as is customarily carried by like organizations engaged in like activities of comparable size and liability exposure; provided Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 62 28 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 that the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for workers’ compensation. (c)All insurance required in this Article V shall be taken out and maintained in responsible insurance companies selected by the Redeveloper that are authorized under the laws of the State to assume the risks covered thereby. Upon request, the Redeveloper will deposit annually with the Authority policies evidencing all such insurance, or a certificate or certificates or binders of the respective insurers stating that such insurance is in force and effect. If permitted by Redeveloper’s insurer at commercially reasonable rates, each policy shall contain a provision that the insurer shall not cancel nor modify it in such a way as to reduce the coverage provided below the amounts required herein without giving written notice to the Redeveloper and the Authority at least thirty (30) days before the cancellation or modification becomes effective. In lieu of separate policies, the Redeveloper may maintain a single policy, blanket or umbrella policies, or a combination thereof, having the coverage required herein, in which event the Redeveloper shall deposit with the Authority a certificate or certificates of the respective insurers as to the amount of coverage in force upon the Minimum Improvements. (d)The Redeveloper agrees to notify the Authority immediately in the case of damage exceeding $100,000 in amount to, or destruction of, the Minimum Improvements or any portion thereof resulting from fire or other casualty. In such event the Redeveloper will forthwith repair, reconstruct, and restore the Minimum Improvements to substantially the same or an improved condition or value as it existed prior to the event causing such damage and, to the extent necessary to accomplish such repair, reconstruction, and restoration, the Redeveloper will apply the net proceeds of any insurance relating to such damage received by the Redeveloper to the payment or reimbursement of the costs thereof. The Redeveloper shall complete the repair, reconstruction and restoration of the Minimum Improvements, regardless of whether the net proceeds of insurance received by the Redeveloper for such purposes are sufficient to pay for the same. Any net proceeds remaining after completion of such repairs, construction, and restoration shall be the property of the Redeveloper. (e)In lieu of its obligation to reconstruct the Minimum Improvements as set forth in this Section, the Redeveloper shall have the option of: (i) if Redeveloper has assigned the Note to a third party, paying to the Authority an amount that, in the opinion of the Authority and its fiscal consultant, is sufficient to pay or redeem the outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Note, or (ii) so long as the Redeveloper is the owner of the Note, waiving its right to receive subsequent payments under the Note. (f)The Redeveloper and the Authority agree that all of the insurance provisions set forth in this Article V shall terminate upon the termination of this Agreement. Section 5.2. Subordination. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the rights of the Authority with respect to the receipt and application of any insurance proceeds shall, in all respects, be subordinate and subject to the rights of any Holder under a Mortgage allowed pursuant to Article VII hereof. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 63 29 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE VI Tax Increment; Taxes Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the Authority is providing substantial aid and assistance in furtherance of the development through reimbursement of the Public Redevelopment Costs. The Redeveloper understands that the Tax Increments pledged to payment on the Note are derived from real estate taxes on the Redevelopment Property, which taxes must be promptly and timely paid. To that end, the Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, that in addition to the obligation pursuant to statute to pay real estate taxes, it is also obligated by reason of this Agreement to pay before delinquency all real estate taxes assessed against the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements. The Redeveloper acknowledges that this obligation creates a contractual right on behalf of the Authority to sue the Redeveloper or its successors and assigns to collect delinquent real estate taxes and any penalty or interest thereon and to pay over the same as a tax payment to the county auditor. In any such suit, the Authority shall also be entitled to recover its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees. Section 6.2. Review of Taxes. The Redeveloper agrees that prior to the Maturity Date it will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment Property through: (A) willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; or (B) willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property pursuant to Section 5.1 hereof, except as provided in Section 5.1(c) hereof. The Redeveloper also agrees that it will not, prior to the Maturity Date, seek exemption from property tax for the Redevelopment Property or any portion thereof or transfer or permit the transfer of the Redevelopment Property to any entity that is exempt from real property taxes and state law (other than any portion thereof dedicated or conveyed to the City in accordance with platting of the Redevelopment Property), or apply for a deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to any law. Section 6.3. Assessment Agreements. (a)At Closing, the Redeveloper shall, with the Authority, execute one or more Assessment Agreements pursuant to Section 469.177, subd. 8 of the TIF Act, specifying an assessor’s minimum market value for the Redevelopment Property and each of the North Components and the South Components constructed thereon. As of January 2, 2019 and each January 2 thereafter, notwithstanding the status of construction by such dates, the amount of the minimum market value for the North Apartments Component shall be $______________, the minimum market value for the North Commercial Space Component shall be $____________, the minimum market value for the E-Generation Facility Component shall be $_____________, the minimum market value for the South Apartments Component shall be $_____________, the minimum market value for the South Commercial Space Component shall be $____________, and the minimum market value for the Hotel Component shall be $_______________. (b)Each Assessment Agreement shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as Schedule G. Nothing in the Assessment Agreement shall limit the discretion of the assessor to Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 64 30 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 assign a market value to any Component of the Redevelopment Property in excess of such assessor’s minimum market value; nothing in this Agreement or in the Assessment Agreement shall limit the right of the Redeveloper, or its successors and assigns, to challenge a market value determination that exceeds the established minimum market value for any Component of the Redevelopment Property. Each Assessment Agreement shall remain in force for the period specified in the Assessment Agreement. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 65 31 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE VII Other Financing Section 7.1. Generally. Before issuance of the Note, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority or provide access thereto for review by Authority staff, consultants and agents, evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that Redeveloper has available funds, or commitments to obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants, loans, or other sources sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum Improvements, provided that any lender or grantor commitments shall be subject only to such conditions as are normal and customary in the commercial lending industry. Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage. In the event that any portion of the Redeveloper’s funds is provided through mortgage financing, and there occurs a default under any Mortgage authorized pursuant to this Article VII, the Redeveloper shall cause the Authority to receive copies of any notice of default received by the Redeveloper from the Holder of such Mortgage. Thereafter, the Authority shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure periods as are available to the Redeveloper under the Mortgage documents. Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination. The Authority agrees to subordinate its rights under this Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a subordination agreement substantially in the form attached as Schedule E, or such other form as the Authority and Holder mutually agree (the “Subordination Agreement”). (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 66 32 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE VIII Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification Section 8.1. Representation as to Development. The Redeveloper represents and agrees that its purchase of the Redevelopment Property, and its other undertakings pursuant to the Agreement, are, and will be used, for the purpose of development of the Redevelopment Property and not for speculation in land holding. Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement. The Redeveloper represents and agrees that prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion for all of the Minimum Improvements (or the issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the final Component): (a)Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of obtaining financing necessary to enable the Redeveloper or any successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, to perform its obligations with respect to undertaking the redevelopment contemplated under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this Agreement, the Redeveloper has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be made or created any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power, or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, to any person or entity whether or not related in any way to the Redeveloper (collectively, a “Transfer”), without the prior written approval of the Authority (whose approval will not be unreasonably withheld, subject to the standards described in paragraph (b) of this Section) unless the Redeveloper remains liable and bound by this Redevelopment Agreement in which event the Authority’s approval is not required. Any such Transfer shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term Transfer does not include (i) acquisition of a controlling interest in Redeveloper by another entity or merger of Redeveloper with another entity; (ii) any sale, conveyance, or transfer in any form to any Affiliate; (iii) grant or conveyance of any Mortgage or other financing obtained by the Redeveloper with regard to the completion of the Minimum Improvements; (iv) any leases of the Redevelopment Property to residential or commercial tenants; or (v) conveyance of any easements necessary for the Project. (b)In the event the Redeveloper, upon Transfer of the Redevelopment Property or any portion thereof either before or after issuance of the Certificate of Completion(s), seeks to be released from its obligations under this Redevelopment Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property that is transferred, the Authority shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided in the Agreement, as conditions to any such release that: (i)Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the Authority, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Redeveloper as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 67 33 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (ii)Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the Authority and in form recordable in the public land records of Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the Authority, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under this Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred and agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Redeveloper is subject as to such portion; provided, however, that the fact that any transferee of, or any other successor in interest whatsoever to, the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, shall not, for whatever reason, have assumed such obligations or so agreed, and shall not (unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement or agreed to in writing by the Authority) deprive the Authority of any rights or remedies or controls with respect to the Redevelopment Property, the Minimum Improvements or any part thereof or the construction of the Minimum Improvements; it being the intent of the parties as expressed in this Agreement that (to the fullest extent permitted at law and in equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided otherwise in this Agreement) no transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership in the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, or any interest therein, however consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally, or practically, to deprive or limit the Authority of or with respect to any rights or remedies on controls provided in or resulting from this Agreement with respect to the Redevelopment Property that the Authority would have had, had there been no such transfer or change. In the absence of specific written agreement by the Authority to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the Authority thereof shall be deemed to relieve the Redeveloper, or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement or otherwise with respect to the Redevelopment Property, from any of its obligations with respect thereto. (iii)Any and all legal documents involved in effecting the transfer of any interest in this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property governed by this Article VIII, shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority. (iv)At the written request of Redeveloper, the Authority shall execute and deliver to Redeveloper and the proposed transferee an estoppel certificate containing commercially customary and reasonable certifications. In the event the foregoing conditions are satisfied then the Redeveloper shall be released from its obligation under this Agreement, as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property that is transferred, assigned, or otherwise conveyed. Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants. (a)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement, the Redeveloper releases from and covenants and agrees that the Authority, and the governing body members, officers, agents, servants, and employees thereof (the “Indemnified Parties”) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 68 34 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements; provided, however, that in no event shall the foregoing modify or expand the indemnification and release obligations of the Redeveloper provided in Section 3.6(b) hereof with respect to the presence, if any, or hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on the Redevelopment Property. (b)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement (including without limitation any failure by the Authority to perform any procedure required under law in connection with establishment of the TIF District), the Redeveloper agrees to protect and defend the Indemnified Parties, and further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless from any claim, demand, suit, action, or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising from this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby. (c)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement, the Indemnified Parties shall not be liable for any damage or injury to the persons or property of the Redeveloper or its officers, agents, servants, or employees or any other person who may be about the Redevelopment Property or Minimum Improvements. (d)All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the Authority contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements, and obligations of such entity and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant, or employee of such entities in the individual capacity thereof. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 69 35 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE IX Events of Default Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be “Events of Default” under this Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement, any one or more of the following events, after the non-defaulting party provides thirty (30) days ’ written notice to the defaulting party of the event, but only if the event has not been cured within said thirty (30) days or, if the event is by its nature incurable within thirty (30) days, the defaulting party does not, within such thirty (30) day period, provide assurances reasonably satisfactory to the party providing notice of default that the event will be cured and will be cured as soon as reasonably possible: (a)Failure by the Redeveloper or Authority to observe or perform any covenant, condition, obligation, or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement in all material respects. (b)If, before issuance of the Certificate of Completion for all the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper shall (i)file any petition in bankruptcy or for any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under the United States Bankruptcy Act or under any similar federal or State law, which action is not dismissed within sixty (60) days after filing; or (ii)make an assignment for benefit of its creditors; or (iii)admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due; or (iv)be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent. Section 9.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section 9.1 hereof occurs and is continuing, the non-defaulting party may: (a)Suspend its performance under this Agreement until it receives assurances that the defaulting party will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement. (b)Upon a default by the Redeveloper under this Agreement, the Authority may terminate the Note and this Agreement. (c)Take whatever action, including legal, equitable, or administrative action, which may appear necessary or desirable to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant under this Agreement, provided that nothing contained herein shall give the Authority the right to seek specific performance by Redeveloper of the construction of the Minimum Improvements. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 70 36 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (d)Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, in the event that an Event of Default by the Authority occurs prior to Closing, the Redeveloper may, in addition to any other remedies available at law or equity: (i)Terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the Authority, in which event all Earnest Money paid by the Redeveloper shall be returned to the Redeveloper, and this Agreement shall become null and void and neither party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder; or (ii)Bring an action for specific performance; any action for specific performance must be commenced within six (6) months of the Event of Default. The Redeveloper, if successful in such action, in addition to other relief, shall be entitled to an award of its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. (e)Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, however, in the event that any Event of Default by the Redeveloper occurs prior to Closing, the Authority’s sole remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 559.21 and receive the Earnest Money from the Title Company, as liquidated damages, in which event this Agreement shall be deemed null and void and the parties shall be released from all further obligations and liabilities under this Agreement. Such termination of this Agreement and receipt of the Earnest Money will be the only remedies available to the Authority for an Event of Default by Redeveloper occurring prior to Closing, and Redeveloper will not be liable for damages or specific performance. Section 9.3. Revesting Title in Authority Upon Happening of Event Subsequent to Conveyance to Redeveloper. In the event that subsequent to conveyance of the Redevelopment Property to Redeveloper and prior to completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements (evidenced by one or more Certificates of Completion described in Section 4.4 hereof): (a) The Redeveloper, subject to Unavoidable Delays, fails to begin construction of the Minimum Improvements in conformity with this Agreement and such failure to begin construction is not cured within ninety (90) days after written notice from the Authority to Redeveloper to do so; or (b)The Redeveloper fails to pay real estate taxes or assessments on the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof when due, or creates, suffers, assumes, or agrees to any encumbrance or lien on the Redevelopment Property (except to the extent permitted by this Agreement), or shall suffer any levy or attachment to be made, or any materialmen’s or mechanics’ lien, or any other unauthorized encumbrance or lien to attach, and such taxes or assessments shall not have been paid, or the encumbrance or lien removed or discharged or provision satisfactory to the Authority made for such payment, removal, or discharge, within thirty (30) days after written demand by the Authority to do so; provided, that if Redeveloper first notifies the Authority of its intention to do so, it may in good faith contest any mechanics’ or other lien filed or established and in such event the Authority shall permit such mechanics’ or other lien to remain undischarged and unsatisfied during the period of such contest and any appeal and during the course of such contest Redeveloper shall keep the Authority informed respecting the status of such defense; or Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 71 37 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (c)there is, in violation of the Agreement, any Transfer of the Redevelopment Property in violation of the terms of Section 8.2 hereof, and such violation is not cured within sixty (60) days after written demand by the Authority to Redeveloper, or if the event is by its nature incurable within sixty (60) days, Redeveloper does not, within such sixty (60) day period, provide assurances reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that the event will be cured as soon as reasonably possible; or (d)the Redeveloper fails to comply with any of its other covenants under this Agreement related to the Minimum Improvements and fails to cure any such noncompliance or breach within thirty (30) days after written demand from the Authority to Redeveloper to do so, or if the event is by its nature incurable within 30 days, Redeveloper does not, within such thirty (30) day period, provide assurances reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that the event will be cured as soon as reasonably possible; or (e)subject to the terms of any Subordination Agreement (including without limitation any right thereunder of the Holder of any Mortgage to effectuate the cure of any default of the Redeveloper hereunder), the Holder of any Mortgage secured by the subject property exercises any remedy provided by the Mortgage documents or exercises any remedy provided by law or equity in the event of a default in any of the terms or conditions of the Mortgage, in either case which would materially adversely affect the rights and obligations of the Authority hereunder; then the Authority shall have the right to re-enter and take possession of the Redevelopment Property and to terminate (and revest in the Authority) the estate conveyed by the Deed to Redeveloper as to the Redevelopment Property, subject to all intervening matters, it being the intent of this provision, together with other provisions of the Agreement, that the conveyance of the Redevelopment Property to Redeveloper shall be made upon, and that the deed shall contain a condition subsequent to the effect that in the event of any default on the part of Redeveloper and failure on the part of Redeveloper to remedy, end, or abrogate such default within the period and in the manner stated in such subdivisions, the Authority at its option may declare a termination in favor of the Authority of the title, and of all the rights and interests in and to the Redevelopment Property conveyed to Redeveloper, and that such title and all rights and interests of Redeveloper, and any assigns or successors in interest to and in the Redevelopment Property, shall revert to the Authority (subject to the rights of any Holder of a Mortgage as provided in Section 7.3 hereof), but only if the events stated in subsections (a) through (e) above have not been cured within the time periods provided above. Section 9.4. Resale of Reacquired Property; Disposition of Proceeds. Upon the revesting in the Authority of title to and/or possession of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof as provided in Section 9.3 hereof, the Authority shall, pursuant to its responsibilities under law, use its best efforts to sell the parcel or part thereof as soon and in such manner as the Authority shall find feasible and consistent with the objectives of such law and of the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan to a qualified and responsible party or parties (as determined by the Authority) who will assume the obligation of making or completing the Minimum Improvements as shall be satisfactory to the Authority in accordance with the uses specified for such parcel or part thereof in the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan. During any time while the Authority has title to and/or possession of a parcel Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 72 38 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 obtained by reverter, the Authority will not disturb the rights of any tenants under any leases encumbering such parcel. Upon resale of the parcel, the proceeds thereof shall be applied: (a)First, to reimburse the Authority for all costs and expenses incurred by them, including but not limited to salaries of personnel, in connection with the recapture, management, and resale of the parcel (but less any income derived by the Authority from the property or part thereof in connection with such management); all taxes, assessments, and water and sewer charges with respect to the parcel or part thereof (or, in the event the parcel is exempt from taxation or assessment or such charge during the period of ownership thereof by the Authority, an amount, if paid, equal to such taxes, assessments, or charges (as determined by the Authority assessing official) as would have been payable if the parcel were not so exempt); any payments made or necessary to be made to discharge any encumbrances, liens, or Mortgages existing on the parcel or part thereof at the time of revesting of title thereto in the Authority or to discharge or prevent from attaching or being made any subsequent encumbrances or liens due to obligations, defaults or acts of Redeveloper, its successors or transferees; any expenditures made or obligations incurred with respect to the making or completion of the subject improvements or any part thereof on the parcel or part thereof; and any amounts otherwise owing the Authority by Redeveloper and its successor or transferee; and (b)Second, to reimburse Redeveloper, its successor or transferee, up to the amount equal to (1) the Purchase Price paid by Redeveloper under Section 3.2 hereof with respect to the parcel revested; plus (2) the amount actually invested by it in making any of the subject improvements on the parcel or part thereof. Any balance remaining after such reimbursements shall be retained by the Authority as its property. Section 9.5. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to any party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. To entitle the Authority to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be required in this Article IX. Section 9.6. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. Section 9.7. Attorneys’ Fees. Whenever any Event of Default occurs and if the non-defaulting party employs attorneys or incurs other expenses for the collection of payments due or to become due or for the enforcement of performance or observance of any obligation or agreement on the part of the defaulting party under this Agreement, the defaulting party shall, within twenty (20) days of written demand by the non-defaulting party, pay to the non-defaulting Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 73 39 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 party the reasonable fees of such attorneys actually incurred and such other reasonable third-party expenses actually incurred by the non-defaulting party. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 74 40 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ARTICLE X Additional Provisions Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable. The Authority and the Redeveloper, to the best of their respective knowledge, represent and agree that no member, official, or employee of the Authority shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement that affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he, directly or indirectly, is interested. No member, official, or employee of the City or Authority shall be personally liable to the Redeveloper, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Authority or for any amount that may become due to the Redeveloper or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity. The Redeveloper, for itself and its successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction of the Minimum Improvements provided for in the Agreement it will comply with all applicable federal, State, and local equal employment and non-discrimination laws and regulations. Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use. The Redeveloper agrees that until the Maturity Date, the Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall devote the Redevelopment Property to the operation of the Minimum Improvements as described in Section 4.1 hereof, and shall not discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental or in the use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected or to be erected thereon, or any part thereof. Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a sexually oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-cashing business, a tattoo business, or a gun business, and that such restrictions may be included in the Deed. Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to or shall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in the Redevelopment Property and any such deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the provisions and covenants of this Agreement. Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and Sections of the Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. Section 10.6. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the following addresses (or to such other addresses as either party may notify the other): Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 75 41 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 To Redeveloper: PLACE E-Generation One LLC Attn: ________________ 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 To Authority: St. Louis Park EDA Attn: Executive Director 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416-2518 Section 10.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 10.8. Recording. At or after Closing, the Authority shall record this Agreement and any amendments thereto with the recording office of the County. The Redeveloper shall pay all costs for recording. The Redeveloper’s obligations under this Agreement are covenants running with the land for the term of this Agreement, enforceable by the Authority against the Redeveloper, its successor and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof or any interest therein. Section 10.9. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement approved by the Authority and the Redeveloper. Section 10.10. Authority Approvals. Unless otherwise specified, any approval required by the Authority under this Agreement may be given by the Authority Representative, except that final approval of issuance of the Note shall be made by the Authority’s board of commissioners. (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 76 S-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and Redeveloper have caused this Purchase and Redevelopment Contract to be duly executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first written above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Its President By Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2017 by Anne Mavity, the President of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2017 by Tom Harmening, the Executive Director of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 77 S-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Execution page of the Redeveloper to the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, dated as of the date and year first written above. PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF _________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________, 2017, by _________________________, the _________________ of PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of the Redeveloper. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 78 A-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE A REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY Authority Parcels: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. AND Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 79 A-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. City Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 80 A-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. AND Tract A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No, 517068. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Tract B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 81 A-4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Lot 6 and the East line of Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Together with that part of the East 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. County Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) AND Tract A: That part of the following described property: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 29, extended Northerly. Tract B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, ''Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 82 A-5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot 9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. AND Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 83 A-6 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence North 00 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds East, 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 183.14 feet; thence North 24 degrees 38 minutes 46 seconds West, 20.57 feet; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence North 39 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds West, 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 17 minutes 59 seconds East, 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence North 01 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds East, 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property) The Redevelopment Property will be replatted as Lot 1, Blocks 1, 2 and 3, and Outlots A, B, and C, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 84 B-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE B FORM OF QUIT CLAIM DEED Deed Tax Due: $__________ ECRV: _________________ THIS INDENTURE, from the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Grantor”), to PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Grantee”). WITNESSETH, that Grantor, in consideration of the sum of $_______________ and other good and valuable consideration the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, quitclaim and convey to the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, all the tract or parcel of land lying and being in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota described as follows, to-wit (such tract or parcel of land is hereinafter referred to as the “Property”): [Insert platted legal description of Redevelopment Property] To have and to hold the same, together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging. SECTION 1. It is understood and agreed that this Deed is subject to the covenants, conditions, restrictions and provisions of an agreement recorded herewith entered into between the Grantor and Grantee on __________, 2017, identified as “Purchase and Redevelopment Contract” (the “Agreement”) and that the Grantee shall not convey this Property, or any part thereof, except as permitted by the Agreement until a certificate of completion releasing the Grantee from certain obligations of said Agreement as to this Property or such part thereof then to be conveyed, has been placed of record. This provision, however, shall in no way prevent the Grantee from mortgaging this Property in order to obtain funds for the purchase of the Property hereby conveyed or for erecting the Minimum Improvements thereon (as defined in the Agreement) in conformity with the Agreement, any applicable development program and applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, or for the refinancing of the same. It is specifically agreed that the Grantee shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the development of the Property through the construction of the Minimum Improvements thereon, as provided in the Agreement. Promptly after completion of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, the Grantor will furnish the Grantee with a Certificate of Completion (as defined in the Agreement) so certifying. Such Certificate of Completion by the Grantor shall be (and it shall be so provided in the certification itself) a conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 85 B-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 of the agreements and covenants of the Agreement and of this Deed with respect to the obligation of the Grantee, and its successors and assigns, to construct the Minimum Improvements and the dates for the beginning and completion thereof. Such certifications and such determination shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any obligation of the Grantee to any holder of a mortgage, or any insurer of a mortgage, securing money loaned to finance the purchase of the Property hereby conveyed or the Minimum Improvements, or any part thereof. All certifications provided for herein shall be in such form as will enable them to be recorded with the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. If the Grantor shall refuse or fail to provide any such certification in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement and this Deed, the Grantor shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Grantee, provide the Grantee with a written statement indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Grantee has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the opinion of the Grantor, for the Grantee to take or perform in order to obtain such certification. SECTION 2. The Grantee’s rights and interest in the Property are subject to the terms and conditions of Section 9.3 of the Agreement relating to the Grantor’s right to re-enter and revest in Grantor title to the Property under conditions specified therein, including but not limited to termination of such right upon issuance of a Certificate of Completion as defined in the Agreement. SECTION 3. The Grantee agrees for itself and its successors and assigns to or of the Property or any part thereof, hereinbefore described, that the Grantee and such successors and assigns shall comply with all provisions of the Agreement that relate to the Property or use thereof for the periods specified in the Agreement, including without limitation the covenant set forth in Section 10.3 thereof. It is intended and agreed that the above and foregoing agreements and covenants shall be covenants running with the land for the respective terms herein provided, and that they shall, in any event, and without regard to technical classification or designation, legal or otherwise, and except only as otherwise specifically provided in this Deed, be binding, to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity for the benefit and in favor of, and enforceable by, the Grantor against the Grantee, its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Property, or any part thereof or any interest therein, and any party in possession or occupancy of the Property or any part thereof. In amplification, and not in restriction of, the provisions of the preceding section, it is intended and agreed that the Grantor shall be deemed a beneficiary of the agreements and covenants provided herein, both for and in its own right, and also for the purposes of protecting the interest of the community and the other parties, public or private, in whose favor or for whose benefit these agreements and covenants have been provided. Such agreements and covenants shall run in favor of the Grantor without regard to whether the Grantor has at any time been, remains, or is an owner of any land or interest therein to, or in favor of, which such agreements and covenants relate. The Grantor shall have the right, in the event of any breach of any such agreement or covenant to Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 86 B-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 exercise all the rights and remedies, and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach of agreement or covenant, to which it or any other beneficiaries of such agreement or covenant may be entitled; provided that Grantor shall not have any right to re-enter the Property or revest in the Grantor the estate conveyed by this Deed on grounds of Grantee’s failure to comply with its obligations under this Section 3. SECTION 4. This Deed is also given subject to: (a)Provision of the ordinances, building and zoning laws of the City of St. Louis Park, and state and federal laws and regulations in so far as they affect this real estate. (b)[Others] Grantor certifies that it does not know of any wells on the Property. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 87 B-4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused this Deed to be duly executed in its behalf by its President and Executive Director this ______ day of ____________, 2017. o The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. o A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document or has been electronically filed. (If electronically filed, insert WDC number: __________________). o I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Anne Mavity Its President By Tom Harmening Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2017 by Anne Mavity, the President of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2017 by Tom Harmening, the Executive Director of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 88 B-5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 This instrument was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Charted (MNI) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 Tax Statements should be sent to: PLACE E-Generation One LLC 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 89 C-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE C AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING A PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ITS TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE TO PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) as follows: Section 1. Recitals; Approval and Authorization; Award of Sale. 1.01. Recitals. (a)The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have heretofore approved the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project. (b)To facilitate the redevelopment of certain property within the Project and TIF District, the Authority and PLACE E-Generation One LLC (the “Owner”) have negotiated a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Agreement”) which provides for the conveyance of certain Authority-owned property (the “Property”) to the Owner, the construction by the Owner of a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development, including rental housing, and associated parking on the Property, and the issuance of the Authority’s Tax Increment Revenue Note (the “Note”) to the Owner. (c)On April 19, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City reviewed the proposed conveyance of the Property and found that such conveyance is consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. (d)The Authority has on this date conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the conveyance of the Property to the Redeveloper, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 90 C-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (e)The Board has reviewed the Agreement and finds that the execution thereof and performance of the Authority’s obligations thereunder, including the conveyance of the Property to the Redeveloper, are in the best interest of the City and its residents. 1.02. Approval of Agreement. (a)The Agreement as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval. (b)Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the Authority’s obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution of any documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, and any deed or other documents necessary to convey the Property to Redeveloper, all as described in the Agreement. 1.03. Authorization of Note. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell the Note to the Owner for the purpose of financing certain Public Redevelopment Costs of the Project, subject to all terms and conditions of the Agreement. 1.04. Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a)The Authority hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to issue the Note in accordance with the Agreement. All capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning provided in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise. (b)The Note shall be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $5,660,000 to the Owner in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner under the Agreement, shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum from the date of issue to the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Note will be issued in the principal amount of Public Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordance with Section 3.8 of the Agreement. The Note is secured by Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of the Note herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive Director the determination of the date on which the Note is to be delivered, in accordance with the Agreement. Section 2. Form of Note. The Note shall be in substantially the following form, with the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal amount adjusted as of the date of issue: Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 91 C-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 UNITED STATE OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY No. R-1 $_____________ TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE SERIES 20__ Date Rate of Original Issue 5.0% _________________ The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) for value received, certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to PLACE E-Generation One LLC, or registered assigns (the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate of 5.0% per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings provided in the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the Authority and the Owner, dated __________, 2017 (the “Agreement”), unless the context requires otherwise. 1.Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 2020 and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 2035 (the “Payment Dates”) in the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of issue through and including February 1, 2020 shall be compounded semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of each year and added to principal. Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days ’ written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts. 2.Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal, commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360 days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid. 3.Available Tax Increment. (a)Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 92 C-4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Increment attributable to the Minimum Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in the six months preceding each Payment Date on the Note. (b)The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure of the Authority to pay principal or interest on this Note on any Payment Date shall not constitute a default hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest hereon to the extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on February 1, 2035. 4.Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event of Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid, without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written notice to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement. 5.Prepayment. (a)The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Note is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise required to be made under this Note. (b)Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the Participation Amount as described in Section 3.9 of the Agreement, one hundred percent (100%) of such Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note. Upon request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the outstanding principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this paragraph. 6.Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of $_________________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly adopted by the Authority on __________, 2017, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 93 C-5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto. 7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the principal office of the Chief Financial Officer of the City, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such transfer or exchange and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same dates. Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.8(d) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such transfer. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Executive Director President Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 94 C-6 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 REGISTRATION PROVISIONS The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register of the Chief Financial Officer, in the name of the person last listed below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Chief Financial Officer PLACE E-Generation One LLC Federal Tax I.D. No. ___________ [End of Form of Note] Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery. 3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note numbered R-1. The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the Chief Financial Officer to perform the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of transfers and exchanges of the Note. (b)Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each Payment Date and until such Payment Date. (c)Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 95 C-7 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 (d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount, maturity dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Note prior to payment. 3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 96 C-8 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Section 4. Security Provisions. 4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Note. Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution. 4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority irrevocably agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the Available Tax Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available Tax Increment, whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund shall be transferred to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the Note in accordance with its terms. 4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the pledge on the Note. Section 5. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein. Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority __________, 20__ Executive Director President Attest Secretary Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 97 D-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE D FORM OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION [The remainder of this page is intentionally blank] Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 98 D-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) and PLACE E-Generation One LLC (the “Redeveloper”) entered into a certain Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, dated __________________, 2017 (the “Contract”), filed of record in the office of the Hennepin County [Recorder] [Registrar of Titles] as Document No. _____________ on ____________, 20__; and WHEREAS, the Contract contains certain covenants and restrictions set forth in Articles III and IV and Section 9.3 thereof related to completing certain Minimum Improvements [OR INSERT APPLICABLE COMPONENT]; and WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has performed said covenants and conditions insofar as it is able in a manner deemed sufficient by the Authority to permit the execution and recording of this certification; NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that all construction and other physical improvements related to the Minimum Improvements [OR INSERT APPLICABLE COMPONENT] specified to be done and made by the Redeveloper have been completed and the agreements and covenants of the Redeveloper in Articles III and IV of the Contract have been performed by the Redeveloper, and this Certificate is intended to be a conclusive determination of the satisfactory termination of the Redeveloper’s covenants and conditions in Articles III and IV of the Contract related to completion of the Minimum Improvements [OR INSERT APPLICABLE COMPONENT] and the termination of the right of reverter in favor of the Authority as set forth in Article IX of the Contract, but any other covenants in the Contract shall remain in full force and effect until terminated as provided thereunder. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 99 D-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 Dated: _______________, 20__. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Authority Representative STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 20__ by ______________________, the __________________ of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (MNI) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 100 E-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE E FORM OF SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made as of this _____ day of __________, 20__, between _______________ (the “Lender”), whose address is at _________________________, and the ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”). RECITALS A.PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”), is the owner of certain real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property”). B.Lender has made a mortgage loan to Redeveloper in the original principal amount of $__________ (the “Loan”). The Loan is the evidenced and secured by the following documents: (i)a certain promissory note (the “Note”) made by R edeveloper dated __________, 20__, in the amount of $___________; and (ii)a certain mortgage, security agreement and fixture financing statement (the “Mortgage”) made by R edeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________, 20__, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________ encumbering the Property; and (iii)a certain assignment of leases and rents (the “Assignment”) made by Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________, 20__, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________ encumbering the Property. The Note, the Mortgage, the Assignment, and all other documents and instruments evidencing, securing and executed in connection with the Loan, are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Loan Documents.” C.Authority is the owner and holder of certain rights under that certain Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Contract”) by and between Redeveloper and Authority dated ____________, 2017, filed ____________, 20__, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. _______________. D.Redeveloper is entitled under the Contract to acquire a certain Tax Increment Tax Revenue Note, Series 20__ in the original principal amount of $______________ (the “TIF Note”). Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 101 E-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and as an inducement to Lender to make the Loan, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto represent, warrant and agree as follows: 1. Consent. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is making the Loan to the Redeveloper and consents to the same. The Authority also consents to and approves the collateral assignment of the Contract and TIF Note (when and if issued) by the Redeveloper to the Lender as collateral for the Loan; provided, however, that this consent shall not deprive the Authority of or otherwise limit any of the Authority’s rights or remedies under the Contract and TIF Note and shall not relieve the Redeveloper of any of its obligations under the Contract and TIF Note; provided further, however, the limitations to the Authority’s consent contained in this Paragraph 1 are subject to the provisions of Paragraph 2 below. 2. Subordination. The Authority hereby agrees that the rights of the Authority under the Contract are and shall remain subordinate and subject to liens, rights and security interests created by the Loan Documents and to any and all amendments, modifications, extensions, replacements or renewals of the Loan Documents; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed as subordinating the requirement contained in the Contract the Property be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.3 of the Contract, or as subordinating the Authority’s rights under the TIF Note to suspend payments in accordance with the TIF Note. 3. Notice to Authority. Lender agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to notify Authority of the occurrence of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents, in accordance with Section 7.2 of the Contract. The Lender shall not be bound by the other requirements in Section 7.2 of the Contract. 4. Statutory Exception. Nothing in this Agreement shall alter, remove or affect Lender’s obligation under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.029 to use the Property in conformity to Section 10.3 of the Contract. 5. No Assumption. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is not a party to the Contract and by executing this Agreement does not become a party to the Contract, and specifically does not assume and shall not be bound by any obligations of the Redeveloper to the Authority under the Contract, and that the Lender shall incur no obligations whatsoever to the Authority except as expressly provided herein. 6. Notice from Authority; Lender Cure Rights. So long as the Contract remains in effect, the Authority agrees to give to the Lender copies of notices of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under the Contract and to afford Lender an opportunity to cure any such Event of Default provided the Lender commences the cure within thirty (30) days after the expiration of any cure period applicable to Redeveloper and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure to completion. 7. Governing Law. This Agreement is made in and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 8. Successors. This Agreement and each and every covenant, agreement and other provision hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 102 E-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 respective successors and assigns, including any person who acquires title to the Property through the Lender of a foreclosure of the Mortgage. 9.Severability. The unenforceability or invalidity of any provision hereof shall not render any other provision or provisions herein contained unenforceable or invalid. 10.Notice. Any notices and other communications permitted or required by the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given or served by depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, or any official successor thereto, designated as registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, bearing adequate postage, or delivery by reputable private carrier and addresses as set forth above. 11.Transfer of Title to Lender. The Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale, acquires title to the Property pursuant to a foreclosure, or a deed in lieu thereof, the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall not be bound by the terms and conditions of the Contract except as expressly herein provided. Further the Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale acquires title to the Property pursuant to a foreclosure sale or a deed in lieu thereof, then the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall be entitled to all rights conferred upon the Redeveloper under the Contract, provided that no condition of default exists and remains uncured beyond applicable cure periods in the obligations of the Redeveloper under the Contract. 12. Estoppel. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender, for the purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that: (a)No default or event of default by Redeveloper exists under the terms of the Contract on the date hereof; (b)The Contract has not been amended or modified in any respect, nor has any material provision thereof been waived by either the Authority or the Redeveloper, and the Contract is in full force and effect; (c)Such other reasonable certifications as the Lender may request. 13. Amendments. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender for the purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that Authority will not agree to any amendment or modification to the or any TIF Note issued under the Contract that materially affects the collection of Available Tax Increment (as defined in the Contract) in any way affects the Property without the Lender’s written consent. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 103 E-4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and delivered as of the day and year first written above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Its President By Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20___, by _______________________, the President of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of such public body. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________, 20___, by _______________________, the President of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of such public body. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 104 E-5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 [LENDER] By: Its This document drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (MNI) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 105 F-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE F SITE PLAN [Insert site plan] Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 106 G-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE G FORM OF ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT (_________________ COMPONENT) and ASSESSOR’S CERTIFICATION By and Between ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC This Document was drafted by: KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 107 G-2 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT (___________ COMPONENT) THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the ____ day of _________________, 2017, by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”) and PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”). WITNESSETH, that WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the Authority and Redeveloper have entered into a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, dated _______, 2017 (the “Redevelopment Contract”), pursuant to which the Authority is to facilitate development of certain property in the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) hereinafter referred to as the “Property” and legally described in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Redevelopment Contract the Redeveloper is obligated to construct certain improvements (the “___________ Component”) upon the Property, constituting a portion of the Minimum Improvements under the Redevelopment Contract; and WHEREAS, the Authority and Redeveloper desire to establish a minimum market value for the Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, subdivision 8; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the City Assessor (the “Assessor”) have reviewed the preliminary plans and specifications for the improvements and have inspected such improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the promises, covenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby agree as follows: 1.The minimum market value which shall be assessed for ad valorem tax purposes for the Property described in Exhibit A, together with the portion of the Minimum Improvements designated as the ___________ Component constructed thereon, shall be $_______________ as of January 2, 20___ and as of each January 2 thereafter until termination of this Agreement under Section 2 hereof. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent Redeveloper from challenging an assessment of the Property in excess of the minimum market value established herein. 2.The minimum market value herein established shall be of no further force and effect and this Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of the following: (a) The date of receipt by the Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District, or (b) the date when the Note, as defined in the Redevelopment Contract, has been fully paid, defeased or terminated in accordance with its terms. The event referred to in Section 2(b) of this Agreement shall be evidenced by a certificate or affidavit executed by the Authority. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 108 G-3 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 3.This Agreement shall be promptly recorded by the Authority. The Redeveloper shall pay all costs of recording. 4.Neither the preambles nor provisions of this Agreement are intended to, nor shall they be construed as, modifying the terms of the Redevelopment Contract between the Authority and the Redeveloper. 5.This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties. 6.Each of the parties has authority to enter into this Agreement and to take all actions required of it, and has taken all actions necessary to authorize the execution and delivery of this Agreement. 7. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision hereof. 8.The parties hereto agree that they will, from time to time, execute, acknowledge and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements, amendments and modifications hereto, and such further instruments as may reasonably be required for correcting any inadequate, or incorrect, or amended description of the Property or the Minimum Improvements or for carrying out the expressed intention of this Agreement, including, without limitation, any further instruments required to delete from the description of the Property such part or parts as may be included within a separate assessment agreement. 9.Except as provided in Section 8 of this Agreement, this Agreement may not be amended nor any of its terms modified except by a writing authorized and executed by all parties hereto. 10.This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 11.This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 109 G-4 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and the Redeveloper have caused this Assessment Agreement (___________ Component) to be executed in their names and on their behalf by their duly authorized representatives all as of the date set forth above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By Its President By Its Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ________, 20__ by ____________________, the President of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ________, 20__ by ____________________, the Executive Director of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 110 G-5 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 PLACE E-GENERATION ONE LLC By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF__________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 20__ by ____________________, the ____________________ of PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of the company. Notary Public Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 111 G-6 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 CERTIFICATION BY CITY ASSESSOR The undersigned, having reviewed the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed and the market value assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for the assessment of the above described property, hereby certifies that the values assigned to the land and improvements are reasonable. City Assessor for the City of St. Louis Park STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of ____________, 20__ by _____________________, the City Assessor of the City of St. Louis Park. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Kennedy & Graven, Charted (MNI) 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 112 G-7 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 EXHIBIT A OF ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Property [Insert legal description] Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 113 H-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE H FORM OF DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS [To be inserted] Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 114 I-1 497811v3 MNI SA285-104 SCHEDULE I FORM OF DRAW REQUEST TO: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 DISBURSEMENT DIRECTION The undersigned authorized representative (the “Authorized representative”) of PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”), hereby authorizes and requests you to disburse from proceeds of the __________________ grant in accordance with the terms of the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract, dated ____________, 2017 (the “Agreement”), between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) and the Redeveloper, the following amount to the following person and for the following proper Grant-Eligible Costs: 1. Amount:_________________________ 2.Payee:_________________________ 3. Purpose:_________________________ 4.Grant Source:_________________________ all as defined and provided in the Agreement. The undersigned further certifies to the Authority that (a) none of the items for which the payment is proposed to be made has formed the basis for any payment previously made under Section 3.7 of the Agreement (or before the date of the Agreement); (b) that each item for which the payment is proposed is a Grant-Eligible Cost, eligible for funding from the grant source(s) identified above; and (c) the Redeveloper reasonably anticipates completion of the Grant-Eligible Costs and the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Dated: ____________________ ______________________________________ Redeveloper’s Authorized Representative Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Title: Public Hearing - Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Page 115 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Presentation: 2a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Bike Month Proclamation RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Mayor is asked to read the Proclamation proclaiming May as Bike Month in St. Louis Park. POLICY CONSIDERATION: This action is consistent with polices adopted by the City Council. SUMMARY: In a partnering effort with Hennepin County, Minneapolis Bicycle Coalition and Three Rivers Park District, it is proposed that the city formally proclaim May as Bike Month in St. Louis Park. Throughout the entire month, businesses, community groups, and individuals will host and participate in events and activities focusing on encouraging newer riders to try biking. St. Louis Park is engaging in two events: Twin Cities Bike to Work Day is formally set for Friday, May 19th, from 7:30 to 9 am. The city will have commuter “pit stops” at two locations on our regional trails to encourage and promote bicycling to work. These rest stops will be located at Beltline Boulevard at the Cedar Lake Regional Trail and Virginia Avenue at the North Cedar Lake Trail. Bike the Park Family Bike Ride is formally set for Saturday, May 27th from 10:30 am to 1:00 pm. Participants will meet at the Aquila School parking lot and bike at a kid friendly pace to Dakota Park and back. Both events are intended to showcase the many benefits of bicycling in, around, and through St. Louis Park. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proclamation Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Page 2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 2a) Title: Bike Month Proclamation PROCLAMATION Bike Month 2017 WHEREAS, throughout the month of May, the residents of St. Louis Park and its visitors will experience the joys of bicycling through educational programs, commuting events, or by simply getting out and going for a ride; and WHEREAS, the bicycle is an economical, healthy, convenient, and environmentally sound form of transportation and an excellent tool for recreation and enjoyment of St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, St. Louis Park’s road and trail system attracts bicyclists each year, providing economic health, mobility, and transportation; and WHEREAS, creating a bicycling-friendly community is consistent with the established goals of the City and the Connect the Park capital improvement program; and WHEREAS, creating a bicycling-friendly community has been shown to improve citizens’ health, well-being, and quality of life, growing the economy, improving traffic safety, and reducing pollution and congestion; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County, the Minneapolis Bike Coalition, Three Rivers Park District and St. Louis Park will be promoting bicycling during the month of May 2017; and WHEREAS, greater public awareness of bicycle operation and safety education is needed in an effort to reduce collisions, injuries, and fatalities and improve health and safety for everyone on the road; and NOW THERFORE, let it be known that the Mayor and City Council of the City of St. Park, Minnesota, do herby proclaim May 2017 as BIKE MONTH in the City of St. Louis Park; and LET IT FURTHER BE KNOWN, that we urge all citizens to support and grow the city’s bicycling efforts. WHEREFORE, I set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be affixed this 1st day of May, 2017. ___________________________________ Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Presentation: 2b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Update from Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman RECOMMENDED ACTION: None POLICY CONSIDERATION: None SUMMARY: Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman will update the City Council on activities of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and initiatives to make communities safer, including statistics related specifically to St. Louis Park. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Presentation: 2c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: St. Louis Park High School Students Update on The Nest RECOMMENDED ACTION: Students from St. Louis Park High School will be in attendance to introduce themselves and provide an update on The Nest, a group project they have been working on for the past 18 months. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: The Nest is a project being led by a group of St. Louis Park High School students. It will be a place for students and community members to hangout, study, drink coffee and enjoy being a part of the community. The students have seen places like this in other communities such as Minneapolis, Savage, Hopkins, etc. They feel something similar in St. Louis Park would be a great asset and provide a huge benefit to the community. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 3, 2017 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Knutson), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Chief Financial Officer (Ms. Simon), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planner (Ms. Monson), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Senior Engineering Project Manager, (Mr. Elkin), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: Matt Pacyna, SRF Traffic; and, Ron Mehl, Developer with Dominium 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations – None 3. Approval of Minutes – None 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar 4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of February 25, 2017 through March 24, 2017. 4b. Designate C&L Excavating, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $5,430,986.28 for the 2017 Pavement Management and Connect the Park Project No. 4017-1000 & 4017-2000. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 17-059 approving final plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids (Project No. 4017-1500). 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 17-060 supporting the City of St. Louis Park becoming a 2017-2018 Minnesota GreenCorps Member Host Site. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 17-061 authorizing fund equity transfers and Adopt Resolution No. 17-062 authorizing interfund loan. 4f. Accept for filing Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of December 22, 2016. 4g. Accept for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 1, 2017. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 5. Boards and Commissions – None 6. Public Hearings – None 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement. Resolution No. 17-063 and Resolution No. 17-064. Ms. Monson presented the staff report. She noted the city of St. Louis Park is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct an underground stormwater detention vault at the southwest corner of Carpenter Park. As part of this project, the Engineering Department is collaborating with the Operations and Recreation Department, which proposes to construct a skate park that is approximately 6,000 square feet in area over top of the stormwater detention vault. Mr. Elkin stated that project benefits include removal of 27.6 lbs. of phosphorus per year, which will benefit Bass Lake Reserve. Additionally, there will be a 16% reduction of phosphorus into Minnehaha Creek Watershed. Benefits will also be realized to Carpenter Park itself, including leveling out fields and creating more usable space. The total project cost is $1,397,640. Mr. Elkin stated if approved, staff plans to open bids on May 8, with the project beginning in June and proposed completion in September 2017. Councilmember Brausen stated he is supportive of this project and asked staff what the source of the phosphorus is and why are we concerned about filtering it. Mr. Elkin explained phosphorus is based on the amount of impervious surface and is comprised of leaves, sediment, and organic materials that get into the water, break down, and contribute to poor water quality. Councilmember Brausen asked Mr. Elkin for suggestions of what homeowners can do to help limit phosphorus. Mr. Elkin stated residents can help by preventing grass clippings from going into the street and by picking up dog waste. They can also build rain gardens and use phosphorus-free lawn fertilizer. Councilmember Hallfin stated that right next to the excavating land are two baseball fields. He asked what the hours of operation are for the trucks hauling from the site. Mr. Elkin noted the area will be fenced off, and the route used by the hauling trucks will not disrupt parking or the baseball fields. He added working hours will be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Councilmember Hallfin suggested that trucks not be allowed to haul until 10 p.m. on weeknights, especially in light of the baseball fields, where 5-10-year-old children are playing. Councilmember Mavity stated she supports this project and has worked closely with the Friends of Bass Lake Neighborhood Group. She noted this project is one step and will not replace other efforts that will continue toward preserving Bass Lake. Mr. Elkin agreed and added there will be other efforts implemented this year related to Bass Lake. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 Councilmember Sanger asked to verify where the 600 truckloads will be moving from this parcel and that they will not be on Ottawa Avenue or Minnetonka Boulevard. Ms. Monson confirmed that is correct. Mr. Harmening asked about the elevation once the park is complete and if the stormsewer will be underground. Mr. Elkin stated the stormsewer will be in an underground vault, and the field will be leveled off with no slope. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt Resolution No. 17-063, granting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the City of St. Louis Park allowing the excavation of 6,000 cubic yards of material to construct an underground stormwater detention system at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd, subject to conditions and to adopt Resolution No. 17-064, approving final plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids (Project No 4014-4001). The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Excelsior & Monterey (Bridgewater Dominium Addition) Preliminary Plat and PUD. Mr. Walther presented the staff report. He stated the sites are 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Blvd. and 3743 Monterey Drive. Council last discussed this development at a study session in October 2016. Since that meeting, Dominium further reduced the proposed number of apartments to 148 units and reduced the affordable housing to 8% of the units at 50% of area median income (AMI). No other changes are proposed to the height, scale, or access since the council’s last discussion. Mr. Walther added that the development would combine three parcels into two parcels. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan designates this site as Mixed Use, and the district allows for mixed use, multi-family residential and commercial. There would be 380 parking spaces provided on the site, with three levels of structured and shared parking. Mr. Walther noted that access to the site is off of Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive, with an “entrance only” commercial driveway. He stated the first and sixth floors are stepped back, and creates a colonnade on the first level. ADA ramps provide access. Mr. Walther also noted traffic is a major issue. SRF Consulting Group did data collection on traffic volumes during peak hours on weekdays. They also reviewed crash, sightlines, and capacity. He noted that a dedicated right turn lane onto Park Commons Drive would be added. Mr. Mehl of Dominium spoke to the council and noted the biggest change to the development is the density, which is down a total of 31 units. He added that traffic, density, and green space were issues they addressed, along with setback. Mr. Mehl pointed out the other developments in the area, and how theirs would be further set back, and with more green space. He stated six stories will work, but if number of stories goes down from there, the project will not make sense financially. Councilmember Sanger stated she is not supporting this project for many reasons. She stated the changes made by the developer are very minor, at best, and the project is still too City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 dense. She noted there is still too much traffic in the area, not enough exits, and not enough green space around the exterior of the building. This development will create 1,521 new in and out movements. She stated the developer has had many meetings with council on these issues, and the current proposal is troubling. Councilmember Sanger stated it is time to say no to this project; to find a new developer; and to come up with a new project. She stated she will not support it; will not support selling city owned land; and would support denial of the PUD on the project. Councilmember Lindberg stated he shares many of Councilmember Sanger’s comments, noting the project is very dense and very tall. He added he does not feel like the result reflects the interests of the citizens in this community, and it must be redone. Councilmember Miller stated he supports denial of the project as there have been too few changes. He added that affordable units have been lost, and the council is working hard to put as many affordable units into the city as possible. He stated this building does not fit well on Excelsior Boulevard, while it might work well on Highway 7 or in the West End. Councilmember Miller stated he thinks the city can do better, especially since St. Louis Park is very attractive to developers right now. He continued this corner can be so much more. Councilmember Brausen stated he has been generally supportive of this project, and was pleased that traffic flow had been worked out, along with street changes and commercial access. He is disappointed in the reduction of the number of affordable housing units, but realizes it still does comport with the city’s current inclusionary housing policy. He added he does not believe he can support the TIF the developer is looking for. Councilmember Brausen continued that the project does improve the streetscape and does add some affordable housing. He does support this more than he would an office building of 10 stories or more, noting that sometimes there are worse alternatives. Ultimately, he stated he will vote in support of the project. Councilmember Hallfin stated he cannot remember another time when there has been 99% disapproval from constituents on a project. He added that both he and the council looks at each project as an individual project and pointed out that he does listen to its constituents. Councilmember Mavity stated this is a classic example that time itself does not solve everything. She noted the project does not have the support of this council, and she will vote in favor of a motion to deny it. She added we have guided this mixed use, and residents have said they want more mixed use; however, she understands residents feel very strongly against this project. Councilmember Mavity noted she has asked her neighbors what would be an acceptable project, and they have said four stories, mixed use. However, the developer stated this would not work. She stated she does want to see development on this corner, noting that Excelsior Boulevard will handle more traffic. She added that the council promised the community there would be a larger conversation, and now with Vision St. Louis Park in process, the council wants input from residents. Councilmember Mavity added that she liked the mixed use and not commercial-only space. He added Dominium is a quality developer. She noted this is one project that the community does not want. She added that there are positives; the development does improve circulation, the step down makes it more interesting and attractive; and the colonnade is unique and adds to the walkway. However, there are still density and massing City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 issues. She said she sees the Excelsior and Monterey project issues as being more about access and circulation, and even with the improvements that have been made to the plan, it has not hit 100% yet. Mayor Spano added this project does not have the votes nor the support at this time. He stated he received many emails from residents, but all along he struggled with the density of the development. He also cannot support that of the units that have been reduced, most have been the affordable units that were taken out of the project. He stated that while he understands what the developer is trying to do, the council cannot agree with taking away two-thirds of the affordable units. Mayor Spano also pointed out to the council that they need to be careful about comparing projects on Excelsior with other areas of the city. We should try to take each project on its own and give it the consideration it deserves. He added that ultimately the project does not work for this area of the city. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to direct staff to prepare resolutions and draft findings for denial of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development and the denial of the Preliminary Plat with Variances. The motion passed 6-1 (Councilmember Brausen opposed). 8c. Traffic Study No 677: Authorize Removal of Parking Restrictions on 31st Street. Resolution No. 17-065 Ms. Heiser presented the staff report. She stated residents in this neighborhood contacted staff with concerns about parking due to increased parking demand in the area. Currently, parking is allowed on one side of 31st Street between Inglewood Avenue and the east city boundary. The street is 30 feet wide, which is adequate to allow parking on both sides of the street. The traffic committee recommends lifting restrictions on the south side of 31st Street. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to adopt Resolution No. 17-065, rescinding Resolution 3159 and removing parking restrictions on the south side of 31st Street between Inglewood Avenue and the east city boundary in the Triangle neighborhood. The motion passed 7-0. 8d. Traffic Study No 678: Modify Parking Restrictions on Lynn Avenue. Resolution No. 17-066. Ms. Heiser presented the staff report. She noted staff was contacted by neighbors requesting to adjust the parking restrictions to create additional on-street parking on Lynn Avenue, south of Minnetonka Boulevard. The existing arrangement allows for approximately 16 on-street parking spaces. The traffic committee recommends altering the parking restrictions in the area. The proposed change would restrict parking on the west side and allow parking on the east side of the street. This change would allow about 21 parking spaces, increasing on-street parking by 5 spaces. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 3, 2017 It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to adopt Resolution No. 17-066, rescinding Resolution 6478 rescinding Resolution 3636 and modifying restrictions to allow continuous on-street parking on the east side of Lynn Avenue between Minnetonka Boulevard and CSAH 25 Frontage Road in the Triangle neighborhood. The motion passed 7-0. 8e. Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of Elmwood Apartments TIF District. Resolution No. 17-067 Mr. Hunt noted he had nothing further to add to the staff report included in the packet. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to adopt Resolution No. 17-067, calling for a public hearing relative to the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district). The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Sanger noted the St. Louis Park Historical Society will present Tom Freidman, speaking at the Jewish Community Center on Sunday, April 30. Tickets are available on the Historical Society’s website, and there are only a few left. Councilmember Miller stated NY columnist Peggy Ornstein, a St. Louis Park High School graduate, will be speaking on Teen Health on April 8 at Edina Morningside Church. Councilmember Brausen stated that in Ward 4, a couple burns will be going on, so if residents see smoke in the area at the Westwood Nature Center and Lighter Park, be aware it is planned. Mayor Spano stated there are still ways to engage and participate in the city’s visioning process and asked the public to email staff or the councilmembers for more information. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 17, 2017 The meeting convened at 5:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Communications Manager (Ms. Larson), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Chief Information Officer (Mr. Pires), Police Chief Harcey, Fire Chief Koering, and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: Jeanne Anderson and Henry Solmer, St. Louis Park Historical Society 1. Walker Building - 6524 Walker Street Ms. Anderson, representing the St. Louis Park Historical Society, stated the society has been looking for a permanent home. The property at 6524 Walker Street is for sale and has been identified by the society as a possible location for them. The building dates back to 1892 and is the oldest commercial structure remaining in the community. Ms. Anderson noted the society hopes the city would play a significant role in helping secure the building for their use. She reviewed the society’s proposal with the council members. Ms. Anderson added that the owner of the building has made many improvements, but the building has been on the market since September 2015. The society would like it to come off the market as soon as possible. While the building has not been appraised, the owner is asking $775,000 for it. Ms. Anderson noted that the society cannot get a bank loan or ask for donations to purchase the building. She stated they would need up front money in order to purchase it and would then pay the money back as they were able. She noted there are three options: 1) City grant to buy the property 2) City loans to purchase with a flexible repayment plan based on fundraising. The society would repay all or some of the amount of the loan over time 3) City purchase of the building and lease to the society for $1 per year. She added this is the most common arrangement with other cities and their historical societies. With all of the above options Ms. Anderson noted the society would need to hire a professional fundraiser/executive director to raise donations to buy the building. Councilmember Lindberg asked Mr. Hoffman about the condition of the building. Mr. Hoffman stated the building is structurally sound, with a solid foundation and no evidence of rot. He stated some mechanicals might need replacement, as well as the roof, and it would need updates to allow for ADA access. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 17, 2017 Mr. Solmer thanked Ms. Anderson and Mr. Achers, the history board chair, for their dedication. He stated it would be a dream to own this building, and it would be great to see the building saved; however, he felt the society would be best served if the city owned the building, and the society was able to use some area of the building. He added the society would not be able to own and operate the building by themselves. Councilmember Mavity arrived at 5:20 p.m. Councilmember Miller stated he is interested in preserving this building and in moving forward with the city owning it. He added he sees this as a community building to be used by community organizations, including the historical society, as well as others like the Nest. Councilmember Sanger agreed with Councilmember Miller, stating it is critical to preserve the building and to help develop an historic area of the Walker Lake area. She added she is not sure this is the right spot for the Nest, but she would like it to be considered. Additionally, she noted the city may want to lease it to the school district, adding the city needs to purchase the building quickly before it is demolished. Mr. Harmening stated the city has not spoken to the owner yet, but if the council wants to pursue it, the city will do so. Councilmember Brausen stated he is in favor of temporarily acquiring the title to the building for the historical society and added that if the city is committed to redeveloping this area, they will need to decide how best to do it and include more community engagement. He added it would be useful to look at the visioning before making any decisions, adding he does not want to be pressured into this. Councilmember Mavity stated she has met with the historical society board and members, noting the society does need a home. She added it makes sense for the city to invest in the building; however, the city is not a management company and so would want a long-term private ownership. She added the city could help to get the building on the national register and work with the owner on an incentive for this, but again stated the city should not be managing the building or be a long- term landowner. Councilmember Lindberg agreed with Councilmember Mavity, and does not want the city to be in the business of land ownership, especially when considering ongoing costs and renovating costs. He added this is expensive, and he doesn’t favor a financial commitment or a property acquisition. Councilmember Lindberg stated he has concerns and wants to be wise, not jumping into this without a plan. He added he hopes for a creative solution. Councilmember Hallfin stated he would be willing to take a leap here and help the society, noting the council needs to get behind this effort and is in a position to do so. He asked if the purchase of the building would involve creative financing or if the city would purchase it outright. Mr. Harmening stated that if the council was interested in being assertive, the city has the resources to do this through an EDA or HRA levy. However, he added that he views this project as more of an economic development project for that area of the city, which the historical society can be part of. He added it might be best to work with a developer and a private owner so that the city would not have to manage the building, noting also that the city cannot underestimate the renovation costs of this building, in addition to the purchase price. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 17, 2017 Ms. Anderson stated that if the city or the society owned the building and it was placed on the National Historic Register, they would be eligible for state grants, which would help with reconstruction costs. A management company would manage the property. Councilmember Sanger asked what the society knows about the building’s owner; to what extent is the owner sympathetic to historic preservation; and would the owner be inclined to work with the city. Ms. Anderson stated the owner wants the society to have the building, and he cares about the building’s historical nature very much. After the building is sold, he would want to hold onto part of the first floor for a time. Councilmember Mavity stated the city will want to be sure they are not playing the marketplace on this and that the owner is motivated to sell. Mayor Spano said related to the issue of the Nest, he strongly encouraged the students to maintain their vision and ideas of what they want. He asked Mr. Hoffman if the students wanted to do a coffee shop or food prep in the building, would the remodel for that be expensive, and would there be much work needed. Mr. Hoffman stated the building is classified as office space currently and would need to be modernized and remodeled to meet code. He noted the costs would be high. Mayor Spano added the city does not really have a downtown area and asked the council what the broader vision is for this area. He stated the council has not had this discussion yet, adding that other entities in this area might come to the council and ask the city to purchase their building also, so care will have to be taken about setting precedent. However, he added that the city does need to move forward on taking control of this building to create a sense of continuity, especially since it is the oldest commercial building in the city. He noted that the downtown area buildings in his hometown are all on the national historic register and that creates community, pride. It is a central place people can go to and remember. Mayor Spano added this is an opportunity to get control of one vintage building and is worth pursuing. Mr. Harmening added if anyone would ask why the city purchased the building, he would say it helps leverage additional redevelopment in the area. If the historical society is part of this redevelopment, all the better. It was the consensus of the council to have staff explore further options and the building owner’s interest in working with the city. Councilmember Lindberg noted that there needs to be communication with the public about this building, as well. 2. Vision 3.0 Trends Exercise At 6:15 p.m., the council and city staff members broke into table groups to work on a visioning trend exercise with the consultant. The council reconvened at 6:50 p.m. for a larger discussion with the consultant related to their table work. The areas discussed included resources, technology, demographics and governance. The group rated which items are ready to move forward on now and which are not ready. The consultant stated she will bring more information back to the council related to the visioning exercise results of the Steering Committee, as well. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 17, 2017 Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal) The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 3. Advancing Race Equity: Next Steps for 2017 4. Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 26-268 PUD 7 ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 17, 2017 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), Solid Waste Program Specialist (Ms. Barker), Natural Resources Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: Marla Dustash, St. Louis Park Ambassadors Organizer; Parktacular members and ambassadors; Curtis Wilson, SEEDS; Julie Eddington, Kennedy & Graven; and additional community members. 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year Ms. Dustash stated that the ambassador program started in 1940 as Miss St. Louis Park. In 2002, young men were allowed to enter the program, and titles changed to “ambassadors.” She continued that during the year, the ambassadors attend over 90 events, parades, coronations, and service projects. The 2016-17 ambassadors introduced themselves to the council and noted their favorite event for the year. Mayor Spano thanked the group for their service, noting that $32,000 was raised this year at the Empty Bowls event, which is a new record for St. Louis Park. He added that the Holiday Train will be invited back to the city next winter and stated it is an honor to have these ambassadors represent the city. Councilmember Brausen added his thanks for the great job the group is doing, stating they honor the city by representing St. Louis Park to those outstate, adding that it would be good to see many of them serving as council members someday. b. Volunteer Proclamation City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 Mayor Spano read the volunteer proclamation and thanked the boards and commissions volunteers and city volunteers for their service and commitment to the city. Councilmember Hallfin stated he is an alumni of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, noting that boards and commissions do influence the council’s decisions, and he appreciates their volunteerism. c. 2017 Arbor Day Proclamation Mayor Spano read the proclamation stating May 6 is Arbor Day and the month of May is Arbor month. Mr. Vaughan thanked the mayor and council members for their support and noted that 60 trees will be planted at the Rec Center on May 6. He invited the community to come out for the event. d. 2017 International Compost Awareness Week Proclamation Mayor Spano read the proclamation stating that May 7-13, 2017, is International Compost Awareness Week in St. Louis Park. Ms. Barker stated the city is working to promote organics recycling, noting the program was changed in January to an opt-in program with no cost. She stated that since January, over 700 additional households have joined the program. She encouraged people to join the program, noting it is a great way to recycle 30% of their garbage. Mayor Spano stated this is a very easy program in which to participate and encouraged people to sign up. e. 3rd Annual SLP Earth Day Proclamation and Dinner with Town Hall Visioning Program Mayor Spano read the proclamation to St. Louis Park SEEDS organization members regarding the third annual Earth Day celebration to be held April 25 at the Lenox Community Center beginning at 5:30 p.m. All community members are invited to attend the free dinner and town visioning forum. Mr. Wilson stated he is honored to be at this city council meeting and also invited all to attend the event on April 25. A St. Louis Park High School student and second year intern with SEEDS, stated that the SEEDS program showed her that people are trying to better the city, better the school, and better the community, and that kids can be active in the community. She added that students have obtained over 600 signatures in support of building a green house in St. Louis Park in order to promote better nutrition, and sustainable food options. She noted SEEDS will present this to the council at a future date. Mayor Spano stated that the council and city are very proud of SEEDS and thankful for all you do. f. Recognition of Donations It was noted that the Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation has donated $1,000 for Annual Safety Camp Program T-Shirts. Ms. Becky Finnigan donated $1,000 for park maintenance and enhancements at the Westwood Hills Nature Center. The Minnesota Government Finance Officers Association has donated $2,300 for travel and conference registration for City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 CFO Tim Simon to attend the 2017 Advanced Government Finance Institute on July 30 – August 4, 2017 in Madison, WI. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Special Study Session Minutes March 20, 2017 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the City Council Special Study Session Minutes Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0. (Councilmember Hallfin absent). 3b. City Council Minutes March 20, 2017 Councilmember Brausen noted on page 7, it said he served soup, which was incorrect and it should read, he attended the event where Councilmember Hallfin and Mayor Spano served soup. Councilmember Mavity noted a change on page 5 under item 8c related to the PLACE private activity revenue bonds, it should read the city would be a partner in identifying financial gaps. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to approve the City Council Meeting Minutes with changes. The motion passed 6-0. (Councilmember Hallfin absent). 3c. City Council Special Study Session Minutes April 3, 2017 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the City Council Special Study Session Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Hallfin absent). Councilmember Hallfin returned to the meeting at 8:35 p.m. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar 4a. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Finnegans Community Fund at Gamble Drive and the adjacent privately owned parking lot in West End for May 20, 2017. 4b. Authorize execution of an amendment to a professional services contract with WSB and Associates in the amount of $346,216 for the W. 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project (Boone Ave. to Aquila Ave.) Project No. 4017-1700. 4c. Designate Allied Blacktop Co. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $360,172.79 for Sealcoat Streets (Area 2 & 3) – Project No. 4017-1200). 4d. Designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $708,909.67 for the 2017 Connect the Park Bikeway, Sidewalk and Trail - Project No. 4017-2000. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 17-068 authorizing entering into Agency Agreement No. 1027745 with MnDOT for the W. 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project (Boone Ave. to Aquila Ave.) Project No. 4017-1700. 4f. Approve the 2017/2018 Neighborhood Grants. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 17-069 approving acceptance of a grant from the Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety in the amount of $1,000 for the purchase of Safety Camp t-shirts as a part of the annual Safety Camp event. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 17-070 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Becky Finnigan in the amount of $1,000 for park maintenance and enhancements at Westwood Hills Nature Center. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 17-071 approving acceptance of a scholarship from Minnesota Government Finance Officers Association (MNGFOA) for registration, hotel, and transportation expenses for Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer to attend the 2017 Advanced Government Finance Institute held July 30th – August 4th, 2017 in Madison, Wisconsin in an approximate amount not to exceed $2,300. 4j. Adopt Resolution No. 17-072 authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the joint powers agreement for the Criminal Justice Data Communications Network as maintained by the BCA. 4k. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of March 8, 2017. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing – Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements. Ms. Kennedy presented the staff report. She stated that in 2016 the council discussed several topics related to elections, including Ranked Choice Voting and the filing requirements for candidates for municipal offices. During this discussion, a number of concerns were raised by the council related to municipal elections, including the cost of holding primary elections; staff resources related to the administration of primary elections; historically low voter turnout at primary elections; perceived lack of serious candidates filing for municipal office; and the undue burdens placed on candidates to run campaigns for potentially both a primary and general election. At that time, it was the consensus of the council that a switch to Ranked Choice Voting was not warranted, primarily because the school district does not have the option to switch voting methods, and it was thought that other measures could be taken to address the identified concerns. Staff was directed to refer the issue to the Charter Commission for a recommendation on a potential amendment to the charter. The Charter Commission met on February 22 and approved sending a proposed amendment to the City Charter that would achieve several objectives, including eliminating the need for a municipal primary election when 3 or more candidates file for a specific office and amending the filing requirements for candidates by increasing the number of signatures required on a nominating petition from 15 to 50. Ms. Kennedy noted City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 5 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 that the Charter Commission also discussed increasing the candidate filing fee from its current rate of $20, but ultimately decided against an increase because they did not want running for office to become cost-prohibitive. Ms. Kennedy explained approval of the proposed amendment would require a unanimous vote of all members of the council, and, if approved, the amendment would not take effect until 90 days after passage and publication. Councilmember Mavity questioned if the proposed changes would be in effect for the 2017 election cycle. Ms. Kennedy stated the amendment would not apply to the 2017 municipal election. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. Carl Gamradt, 3347 Virginia Ave. S., stated he is present on behalf of Our Revolution Twin Cities in support of Ranked Choice Voting. He stated people are no longer voting for the candidate of their choice. They are voting for the opposite candidate, in order to get their candidate in. He added they are voting for the person they hate the least, adding that voting is too complicated. Mr. Gamradt stated we can give people the option to vote for more than one person. Then votes are not wasted, and everyone gets to vote for who they believe in. Councilmember Brausen cautioned that the topic of Ranked Choice Voting is not before the council tonight and that the council can only vote on the amendment as proposed. Bruce Fischer, 4359 Browndale Ave., stated he has been voting for a long time and has not missed an election. He is a resident of St. Louis Park and graduated from the high school in 1963. He stated that implementing Ranked Choice Voting may cause candidates to be more responsive to each other in a positive manner. Additionally, a candidate may not be a voter’s first choice but he or she might be their second choice. It might be easier for a voter who doesn’t want to cast a negative vote. Deb Brinkman, 4327 Alabama Ave. S., stated she is with League of Women Voters and hopes the council would consider Ranked Choice Voting. She noted it is not new and has been used in many local elections in Minneapolis and St. Paul. She added the benefits are that it restores majority rule, and voters never feel like their vote is wasted. It also allows for more voter choice and levels the playing field. Suzann Willhite, 3905 Glenhurst Ave. S., encouraged all to vote, as it promotes participation and active campaigns. Jeanne Massey, 3606 Harriet Ave., commended Deb Brinkman and stated the way to eliminate low voter turnout for primaries is to replace it with Ranked Choice Voting. She stated it has been used for years in a dozen plus U.S. cities with a smooth transition. She added it is well liked, preferred over the old system, and includes the benefit of reduction of rancor between candidates. Machines are used to scan and count ballots quickly and efficiently because the process is in place, and it is fast and transparent. Diane Steen-Hinderlie, 2829 Yosemite Ave. S., stated she has lived in St. Louis Park for over 30 years. She encouraged the council to eliminate the primary and adopt Ranked Choice Voting as it ensures the majority rule and is legally proven to work. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 6 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 Denise Konen, 4228 Salem Ave. S., stated she has lived in St Louis Park since 1980 and raised her children here. She would like to eliminate primaries and believes in Ranked Choice Voting. She feels the city could be a role model to other cities, our state, and the nation. She voted for everyone who did not win in the last election, and she would love the idea that her vote could count. She would like elections where candidates treat each other with more respect. Sean Brown, 4228 Salem Ave. S., stated she is a 22-year resident of St. Louis Park. She supports the amendment and encourages the council to adopt Ranked Choice Voting. Kay Drache, 3067 Zarthan Ave. S., stated she is a longtime resident and has served as an election judge since the 1990’s. She supports the amendment and Ranked Choice Voting. Susana Presseller, 2200 Nevada Ave. S., stated she agrees with everything Deb Brinkman said. Loren Botner, 3067 Zarthan Ave. S, stated he prefers Ranked Choice Voting, adding it will give a better opportunity to voters, while candidates need plurality. He added he has been an election judge, as well, and would like to work the General Election only. He stated there is now more national acceptance of Ranked Choice Voting as it allows for a more statesman-like competition, eliminating all of the rancor. He asked the council to consider it as an option. Jim Levthur, 3128 Florida Ave. S., stated it would be better to vote against the proposed amendment and do a new amendment for Ranked Choice Voting. Douglas Johnson, 4093 Utica Ave. S., agreed with everything that has been said. He noted when there are more than three candidates, the third-party candidate is usually the spoiler. If primaries are eliminated, everything is moved to the General Election. He added that Ranked Choice Voting respects all of our neighbors and our country. David Pacheco, 8001 Victoria Lane, agreed with all that was said. He added that he agrees with not increasing the primary fee and thinks Ranked Choice Voting is the next step. He stated it makes every vote count, and since we are looking to promote diversity, this is very important. He asked the council to support the proposal to eliminate the primary and approve Ranked Choice Voting. Luke Varian, 1345 Idaho Ave. S., stated Ranked Choice Voting allows people to run on core ideals, adding it helps voters from polarizing their opinions. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Mavity stated this had been a great discussion. She noted that before the council tonight is a recommendation from the Charter Commission to eliminate the primary, so there will be no vote on Ranked Choice Voting tonight. However, she noted it is the first time the council has heard from residents on this issue. She stated she is certainly listening and hopes her colleagues are, also. She would like to approve what is before the council now and also to direct the Charter Commission to consider Ranked Choice Voting and come back with an overall recommendation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 7 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 Councilmember Sanger stated one comment from a speaker tonight asked the council to include Ranked Choice Voting in the motion. She asked the attorney if that was an option for tonight. Mr. Mattick stated it was not, and that he would prefer a vote on the amendment as proposed without any additional direction. Councilmember Sanger stated she is very supportive of both of these changes to the election laws, including eliminating the primary and adopting Ranked Choice Voting. She stated she also prefers raising the filing fee so candidates won’t file last minute and for personal or frivolous reasons. She noted this proves costly and undercuts the process, if candidates are not filing for office for the right reasons. She added that raising the signatures to 50 is not enough either. She supports Ranked Choice Voting and also requesting that the Charter Commission review and present a new recommendation to the council. Councilmember Brausen stated he supports the amendment as proposed, adding the council did have a study session discussion on this, and the issue was raised related to the ability of the school district to implement Ranked Choice Voting. He added he is also in favor of the Charter Commission looking further into Ranked Choice Voting, noting that adopting this ordinance amendment without adopting Ranked Choice Voting will result in plurality winning. Councilmember Lindberg stated he will support this amendment tonight and thanked everyone for coming to the meeting because it is always informative and helpful to the council. He stated that when this was discussed by the council at the earlier study session, they talked about Ranked Choice Voting. The issue of the school district not being able to adopt Ranked Choice Voting means that the city will have to run dual elections. He stated that while he appreciates the motion to have the Charter Commission look further into Ranked Choice Voting, he would prefer to take this back to a study session first for more discussion and information. Councilmember Hallfin agreed with Councilmember Lindberg, indicating that instead of a motion, he would prefer another discussion on Ranked Choice Voting in study session. Mayor Spano stated he is in support of the motion in front of the council. He added he would also like to further discuss this at a future study session. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements. The motion passed 7-0. Councilmember Mavity stated this discussion has come up repeatedly, and the majority of her colleagues have not recommended Ranked Choice Voting. She added this is the first conversation where the community has spoken out. She hopes the council will consider this at a study session soon. Councilmember Sanger added she would be fine with having another study session on this issue and wants it to include Ranked Choice Voting and other modifications to the election system, along with further information about school board elections. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 8 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 6b. Public Hearing – PLACE Private Activity Revenue Bonds Financing (Housing). Resolution 17-073 Mr. Simon and Mr. Locke introduced Julie Eddington, the city’s bond attorney from Kennedy and Graven, who noted that PLACE received a multi-family housing bond allocation from the state for $27,185,503, in January, 2017. This was less than the original request, due to the oversubscription of housing bonds, but it is still sufficient for PLACE to accept the allocation. As part of the acceptance, they have to issue bonds within 120 days of the allocation award date. Since financing approvals are necessary to issue the bonds, the Private Activity Bond issue will not be complete prior to the allocation expiration date. The borrower has requested the city issue a short-term Private Activity Multi-Family Revenue Note, which will be a private placement. Within one year of the issuance of the short-term note, bonds will be issued which will refund the note and finance the remaining costs of the housing project. She stated these bonds/notes will not impact the city’s ability to issue bank qualified bonds for its own purposes this year, and if something catastrophic happened, any default on the part of the borrower has no effect on the city’s credit rating and no effect on an audit with the IRS either. Further, it will not impact the city’s bottom line. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. John Standal, 9955 Spring Rd., Eden Prairie, stated he owns two buildings in St. Louis Park at the location, and this is a big deal. He thought he would hold the building until light rail came in and then sell it, and now he does not want to sell the building. He noted the developer’s plan put the PLACE building too close to his building. There is no setback, and shading is now a problem. He added there will be traffic and parking issues, with the access from Yosemite, stating he does not think it is a good development. He stated the developer is not the one for this project, and he asked the council to look for something better. Pat Wells, 3379 Brunswick Ave. S., stated he has been communicating with council members and thinks the council are idealists, although the Mayor has an open mind. He stated he is against the PLACE project but knows that he may be outnumbered. He stated the developer submitted a patent request to the US Patent office. It was rejected. The project is not as cutting edge as the council thinks. He added the city will have to help the developer if he goes broke, noting the developer has gone into foreclosure in the past. He has concerns and would like the council to reject the project. J.W. Sterad, 5825 Goodrich Ave., stated that many in the community are very excited about this project as the plans and vision fit with our community. He did, however, note he lives 1,000 feet from PLACE, and traffic will be an issue. He asked that the council apply the brakes and do this properly. Christina Ridley, 3381 Gorham Ave., stated she is speaking on behalf of Perspectives, a non-profit that helps women and children in the community. She stated the housing will help these people. It will change the city and help those who need it most. She added they are excited for what is going to be available for them. Roger Ankin, 3600 Wooddale Ave. S., stated he spoke to the Planning Commission about this project. He noted he lives across from the project, and it does not fit into the area. He City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 9 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 stated that the building will tower over and close in the area rather than keeping it nice and open, as the corner is now. He added the wildlife in the area will be lost, and he is not happy about wind turbines on top of a 100-foot building. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Mavity stated a lot is happening in Ward 2, and she appreciates the comments made. She stated that the council has been discussing this project for three to four years. While she understands these comments, there have been many community meetings over the years and many opportunities for input. She added she has been in support of this project. She agreed it is a complex project but added at this point the city is obliged to continue to support it, and there is no financial risk to the city. She added this conversation is not over and stated the council wants to be sure the developer has all the input from the community to continue to improve the project. Councilmember Miller stated he appreciates this development and actively supports it. He stated that while he has not supported it in its entirety, this project does give something back to the community, and this is the threshold he uses. He noted there are lots of great spaces in the development - retail, coffee shop, hotel, trees - as well as the wonerf, which is open space in the middle. He added it meets the vision that has been articulated by residents, and he supports it. Councilmember Sanger stated she is not going to support the proposal and objects to the timing of considering the land use proposals tonight, since the deadline for EAW comments is only two days away, and all the comments have not yet been received. She stated the timing of taking action on the project now makes the project’s EAW a sham, and she has many concerns. She stated the positives include the environmentally sustainable concept and space for artists, but there are many negatives, as well. She stated there is not enough parking for residents and guests, and the consultant miscalculated the parking needed. She added that the ride share numbers were overestimated, as well. Traffic is a concern, and two-thirds of the units being affordable is too high of a concentration. She noted that if rents cannot be raised, there will be a downward spiral in the maintenance and quality of the buildings, noting the Cedar Riverside Apartments in Minneapolis as an example of a mixed income project gone awry. She stated she does not want the city of St. Louis Park to have to bail out the developer on this project. Councilmember Sanger stated the developer has no financial skin in the game and is still $23 million short. She is deeply concerned about the financial issues, noting the project will be valued at $67 million. She stated that since the city owns the parcels, we should wait for a better proposal with fewer impacts to the community. Councilmember Brausen stated he will support this motion to approve the project. He assured tax payers the council and staff have vetted this project for two years, and the developer has worked with the city to develop, modify and improve the project. He added this supports a larger purpose, and people in this community need affordable housing. He stated the council needs to be more proactive on this, adding the project incorporates wonderful environmental aspects, as well. He again stressed this is a challenging project for the developer, but the taxpayers are protected. There have been many letters of support from residents on this project. He added also that St. Louis Park is a built-up suburban area, and traffic will always be a challenge. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 10 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to adopt Resolution No. 17-073, authorizing issuance and sale of multifamily housing revenue obligations for the benefit of VIA Affordable Living Limited Partnership: authorizing the execution and delivery of documents related thereto; adopting a housing program; and taking certain other actions. The motion passed 6-1 (Councilmember Sanger opposed). 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. PLACE – Comprehensive Plan 2030 Land Use Map Amendment; Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development. Resolution No. 17-074 Ms. Monson gave a complete overview of the PLACE project. She noted that the PUD is needed to rezone the property from I-G General Industrial and MX mixed use to allow for a mixed-use building. The PUD also provides flexibility on height, density, and parking. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt Resolution No. 17-074, approving the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment. The motion passed 6-1 (Councilmember Sanger opposed). It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to approve first reading of Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 9 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from IG-General Industrial and MX-Mixed Use to PUD 9 for the property located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue, and set the second reading for May 1, 2017. The motion passed 6-1. (Councilmember Sanger opposed). Councilmember Mavity stated she appreciated Ms. Monson’s presentation, adding it was very thorough and clear. She noted this is an enormous step forward, stating we can cautiously celebrate each step along the way. When the project is completed, there will be a big celebration. Mayor Spano stated this is a bold project and not without risk. He added that the council understands this, is willing to take these risks, and is not willfully ignorant. He added the council has also been talking about this project and these risks for many years. 8b. Excelsior & Monterey (Bridgewater Dominium Addition) Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD. Resolution No. 17-075 Mr. Walther presented the staff report. He stated the council reviewed the proposal on April 3, 2017, and approved a motion to direct staff to prepare the resolution and findings of fact supporting the denial of the Preliminary Plat with variances and Preliminary Planned Unit Development for the proposed Excelsior & Monterey development and Bridgewater Dominium addition. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 11 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 Mayor Spano noted that Councilmember Brausen left the meeting at 10:15 p.m., adding he has been a strong advocate and supporter of this project and hopes that a new development will come back at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to adopt Resolution No. 17-075, denying rezoning to Planned Unit Development and denying preliminary plat with variances. The motion passed 6-0. (Councilmember Brausen absent) 8c. Traffic Study No. 679: Snow Removal Exempt Parking List Revisions. Resolution No. 17-076 Ms. Heiser presented the staff report. She stated the city’s snow removal ordinance restricts on-street parking after a snowfall. In the case of a snow emergency, on-street parking is restricted until streets are plowed from curb to curb and snowfall has ended. She noted additionally that there are some exceptions to the winter parking ordinance, where parking is limited due to nearby apartment buildings or commercial businesses. In these areas, parking is allowed within the first 24 hours of the snow emergency. After the first 24 hours, vehicles must be moved to a plowed street and vehicles not moved are subject to ticketing and towing. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt Resolution No. 17-076 rescinding Resolution No. 03-180 and approving the revised list of snow removal exempt parking areas. The motion passed 6-0. (Councilmember Brausen absent). 8d. Resolution Supporting Local Decision Making Authority. Resolution No. 17- 077 Mr. Locke presented and explained that the League of Minnesota Cities has drafted a model resolution for city councils concerned about the proliferation of 2017 legislative initiatives aimed at restricting local decision-making. The resolution supports local decision-making authority and opposes legislation that removes the ability for local elected officials to respond to the needs of their businesses and constituents. Mayor Spano stated there are currently 35 bills in the legislature which penalize local governments for certain decisions they make. Councilmember Mavity stated she serves on the League of Minnesota Cities Board and this issue is the single most important issue cities are fighting for. She added this undermining is unprecedented, and the more we can stand in alignment, the better it is for our city. Councilmember Miller added he hopes other municipalities continue to do this, as it is about taking away local decision making, which includes affordable housing and sanctuary cities. He asked that residents contact their legislators on this issue. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3c) Page 12 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2017 It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt Resolution No. 17-077 supporting local decision-making authority. The motion passed 6-0. (Councilmember Brausen absent). 9. Communications - none 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:26 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Minutes: 3d UNOFFICIAL MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 24, 2017 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the special meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, and Susan Sanger. Councilmembers absent: Thom Miller. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening) and Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther). Guests: Sheldon Berg, DJR Architects 1a. Roll Call 2. Resolutions, Ordinance, Motions and Discussion Items 2a. Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7. Mr. Walther presented the staff report. He noted that Parkway 25, LLC, submitted an application for a major amendment to section 36-268 PUD 7 that established the zoning for the Parkway 25 redevelopment located at 4005, 4015, and 4027 County Road 25 (the former Vescio’s restaurant and Valu Stay Inn). The council approved the Parkway 25 PUD in September, 2016, which allowed for the construction of a five-story, mixed-use building with 112 residential units; 8,850 square feet of ground floor commercial space; and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground parking ramp. Mr. Walther stated the original proposal included a restaurant and a fitness center. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the PUD to allow for medical uses and to increase the size of the ground floor commercial area from 8,850 square feet to 12,040 square feet. The plan would decrease the west surface parking lot from 25 spaces to 14 spaces to accommodate the additional commercial space and would reduce the east surface parking lot from 30 parking spaces to 29 spaces to install a turnaround space. The change from restaurant to medical office space decreases the parking demand, and the proposed parking counts would meet the city’s requirements. Mr. Walther noted the additional 3,190 square feet of commercial space would be added to the west side of the building’s ground floor, which was previously parking spaces located under a cantilevered portion of the building. The additional commercial space requires the parking lot to be shifted 5 feet to the west to allow for increased circulation, resulting in the removal of landscaping on the west property line. Additionally, landscaping is being installed elsewhere on the site to make up for the removals. The development will include 112 residential dwelling units and will remain 5 stories in height. The only proposed changes occur on the ground floor of the building. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: Special City Council Meeting Minutes of April 24, 2017 Mr. Walther stated the Planning Commission recommends council’s approval of the PUD, with conditions noted by staff. Councilmember Sanger stated she was disappointed the restaurant will not be located at the development, as she was looking forward to it. However, she added that these other uses are acceptable at the site. Councilmember Mavity asked if this will be a 10 or 15-year commercial lease and also what the term of lease is to allow for this use. Mr. Berg responded the lease term is 10- years with two 5-year extensions, so potentially a 20-year lease term. Councilmember Mavity asked what “private indoor entertainment” means. Mr. Walther stated this refers to either the planned fitness center or such things as pool halls, arcades, and bowling alleys. Councilmember Brausen asked if the smaller commercial space on the east side of the development could house a smaller restaurant or coffee shop. Mr. Berg said yes and added that the infrastructure will be left in place for those types of businesses, so that could be a possibility in the future. Councilmember Brausen stated he is happy to hear that as he hopes the area along County Road 25 will become more pedestrian-friendly. He added that he shares in Councilmember Sanger’s disappointment about there now being no restaurant; however, he will still offer his support. Councilmember Sanger asked about the timeline for the start of construction and when the building will be open for business. Mr. Berg stated they expect to begin construction by mid-May or early-June, and it will be completed in 14 months. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Section 36-268 PUD 7 of the Zoning Code for property located at 4005, 4015, and 4027 County Road 25, and set the second reading for May 1, 2017. The motion passed 6-0. 3. Adjournment The special meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Approval of City Disbursements RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of March 25, 2017 through April 21, 2017. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve City disbursements in accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter? SUMMARY: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the City Council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information follows the City’s Charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, Accounting Clerk Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,017.25 EARL ANDERSEN INC INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 353.30SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,370.55 232.383MINSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 232.38 17.99A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 17.99 1,382.76ABLE HOSE & RUBBER INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,382.76 738.20ABRA MN EDEN PRAIRIE UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 738.20 462.00ABRAKADOODLEARTOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 462.00 2.00ACME TOOLS ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS 2.00 2,600.00ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS OPERATIONS TRAINING 2,600.00 6,480.00ACTION FENCE INC.PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,480.00 841.70ACTION TARGET POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 841.70 42,805.00ADVANCED DISPOSAL SERVICES SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE 1,006.72SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE 43,811.72 13,894.00ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 13,894.00 299.70AHLMAN'S ERU OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 299.70 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 2 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 248.06ALBRECHT, MARY PROSECUTION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 248.06 494.00ALL CITY ELEVATOR INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 494.00 5,990.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 5,990.00 13,410.00ALPHA VIDEO AND AUDIO INC TV PRODUCTION OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 13,410.00 75,347.00ALTEC INDUSTRIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 75,347.00 196.00AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOC WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 196.00 262.50ANDERSON PATRICIA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 262.50 51.70ANOTHONY REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 51.70 50.00AOL LEGAL DEPT POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 191.58APPLIED MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 191.58 1,337.70ARCGIS SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,337.70 2,088.00ARMCOM DISTRIBUTING CO MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 2,088.00 48.20ARTISTIC PLUMBING INC INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL 114.00INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING 162.20 666.89ASET SUPPLY AND PAPER INC SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 3 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 666.89 635.64ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 635.64 2,086.10ASPEN MILLS OPERATIONS UNIFORMS 118.50OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING 2,204.60 150.00ASSIE DANIELLE AND COLE WELHAVEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 150.00 49.94ATOMIC RECYCLING FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 49.94PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 49.94WATER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 284.68VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 434.50 69.80AUTO PLUS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 69.80 250.00AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO.WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 250.00 80.25BADER JOHN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 80.25 11.80BANCE STEVEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 11.80 40.13BARKER, EMILY SOLID WASTE G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 40.13 7,335.00BARR ENGINEERING CO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,335.00 19,463.00BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MGMT COMMISSIONSTORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 19,463.00 52.00BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS ARENA MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,686.25RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 4 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,738.25 250.00BELLPRO ARCHITECTURAL LLC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 250.00 5.17BERGSENG GARY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 5.17 442.38BERSHEID GARY HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 442.38 14,509.75-BIRDAIR INC.PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 290,195.10PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 275,685.35 178.83BLACHETTE BRIAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 178.83 149.98BLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A EQUIPMENT PARTS 17.98ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 167.96 50.00BOLIN SUZANNE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 212.50BOLL CRAIG GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 212.50 753.66BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 753.66 167.06BOYER TRUCK PARTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 167.06 29.98BRAATEN STEVEN & LINDA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 29.98 1,000.00BRENNAN COLLEEN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 1,000.00 338.19BRIN GLASS SERVICE DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 5 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 180.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 518.19 417.25BROUDE EVA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 417.25 105.76BROWN ADAM & JORDANA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 105.76 18.62BROWNDALE NRIGHBORHOOD ASSN.HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 18.62 510.00BUREAU OF CRIM APPREHENSION CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 510.00 5.22BURLINGAME ROBERT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 5.22 758.33BUSINESS ESSENTIALS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 758.33 675.00CAPSTONE PUBLIC SECOR SOLUTIONS OPERATIONS TRAINING 675.00 2,385.00CARTEGRAPH SYSTEMS INC PUBLIC WORKS G & A TRAINING 795.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TRAINING 3,180.00 952.25CBIZ BENEFITS & INSURANCE SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 952.25 42,316.37CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 42,316.37 8,038.74CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,038.74 600.00CENTER FOR SOCIAL INCLUSION INC GENERAL FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 600.00 3,722.96CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 6 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 4,195.64WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 224.51REILLY G & A HEATING GAS 123.35SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 255.66SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 982.85PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS 135.37WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS 167.75NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS 9,808.09 5,938.88CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS 5,938.88 10,800.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENT 10,800.00 225.00CHARLES LEVIN ARCHITECTS MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 118.99CHET'S SHOES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 118.99 54.00CHOE, DAEWON INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL 54.00 116.58CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 100.37FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 208.96VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 425.91 6.59CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK ADMINISTRATION G & A POSTAGE 300.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,295.60ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,319.79ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 15.41HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES 83.11HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 733.60HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 100.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 1,790.00HUMAN RESOURCES GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 299.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING 655.75HUMAN RESOURCES TRAVEL/MEETINGS 28.42COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 7 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 195.00COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 465.64COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 426.43COMM & MARKETING G & A RENTAL EQUIPMENT 145.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 418.02COMM & MARKETING G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 28.00IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 968.82IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 25.48IT G & A TRAINING 2.00IT G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 600.00ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 470.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 55.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 264.66FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 59.24POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 314.70POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 2.67POLICE G & A MAINTENANCE 17.01POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 334.00POLICE G & A TRAINING 492.50JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP RECRUITMENT 165.69OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 140.97OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,286.05OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS 122.00OPERATIONSUNIFORMS 1,650.18OPERATIONSTRAINING 4,797.21OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 18.87PUBLIC WORKS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 900.00ENGINEERING G & A TRAINING 10.25TRAININGSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 120.00FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 204.45TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES 848.82TV PRODUCTION OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 730.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47.45CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.96WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 330.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 251.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 252.15-SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 50.00ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 764.49TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 36.19ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.00ORGANIZED REC G & A ADVERTISING City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 8 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 28.00ORGANIZED REC G & A MEETING EXPENSE 1,500.00ADULT PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 106.02SPECIAL PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 4.00SPECIAL EVENTS TRAINING 647.92HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 16.09YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 350.00YOUTH PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 22.17PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 180.95PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 409.74PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SMALL TOOLS 208.20PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 9.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 131.90NATURAL RESOURCES G & A SMALL TOOLS 3.20NATURAL RESOURCES G & A TRAINING 1,093.38WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 407.28REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 174.58REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 69.33REC CENTER BUILDING MEETING EXPENSE 1,334.00REC CENTER BUILDING LICENSES 25.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,317.00LIFEGUARDINGGENERAL SUPPLIES 21.06VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 180.00-VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TRAINING 218.84PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS 949.01PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 34,325.54 434.52CLAY BENJAMIN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 434.52 20,503.41COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 20,503.41 59.17COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 19.06OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 284.55WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.71REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 375.49 321.25COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 321.25 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 9 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 4,600.00COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP SUB HENN EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,600.00 980.00COMPAR INC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 980.00 20,910.28COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA SANDING/SALTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 20,910.28 7,035.40CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSUR 7,035.40 430.20CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 430.20 10,530.00COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,530.00 212.55CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC - DARE DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 212.55 136.60CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 136.60 28.20CROWN MARKING INC COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 28.20 194.62CUB FOODS POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 194.62 1,717.10CUMMINS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,725.03WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,756.22SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 6,198.35 3,899.18DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 3,899.18 379.70DELI DOUBLE WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES 379.70 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 10 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8,345.79DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 8,345.79 2,814.16DESIGNER SIGN SYSTEMS REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,814.16 207.75DEWITT RYAN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 207.75 759.00DH ATHLETICS LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 759.00 1,103.92DISCOUNT STEEL INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,103.92 15.70DISTINCTIVE PRINT INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 414.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 429.70 2,692.17DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE 2,542.95COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 5,235.12 653.41DRYWALL SUPPLY INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 653.41 450.00ECM PUBLISHERS INC ESCROWS PLACE 1,733.15ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES 2,183.15 15,678.75EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS PLACE 3,047.50ESCROWS5605 W 36TH (AMER LEGION SITE) 18,726.25 1,000.00EIFFLER CHARLES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 1,000.00 153.01EISOLD, JASON REC CENTER BUILDING MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 153.01 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 11 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 450.00ELIOT VIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 450.00 32.09ELLANSON, LUKE ERU OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 32.09 161.82EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 161.82 80.58ENDRUD, KIRSTEN HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 80.58 840.00ENVIRONMENTAL AGRONOMICS LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 840.00 730.00EPIC SECURITY PROFESSIONALS INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 730.00 20,174.00ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 20,174.00 21.66ESTATE OF DONALD MCGILLIVRAY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 21.66 9.92ESTATE OF RUBY SHER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 9.92 480.00EVERGREEN LAND SERVICES CO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 480.00 459.47FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 198.00TRAININGTRAINING 657.47 72,358.50FARBER SOUND LLC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 72,358.50 33.06FASTENAL COMPANY PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 18.81REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 51.87 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 12 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,372.50FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,372.50 252.38FERRELLGASARENA MAINTENANCE MOTOR FUELS 252.38 590.00FIELD TRAINING SOLUTIONS POLICE G & A TRAINING 590.00 118.00FIRE ENGINEERING OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 118.00 294.32FISHER, JON POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 294.32 203.50FLEX COMPENSATION INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 203.50 33.70-FLYNN MIDWEST LP PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 674.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 640.30 360.00FOREST LAKE SPORTSMEN'S CLUB ERU OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 360.00 41.73FRANCIS, ERICK ENGINEERING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 41.73 9.98FRATTALONE'S/SAINT LOUIS PARK PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 9.98 73.73FREEDMAN, BREANNA HUMAN RIGHTS MEETING EXPENSE 73.73 27.00-FRONTIER FIRE PROTECTION INC.PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 540.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 513.00 129.00FRONTIER PRECISION INC IT G & A TRAINING 258.00ASSET MANAGEMENT TRAINING 387.00 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 13 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 87.77G & K SERVICES REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.77 3,165.00GARY L FISCHLER & ASSOCIATES PA HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 3,165.00 21,025.00GATEWAY KNOLLWOOD LLC RIGHT-OF-WAY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 21,025.00 186.02GLENWOOD FINANCIAL LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 186.02 60.00GOLDEN VALLEY, CITY OF BASKETBALL PROGRAM REVENUE 60.00 85.00GOLDMAN ALEXA INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 85.00 12.98GPS CITY ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 12.98 96.98GRAFIX SHOPPE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 96.98 6.28GRAINGER INC, WW GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 258.97FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 129.13WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 366.21PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 760.59 8,387.50GRANITE CITY RESTAURANT OPERATIONS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LIQUOR 8,387.50 4,065.55-GREAT NORTHERN LANDSCAPES INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 81,311.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 77,245.45 480.48GROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE 480.48 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 14 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 360.29GUTKNECHT, MARY ELLEN WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 360.29 467.50-H&B SPECIALIZED PRODUCTS INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 9,350.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 8,882.50 80.00HAGE CONCRETE WORKS INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING 80.00 219.34HAMKOS SANDRA & HAL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 219.34 130.64HANSON, MARK PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 130.64 3,968.41HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 3,968.41 60.20HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER 60.20 1,038.50HEDBERG AGGREGATES INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,038.50 510.15HEDBERG SUPPLY WESTWOOD G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 510.15 48.90HEJNY ROBERT INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL 48.90 2,568.00HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER OPERATIONS TRAINING 2,568.00 155.00HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 155.00 564.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 5,031.84POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,518.27POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE 5,146.20OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 15 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,925.00PARK IMPROVEMENT G & A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES 191.66PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 15,376.97 1,472.00HIAWATHA LUMBER COMPANY REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,472.00 1,491.00-HIGH FIVE ERECTORS II, INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 29,820.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 28,329.00 206.50HIRSCH CHARLOTTE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 206.50 1,252.30HIRSHFIELDSWATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 1,252.30 152.38HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 24.60POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 321.70ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS 12.97ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 229.69ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 125.82DAMAGE REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 42.07DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 15.26FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 387.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 546.05PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 74.69PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SMALL TOOLS 16.44SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 461.54REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,410.21 112.88HOPPE, MARK ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 112.88 300.00HORIZON AFO SEMINARS PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING 300.00REC CENTER BUILDING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 600.00 245.65-HORWITZ INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE 4,913.03PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 16 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 4,667.38 8.40HUBBARD AMY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 8.40 19.00IATNVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 19.00 376.95ICCINSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 376.95 612.50IDEAL SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 612.50 732.78IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 732.78SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 732.77SOLID WASTE G&A POSTAGE 80.45SOLID WASTE G&A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 732.77STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 3,011.55 228.53INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 31.80IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 260.33 310.00INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 310.00PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 620.00 2,250.00INNOVYZEWATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,250.00 2,187.95INTEGRA TELECOM IT G & A TELEPHONE 2,187.95 135.00INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL INC INSPECTIONS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 135.00 50.19INTL SECURITY PRODUCTS OFF-LEASH DOG PARK GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.19 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 17 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 125.00INT'L SOCIETY OF FIRE SERVICE INSTRUCTOR OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 125.00 79.02INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 219.98GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 299.00 525.00ITERIS INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 525.00 1,176.00JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 518.91UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 2,097.02EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FIRE EQUIPMENT 3,617.55EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 7,409.48 89.97JEMS MAGAZINE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 89.97 42.49JENSEN SHANE & ELENA JELSING WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 42.49 10.74JERRY'S HARDWARE POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES .01-DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 156.90PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.98IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.16WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 186.77 186.48JESSE DAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 186.48 605.81JOHN A. DALSIN & SONS INC UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 605.81 166.92JOHNSON PAUL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 166.92 11.52JOHNSON ROSS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 11.52 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 18 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 59.45KAMPA, MARK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 168.21POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 227.66 503.08KELLER, JASMINE Z EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS 503.08 1,893.75KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS PLACE 1,893.75 67.50KIDCREATE STUDIO LITTLE TOT PLAYTIME OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 67.50 446.01KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 446.01 80,324.15KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 80,324.15 100.00KING, RYAN BROOMBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 100.00 5,046.00KNOX COMPANY OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 5,046.00 410.90KOERING, STEVE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 410.90 2,693.75KOTHRADE SEWER WATER & EXCAVATING INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,693.75 12,420.49KRECH, O'BRIEN, MUELLER & WASS INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 12,420.49 71.90KROGAN, MIKE HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 71.90 162.72LARSON, JACQUELINE COMM & MARKETING G & A TRAINING 146.38COMM & MARKETING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 309.10 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 19 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,889.84LAWRENCE TERRYN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 1,889.84 197.64LAWSON PRODUCTS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 197.64 1,240.00LEAGUE OF MN CITIES STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,240.00 6,055.62LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 6,055.62 3,540.00LEOTEK ELECTRONICS USA LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 3,540.00 538.16LIBERTY ENVELOPE COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 538.16 267.35LIBERTY TIRE RECYCLING SERVICES MN VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 267.35 40.05LIBERTY TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 40.05 323.05LIFE SUPPORT INNOVATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 323.05 138.54LINDELL JOSEPH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 138.54 4,475.00LINDSAY KNOLLWOOD LLC RIGHT-OF-WAY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,475.00 144.64LITIN PAPER, PACKAGING & CONVERTING POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 73.78POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 316.89SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 535.31 8,584.33LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES 8,584.33 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 20 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,118.59LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 2,118.59 35,870.00LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 9,747.50TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 45,617.50 243.21LOTT PETER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 243.21 708.23LUBE-TECH & PARTNERS LLC BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 708.23 4,870.00LUMA SALES ASSOC SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 4,870.00 931.71MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,125.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,056.71 35.00MAGCCABLE TV G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 35.00 72.00MAISTOVICH JESSE INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING 72.00 16,369.20MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 16,369.20 101.36MARTENS, AFTON JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP MEETING EXPENSE 101.36 6,284.85MAVO SYSTEMS MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,284.85 200.00MAXWELL MONIQUE OPERATIONS TRAINING 200.00 450.00MCMONIGAL ARCHITECTS LLC MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 21 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 23.00MDHWATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 23.00 5,500.00MDH PROPERTIES LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,500.00 60.00MEADOWBROOK COLLABORATIVE HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 60.00 13.46MENARDSPOLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 58.86SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 120.86WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 22.41PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1.97WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 253.97WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 17.32WESTWOOD G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 488.85 1,072.00METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,072.00 34,442.10METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 3,150.00WATER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 1,626.90SEWER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 355,300.85OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 394,519.85 155.93MICRO CENTER TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 155.93 6,080.00MILLERBERND MFG CO SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 6,080.00 402.30MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 402.30 56.83MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS 56.83 147.66MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS 147.66 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 22 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 60.00MINNESOTA CRIME PREVENTION ASSN POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 60.00 50.00MINNESOTA FIRE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 50.00 225.00MINNESOTA FIRE SVC CERT BD OPERATIONS TRAINING 225.00 1,272.25MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,272.25 1,200.00MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING 1,200.00 119.00MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 15.00ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 134.00 254.00MINUTEMAN PRESS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 254.00 200.00MN DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY FACILITIES MCTE G & A LICENSES 200.00 399.99MN MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT INC PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLS 48.51ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 448.50 25.00MNAPA ADMINISTRATORS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 25.00 305.00MOBILE WELD FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 305.00 1,119.27MORAN MATTHEW WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 1,119.27 181,018.83MORRIE'S PARTS & SERVICE GROUP GRANTS SOIL REMEDIATION 181,018.83 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 23 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 405.00MOSHREFZADEH MANDANA SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 405.00 25.00MPCAGENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,250.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 345.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 1,230.00SEWER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 2,850.00 950.00MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOC HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 950.00 195.00MRPABASKETBALLSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 195.00 56.61MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 56.61 329.05MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 130.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 459.05 26.48MUELLER LYLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 26.48 167.51MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 167.51 38.68MYERS TIRE SUPPLY CO PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 38.68 1,184.46NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 75.26POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.98ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 16.09DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 139.67WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 8.62UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 349.70PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 334.86VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 169.01VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 24 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,288.65 379.40ND CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS 379.40 25.52NELSON, MARK OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.52 200.00NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 200.00 853.20NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 186.72WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,039.92 157.18NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 157.18 439.20NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 439.20 273.13NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 273.13 235.00NYBERG, DEREK INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL 235.00 5,639.69NYSTROM PUBLISHING COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE 21,194.65COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 26,834.34 600.00OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 500.00OAKWOODS PARTNERS ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 500.00 169.41OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 173.11HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 76.76COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 12.08COMMUNITY OUTREACH G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 25 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 198.09FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 86.74GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 249.01POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 160.96POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 57.48ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 66.82INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 201.31PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 93.45ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 24.50PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 88.97WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 22.35ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY OFFICE SUPPLIES 95.50ORGANIZED REC G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES 29.99-VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,746.55 226.32OFFICE TEAM COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,944.00INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,170.32 196.90OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 272.99INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 469.89 53.00ON SITE SANITATION FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 103.50OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 156.50 1,320.00OSI ENVIRONMENTAL INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,320.00 150.61OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 150.61 615.00PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 615.00 3,000.00PALKERT CALEB ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 3,000.00 33,828.96PARK NOCOLLET WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 33,828.96 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 26 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 99.00PARKER, JON POLICE G & A TRAINING 99.00 792.08PARSONS ELECTRIC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 792.08 275.00PATEL, CHANDRAKANT GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 700.00PATRIOT 2000 INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 700.00 616.17PEACE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 616.17 275.00PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 275.00 7.98PETTY CASH POSTAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.00POSTAL SERVICES TRAINING 44.68POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 6.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A TRAINING 12.07PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 16.00TRAININGTRAINING 22.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 21.84WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.99WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 35.13WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 42.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 25.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING 11.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TRAINING 181.50VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES 443.19 43.49PETTY CASH - WWNC WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 16.59WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 15.62OTHER SCHOOL RELEASE PRGMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 21.18SCOUTSGENERAL SUPPLIES 96.88 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 27 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 3,215.38PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT CITY POOLED INVESTMENTS BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 3,215.38 110.00PLEAACLERICALTRAINING 110.00 1,692.26POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 430.68UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 2,122.94 130.72POPP.COM INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE 130.72 550.00PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 237.65PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 237.64WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 237.64SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 237.64STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 950.57 100.98PREMIUM WATERS INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 100.98 220.00PRINTERS SERVICE INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 220.00 30,579.00PROGRESSIVE BUILDING SYSTEMS LTD PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 30,579.00 2,109.41PROSOURCE SUPPLY REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,109.41 324.00PUBLIC SAFETY SOFTWARE GROUP POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 324.00 76.51PUMP & METER SERVICE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 76.51 3,115.64RANDY'S ENVIORMENTAL SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 28 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 541.31SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,605.26REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 5,262.21 54.67REGENCY BUSINESS SOLUTIONS POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 44.59POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 99.26 6,992.18REHRIG PACIFIC CO SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OTHER 6,992.18 6,600.00REVERING LAW AND MEDIATION HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,600.00 4,580.84RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 4,580.84 87.38RIGID HITCH INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 87.38 72,536.84RJM CONSTRUCTION LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 72,536.84 2,654.78ROBERTS JOHN COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 2,654.78 318.00ROTARY CLUB OF SLP ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 318.00 2,400.00RTVISION INC ENGINEERING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 2,400.00 11,023.04SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,023.04 897.37SAFE-FAST INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 897.37 159.81SAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 159.81 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 29 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 33.84SAM'S CLUB POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 63.82OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 17.45ORGANIZED REC G & A MEETING EXPENSE 83.52WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 76.24WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES 263.36CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES 538.23 66.63SBA COMMUNICATIONS INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING 66.63 136.70SCHAAKE COMPANY, AJ ADMINISTRATION G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 139.40HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 276.10 46.80SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 45.99PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 295.91SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 589.87SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 978.57 44.00SCHWANTZ LARRY INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL 44.00 213.50SEHSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 213.50 13,725.00SHAWN, JACK BASKETBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,725.00 341.42SHERWIN WILLIAMS UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 341.42 14.05SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 48.83IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12.95FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 70.25POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 14.05WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14.05ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 174.18 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 30 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 3,050.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 3,050.00 536.28SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 536.28 5,670.00SIWEK LUMBER & MILLWORK INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 1,536.00REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 7,206.00 99.16SKB ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANING/DEBRIS REMOVAL CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 99.16 81.69SKELLY, GABRIEL HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 81.69 281.52SKOGEN TIMOTHY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 281.52 1,072.49SMITH, TIM OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,072.49 99.90SOUTHCOMM BUSINESS MEDIA OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 99.90 1,000.00SPACK CONSULTING ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,000.00 570.69SPANO, JAKE ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 570.69 1,717.79SPRINTIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS 3,499.57CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 5,217.36 46,262.28ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB 46,262.28 369.72STAR TRIBUNE POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 369.72 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 31 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8.17STEVENS GROUP LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 8.17 324.75STEVENS JEFF TRAINING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 324.75 696.00STONEBROOKE EQUIPMENT INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 696.00 32.99STREICHER'S ERU OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 32.99 250.00STUZMAN CHAD GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 188.70SUMMIT COMPANIES OPERATIONS REPAIRS 188.70 22,536.68SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 22,536.68 257.00SWANASOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 257.00 6,862.00SWANSON & YOUNGDALE INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,862.00 225.00TEA2GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 225.00 346.75TENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO.GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 346.75 593.64TERMINIX INT GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 116.93REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 710.57 4,588.50THE CREATIVE GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,008.00CABLE TV G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,100.00FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10,696.50 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 32 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,488.00THE JOHN ROBERTS COMPANY COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,488.00 157.97THE MPX GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 157.97 614.97THE SHERWINN WILLIAMS CO MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 614.97 90.00THE WILEY LAW OFFICE, PC HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 90.00 474.00THINK GREAT TRAINING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 474.00 263.25THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 263.25 275.29THURSTON BILL SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 275.29 864.41THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 864.41 500.00TIGER OAK MEDIA COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING 500.00 752.96TIMBER SYSTEMS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 752.96 766.13TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 766.13 6,214.93TKDAWATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,214.93 39.65TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 39.65 55.00TRANSPORT GRAPHICS OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 33 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 55.00 99.98TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 99.98 1,653.00TUBE PRO INC AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,653.00 135.00TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 375.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 510.00 65.32TWIN CITY HARDWARE PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 65.32 1,120.00TWIN CITY SWEEPING PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,120.00 1,368.33UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,412.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 9,536.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 21,792.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 11,054.59TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 3,980.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 1,566.00REC CENTER BUILDING BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 50,708.92 503.01ULINEOPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 503.01 297.06UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,693.49SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 892.93PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 149.98RESERVESOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 527.80EXPLORERSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 4,561.26 106.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAY 106.00 995.00UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION TRAINING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 34 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 995.00 180.00UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 295.00USCCSOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 295.00 167.99VAUGHAN, JIM NATURAL RESOURCES G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 167.99 20.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 20.00 50.04VERIZON WIRELESS SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 14,155.04CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 69.98CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 14,275.06 318.05VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 741.06WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,059.11 2,077.50WARNING LITES OF MN INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 335.20WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,412.70 136.11WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 17,219.54-SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 136,636.80SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 67,837.30SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICE 11,020.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE 59,006.75SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 257,417.42 572.10WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 572.10 2,250.00WATERS & COMPANY HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,250.00 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 35 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 800.00WEIVODA, JANET HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE 800.00 150.00WELCOME HARVEST LLC HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150.00 4,050.00WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION RIGHT-OF-WAY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,050.00 277,600.00WEST END OFFICE MN LLC GRANTS SOIL REMEDIATION 277,600.00 1,776.00WHEELER LUMBER LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,185.24PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 2,961.24 5,000.00WILLIAMS RODNEY ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,000.00 237.54WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 237.54 665.00WOLFF, JOHN OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 665.00 150.00WOODS ANN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 150.00 150.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS ADULT PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 72.50WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 222.50 900.00WSB ASSOC INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,418.25STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,318.25 14,049.46XCEL ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 24.30OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 2,188.62PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 18,696.93WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,936.23REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 36 4/21/2017CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 14:17:39R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/21/20173/25/2017 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,653.12SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,218.46STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 3,468.23PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 32.68BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE 48.16WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE 487.29WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 16,126.64REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE 60,930.12 13.08YEDONI JON WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 13.08 3,452.75Z SYSTEMS INC CABLE TV G & A NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 3,452.75 1,374.00ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC SWEEPING EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,374.00 148.15ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 148.15 282.46ZEP SALES AND SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 282.46 100.36ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 4,320.19PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 4,420.55 1,243.67ZIP PRINTING COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,243.67 Report Totals 2,925,832.95 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 37 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending Section 36-268 PUD 7 of the Zoning Code for property located at 4005, 4015, & 4027 County Road 25, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed Major Amendment to the Parkway 25 PUD? SUMMARY: Parkway 25, LLC submitted an application for a Major Amendment to Section 36- 268 PUD 7 that established the zoning for the Parkway 25 redevelopment located at 4005, 4015, & 4027 County Road 25 (the former Vescio’s restaurant and Valu Stay Inn). City Council approved the Parkway 25 PUD in September 2016 which allowed for the construction of a five story, mixed-use building with 112 residential units, 8,850 square feet of ground floor commercial space, and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground parking ramp. The original proposal included a restaurant and a fitness center. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the PUD to allow for medical uses and to increase the size of the commercial square footage from 8,850 square feet to 12,040 square feet. The plan would decrease the west surface parking lot from 25 spaces to 14 spaces to accommodate the additional commercial space, and reduce the east surface parking lot from 30 parking spaces to 29 spaces to install a turnaround space. The change from restaurant to medical office decreases the parking demand and parking counts would meet the city requirements. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 19, 2017 and no comments were received. Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the Major Amendment. City Council held a First Reading of an Ordinance on April 24, 2017 and voted 6 to 0 to approve the Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 for Parkway 25. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Ordinance and Publication Summary Unofficial Planning Commission Minutes (excerpt) Proposed Development Plans Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 DISCUSSION SITE LOCATION MAP: SITE INFORMATION: Site Area: 1.574 acres Zoning: PUD – Planned Unit Development Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Neighborhood: Triangle BACKGROUND: City Council approved the Parkway 25 PUD in September 2016 which allowed construction of a five story, mixed-use building with 112 residential units, 8,850 square feet of ground floor commercial space, and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground parking ramp. PUD ANALYSIS: Description: The developer requests a major amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 of the city’s zoning ordinance which established the zoning for the Parkway 25 development. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Existing Approved Plans Proposed Plans Commercial Commercial Commercial /Restaurant 5 Units 7 Units 2 Units Commercial Glenhurst Ave Glenhurst Ave City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 4 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Zoning Compliance Table: Factor Required Adopted Proposed Use Commercial Mixed Use-Commercial and Residential No Change Lot Area 2.0 acres, or less with City Council approval 1.574 acres No Change Height No maximum with PUD 67 feet No change Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials A: 69.4% Class I B: 62.8% Class I C: 73.4% Class I D: 70.7% Class I E: 71.0% Class I F: 70.5% Class I G: 85.8% Class I H: 68.4% Class I A: 72.6% Class I B: 62.8% Class I C: 73.4% Class I D: 70.7% Class I E: 71.0% Class I F: 70.5% Class I G: 85.8% Class I H: 68.4% Class I Density 50 units/acre, or more with PUD 66.7 units/acre No Change Floor Area Ratio None with PUD 2.09 2.12 Ground Floor Area Ratio N/A 0.2 0.34 Off-Street Parking Residential: 154 spaces •1 space/bedroom Commercial: 54 spaces •1 space/200 square feet for commercial (58 spaces) •-10% transit reduction (-6 spaces) Total: 206 spaces required •159 underground spaces •55 off-street surface spaces •16 on-street spaces Total Provided: 230 spaces Total Required: 230 spaces •159 underground spaces •43 off-street surface spaces •16 on-street spaces Total Provided: 218 spaces Total Required: 206 spaces Bicycle Parking Residential: 127 •1 space/unit (112 spaces) •1 space/10 automobile spaces (15.4 spaces) Commercial: 6 •10% of required vehicle parking Total: 133 spaces •132 interior bike spaces in underground ramp •14 exterior bike spaces Total: 146 bike spaces •130 interior bike spaces in underground ramp •14 exterior bike spaces Total: 144 bike spaces DORA 12% total lot area 12,187 square feet, 17.7% 12, 626 square feet, 18.4% Landscaping See Landscaping section Setbacks None with PUD Front (North): 0’ Side (East): 14’ Rear (South): varies, 17’- 70’ Side (West): varies 47’- 73’ Front (North): 0’ Side (East): 14’ Rear (South): varies, 17’- 70’ Side (West): varies 47’- 53’ Uses: The proposal includes a mix of commercial and residential amenity space and dwelling units on the ground floor and residential units on floors two through five. The ground level was originally approved with 7 ground floor dwelling units split between the buildings east and west sides and 8,850 square feet of commercial space. The developer proposes moving all ground floor City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 5 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 residential units to the building’s east side while modestly reducing the size of those units. The applicant proposes commercial space on both the east and west sides of the building: 2,237 gross square feet of commercial space on the building’s east side and 9,785 gross square feet of commercial space on the west side, for a total of 12,040 square feet of commercial space. Height: No changes to height are proposed. Parkway 25 will remain 67 feet and 5 stories tall. Parking: A restaurant use requires more parking than a medical use which reduces the overall parking requirements from 230 parking spaces to 209 parking spaces. The plans include 218 parking spaces and meet the parking requirements for the amended uses. Landscaping: The revised plans decrease the number of trees and plantings on the site due to the shifting of the west parking lot. The plan proposes 87 deciduous trees, 317 shrubs, and 1083 perennials, while the original plan called for 91 deciduous trees, 306 shrubs, and 1,146 perennials. Due to the loss of landscape materials, the applicant worked with the city’s Natural Resource Coordinator to increase the quality and diversity of the tree and plant species. The plans continue to meet the intent of the landscape ordinance. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The proposed development plans illustrate DORA through the inclusion of the 12,626 square feet outdoor space in the rear of the building, including 11,654 square feet for an outdoor recreation plaza and a 972 square foot dog park. The plan exceeds the City’s minimum 12% DORA requirements, and provides approximately 18.4% of DORA. The previous approved plans included 12,187 square feet (17.7%) of DORA space. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting was held on April 6, 2017 to discuss the proposed changes to the uses and ground floor of the building. There was disappointment that a restaurant is no longer part of the proposed development, and there were questions to clarify the location of parking. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends amending Section 36-368 PUD 7 and the Official Exhibits for Parkway 25: 1.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 19, 2017 to gather comments on the proposed amendment. No public comments were made, and the Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7. CITY COUNCIL: The City Council held a first reading of the ordinance on April 24, 2017 and voted 6 to 0 to approve the major amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 6 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 ORDINANCE NO. ____-17 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTION 36-268-PUD 7 THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4005, 4015, & 4027 COUNTY ROAD 25 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-13 PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 7. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the following described lands as Commercial: Lot 1, Block 1, Parkway 25 Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 3. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268-PUD 7 is hereby amended to add the following changes: Section 36-268-PUD 7. (a) Development Plan The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1. C0.0 G000P – Cover Sheet 2. C0.1 – Site Survey 3. C1.0 – Removals Plan 4. C2.0 – Site Plan 5. C2.1 – Alley Plan and Profile 6. C3.0 – Grading Plan 7. C3.1 – Grading Plan Interim 8. C4.0 – Utility Plan 9. C5.0 – Civil Details 10. C5.1 – Civil Details 11. C5.2 – Civil Details 12. SW1.0 – SWPPP – Existing Conditions 13. SW1.1 – SWPPP – Proposed Conditions City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 7 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 14. SW1.2 – SWPPP – Narrative and Details 15. SW1.3 – SWPPP – Attachments 16. SW1.4 – SWPPP- Attachments 17. L100 – Tree Preservation Plan LS100 – Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan 18. L200 – Preliminary Landscape Plan– LS300 - Site Landscape Plan 19. L400 – Reference Plan 20. L401 – Layout Plan 21. L500 – Planting Details 22. G000 – Cover Sheet 23. A100P – Floor Plan – Level -1 24. A110P – Floor Plan – Level 1 25. A120P – Floor Plan – Level 2-4 26. A150P – Floor Plan – Level 5 27. A160P – Roof Plan 28. A200 – Exterior Elevations A200P – Exterior Elevations 29. A201 – Exterior Elevations A201P – Exterior Elevations 30. AS100 – Architectural Site Plan AS100P – Architectural Site Plan 31. A300P – Building Sections 32.Site Lighting Photometric Plan 33. Zoning Map Amendment Exhibit 34.Preliminary Plat 35.Final Plat 36.Traffic Study 37.Parking Management Plan 38.Parking Agreement The site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1)The property shall be developed with 1112 residential units and 8,850 12,040 square feet of ground floor commercial space. 2)At least 214 202 off-street parking spaces shall be provided. At least 16 on-street parallel parking and loading spaces shall be installed adjacent to the site. An off- City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 8 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 street parking management plan shall be approved by the city and managed by the property owner, with the goal of avoiding spill over parking into surrounding streets in the neighborhood and maximizing the benefits of mixed use development and shared parking. At least 10% of the parking shall be permitted for use as guest parking. 3) The maximum building height shall not exceed 67 feet and five stories. 4)The development site shall include a minimum of 17.7% percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b) Permitted Uses (1)Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to, the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space are limited to a maximum of 40% of the building first floor. (2)Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are limited to the following: medical office, restaurant, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. a.a. All parking requirements must shall be met for each use. b.b. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. including commercial deliveries c.No more than 3,950 square feet of gross building floor area shall be used for restaurant. d.c. Each commercial tenant space on the first floor shall have a direct and primary access to the outside of the building on the north building elevation that is open during business hours. e.d. In vehicle sales is prohibited. f.e. Restaurants are prohibited. (3)Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. (c) Accessory Uses Accessory uses are as follows: City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 9 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 (1)Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. (2)Home occupations complying with all of the conditions for home occupations located in the R-C district. (3)Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. (4)Gardens. (5)Parking lots. (6)Public transit stops/shelters. (7)Outdoor seating, public address (PA) systems are prohibited. (8)Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. (d) Special Performance Standards (1)All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2)All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. (3)Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the MX- Mixed Use District requirements found in the sign code. (4)Façade. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor non-residential facades: a.For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signage. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. b.Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 10 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 (5)Awnings. a.Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. b.Backlit awnings are prohibited. Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-13 PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing April 19, 2017 First Reading April 24, 2017 Second Reading May 1, 2017 Date of Publication May 11, 2017 Date Ordinance takes effect May 26, 2017 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 11 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION ORDINANCE NO._____-17 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4005, 4015, AND 4027 CO. RD. 25 This ordinance states that the Zoning Ordinance Code, Section 36-268-PUD 7 will be amended to accommodate a proposed medical office use and tenant in place of the previous commercial restaurant and fitness uses. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 11, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 12 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 EXCERPT UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 19, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Greg Hunt, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther *** C.Major Amendment to PUD – Parkway 25 Location: 4005, 4015 and 4027 County Rd. 25 Applicant: Sela Group, LLC Case No.: 17-13-PUD Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. She noted a correction in the proposed motion. The zoning code section to be amended is 36-268 PUD 7, not 26-268 PUD 7. She explained that the original PUD commercial uses included a restaurant. The applicant has requested an amendment to the PUD to allow for medical uses and to increase the size of the commercial area. Proposed changes occur only on the ground floor of the building. The amendment would decrease the west surface parking lot and the east surface parking lot. Landscaping on the west property line will be removed and additional landscaping will be installed elsewhere on the site to make up for removals. Ms. Monson presented existing approved plans and proposed plans. She reviewed uses, height, parking, landscaping, DORA and public input. Commissioner Person asked if the developer has a medical office tenant. Ms. Monson responded that a medical office tenant has been named. Commissioner Person asked about the small commercial space. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, stated that space would be an executive office space of the medical office. Chair Peilen asked about the pool house from the existing plan. Dean Dovolis, architect, DJR Architecture, explained that pool equipment would have been stored in the pool house. That equipment space has now been moved inside, resulting in more green space outdoors. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 13 Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Chair Peilen stated she was disappointed over the loss of the restaurant as an amenity. She said she understood with the amendment that there was no longer the required parking available for a restaurant. She asked if in the future there might be a food service of some type. Mr. Dovolis said it’s possible a coffee shop or food use could operate in the future. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak she closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. PARKWAY25 15-066.00 PARKING AND BIKE RACK CALCULATIONS UNIT ALCOVE COUNT 1 69 42 BR/UNIT BEDROOMS 1 TOTAL PARKING 1 1 BEDROOM 2BEDROOM TOTAL 112 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIRED 69 84 154 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING PROVIDED (IN UNDERGROUND GARAGE) TOTAL RESIDENTIAL GARAGE = 159 SPACES · (5 SPACES FOR COMM. P OFFICE= 12,040 GSF TOTAL (WEST· 9,785 GSFI EAST· 2,237 GSF) PA RKING REQ= 1 STALU200 GSF 69 84 TOTAL OFFICE PKG REQUIRED 11,548 SF/200 (SF AS DE FINED BY SLP CO REDUCTION IN PARKING FOR TRANSIT (10% OF REQUIRED SPACES) TOTAL COMMERCIAL PARKING REQUIRED TOTAL COMMERCIAL PARKING PROVIDED ON GRADE PARKING -43 SPACES STRE ET PARKING -16 SPACES BE LOW GRAOE PA RKIN G • 5 SPACES GRAND TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED GRAND TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED RESIDENTIAL BIKE RACKS REQUIRED= 1 PER UNIT+ 1/10 PARKING STAL 112+(154110) COMMERCIAL BIKE RACKS REQUIRED= 1110 PARKING STALLS TOTAL BIKE RACKS REQUIRED TOTAL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED Allworkstlallcomplywithsllspplicsble Wltsandlocsl codes111nd ordl11111m:111s. Worklsto beoompletadi'laccordance with d documants indudi119 drawings, 9pecificatio11s.andcot1ditionsof oontr8d f«work . Refertooomplatasetof lssued oolllractdocumentslndudlngdrawings alld spedflcetlonsofllll dlsclpllnesfa 111pplicablenotes,111bbreviations,111nd symbols.Contractorisrespomillelor ooordination ofwork.NotifyArchit9ct of81lydlsaepandesbelore proceedlngwithwork. FoodsaMCefor coordl11111tlononly. Food sarvice equipment and i'latllllation noti'lconlJ'llcl (64/10) (130 AT LEVEL ·1, 14 AT LEVEL 1) MN BUILDING CODE 1303.1500 trttps:1iw-.rev1sor.roo.gov/l\lles/?ld=1303.1SOO GROSS PARKING: 56,099 l! .001 • 56 GROSS RESIDENTIAL: 134,725 � .0025 = 337 GROSS COMMERCIAL: 8,096 l! .001 = 6 AREA REQUIRED: 401 SF AREA PROVIDED: 1037 SF BEDROOM 1 1015 SF B2 992 SF 83 1056 SF 1311 SF 1108SF 1183 SF 1183 SF 1209 SF 1194SF 1295 SF LEVEL 1 ALCO VE 1 BEDROOM 1+BEDROOM 2BEDROOM TOTALS 839 GSF 967 GSF 986 GSF 1094 GSF 1093 GSF 1152 GSF 1417 GSF 1183 GSF 1265 GSF 1276 GSF 1311 GSF 1275 GSF 1406GSF 27 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 0 0 0 12 12 12 4 4 4 11 11 11 27 27 27 24 LEVEL 5 TOTAL 0 1 3 12 15 12 2 2 1 11 53 4 16 9 42 24 112 !I I --"'' 1 ! SI TELO�ATION7 --� i I I" .. i·• I ) i'�'' ,/ ) ... f I I • �) 2.12 0.34 I I I ,-• ,.,.... -J 71 UNITS/ACRE ENERGY CODE MODEL: GSF 56,099 SF 26,120SF 30,337 SF 30,337 SF 30,337 SF 28,481 SF 201,711 SF 56,099 SF 133,572 SF 12,040 SF / LEED FOR HOMES RATING SYSTEM· MULTIFAMILY MIO.RISE 4015 CSAH 25, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416 PROJECT PARTICIPANTS OWNER P�AY25,LLC 4915 W 35TH ST. #102 SAINTLOUIS PARK. MN 55416 952.925.3878 ARCHITECT OJR ARCHITECTURE, INC. 333 WASHINGTON AVENUE N SUITE#210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 CONTACT: Stleldon Berg (612)676-2719 (612)676-2796(fax) sb e�r-lnc.com CONTRACTOR DORAN COMPANIES 7803 GLENROY RD #200 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55439 952.288 .2000 CONTACT:AndyWells (952)288-2076(ofllce) (612)750-0871 (mobile) andy.wells@doraneompanias.com PROJECT PARTICIPANTS CML CIVIL SITE GROUP 4931 W 35TH ST SUITE 200 ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CONTACT: David Knaebla (783)234-7523(direct) (612)615-00SO{offlce) dknaable@civilsitagroup.com STRUCTURAL ERICKSEN ROED & ASSOCIATES 2550 UNIVERSITY AVE W ST PAUL,MN 55114 (651)251-7570 CONTACT: Matt Kahle (651)414-6147(dlrect) mkahla@araeng .com CONTACT: Tom Root (651)414-6143(direet) lroot@eraeng.com SHEET INDEX· GENERAL co.o C0.2 C1.0 C2.1 C3.1 cs.o SW1.0 SW1.2 L500 LS100 LS300 A110P A120P A1SOP A160P A201P AS100P I COVER SHEET SHEET INDEX· CML ALTASlSVB)' TITI.ESHEET REMOVALS PLAN ALLEY PLAN AND PROFILE GRADING PLAN-INTERIM SWPPP • EXISTING CONDITIONS SWPPP • NARRATIVE AND DETAILS SWPPP-NOTES SHEET INDEX· LANDSCAPE REFERENCE PLAN DETAILS· AMENITY DECK DETAILS -AMENITY DECK TREE PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT PLAN SITE LANDSCAPE Pl.AN SHEET INDEX· ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN • LEVEL· 1 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN • LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL ROOF PLAN PLANNING) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING SECTIONS ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN PROJECT PARTICIPANTS MECHANCIAU ELECTRICAL EMMANUELSON-POOAS, INC. 7705 BUSH LAKE ROAD, ED1NA,MN 55439 (952)930-0050 CONTACT: Jotln Noro&trom (952)540-4011(dlrect) Jnorditrom@epslc.com CONTACT:JustinArtz (952)540-4023(direct) jarlz@epiric .com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT CONFLUENCE 530 N 3ROST#120 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 (612)333-3702 CONTACT: Brad Aldrich (612)237-5046 baldricil@thlnkcoofluenoe.com PROJECT PARTICIPANTS INTERIORS BKVGROUP 222 NORTH 2ND STREET SUITE101 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 CONTACT: Serah Tracey (612)373-9532(dired) st racey@bkvgroup.com �o Zo -���eW�ong a::�r,....,�!!! wo :E_g 0 !::,i� 5�,� a::a�co <{ r Ul H� ;!H ·�i, �lljj hi; H')' i !! _,i i .§i i ! Ii. � �n;� l•i� I ca .�11n, m: �i .l§ i•tii!Lgeii �· ij, I ;1;J 1H.. �11 �.z hi� !"I i �.� i �!! �·i. ;I!� ,�.� 11.�.3� I I ;; ;; !j GOOOP City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Page 14 EXTENT OF '-==----UNOERGROUND t-PARKING GARAGE --I I I I I I I I I _________ _J 14PARKING SPACES ---------1 I I L. D D D D D Commercial 2 9,376 SF 9,785GSF -------->j<--- fJ TRENCH DRAIN LINE OF PARKING '---1_ DOG I RUN� DOGPARK : L __ - GARAGE BELOW-�-� I �-L---GARAGE ACCESS RAMP Lobby 3,058 SF El ACCESS ALLEY D n 1BR 484SF D 1BR 486 SF 1BR i;:;i 524SF Commercial 2,098SF 2.237GSF A 1 ���� �':."-LEVEL 1 65'-8112" METAL TRELLIS see LANDSCAPE DWGS '--W--'1--------- (4) INVERTED USTYLE BIKE PARKING I I I ;; ;; !! j A110P City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Page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x *5((1522)6(;7(16,9(*5((1522)$5($6,17+($0(1,7<'(&.$5($ 6)3/$17(' $5($6:,//,1&/8'(60$//75((6+58%$1'3(5(11,$/3/$17,1*67+(5(,6$127+(5 6) 2)3/$17,1*$5($2876,'(2)7+($0(1,7<'(&.7+$7,6$/6229(56758&785($1':,// %($87,)<7+(3$5.,1*/27 x 3/$17(566($621$/3/$17,1*6:,//$&&(17(175,(6$1'3529,'()2&$/32,176,17+( /$1'6&$3(&855(17/<7+(5($5(/$5*(3/$17(56352326(')257+((;7(5,252)7+( %8,/',1*$1'3/$17(56352326(',16,'(7+($0(1,7<'(&. x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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Page 16 BUILDING MATERIA L BY ELEVATION Elevation Malerlal Class A Brick Class 1 Stone Class 1 Stucco Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 B Stooe Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class 2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 C Stone Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class 2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 D Stooe Class 1 Stucco Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class 2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 E Stooe Class 1 Brick Class 1 Stucco Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class 2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 F Brick Class 1 Stone Class 1 Stucco Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class2 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 G Stucco Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class2 Tota1Clau1 Total Class 2 H Stucco Class 1 Brick Class 1 Glass Class 1 Metal Class 1 Total Class 1 Total Class 2 Grand Total Class1 Class 2 o Building Material By Elevation 12"= 1'-0" 8 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION C-CS AH 25 3/32"= 1'-0" % 3.4% 19.5% 12.4% 37.3% 27.4% n.6% 27.4% 15.7% 47.1% 37.2% 62.8% 37.2% 25.8% 47.6% 26.6% 73.4% 26.6% 23.8% 9.5% 37.4% 29.3% 70.7% 29.3% 3.1% 12.7% 23.6% 31.9% 28.7% 71.0% 29.0% 10.2% 1.9% 18.1% 40.3% 29.5% 70.5% 29.5% 41.8% 44.0% 14.2% 85.8% 14.2% 13.5% 24.4% 30.5% 31.6% 68.4% 31.6% 71.9% 38.1% C B A->\G F-> -H _j E PREFINISHED METAL PARAPET PREFINISHED METAL WRAPPED COLUMNS--------METAL PANEL 1 --------- METAL PANEL2 --------- ALUMINUM 8ALCONIES WITHGLASSRAlLINGS ------- D y PREFINISHED METAL PARAPET PREFINISHED METAL PARAPETCAP --����----------+--+--- (ze) STONE VENEER T ALUMINIUM STOREFRONT -----;:t��--t:Jl=l=t:t..1-..L....L..J.J I-+-+-+-+-++-+, 1--+-+-+-+-+--i--iH .--.---+-+-+--i--i--, :H--t--tHHt-i,,,,t-, CONCRETE COLUMN ------� CAST STONE CAP CAST STONE VENEER AT LANDSCAPE WAI.LS _______ _/ 8 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION C • 5TH FLOOR 3132· = 1'..()ft r r r ALUMINIUM BALCONIES WITH GLASS RAILING ===t=--CONCRETECOLUMN ---\��---$ PREFINISHED METAL CANOPY JOISTB��I�-$ __METAL PANEL 1 ___ ______IBU���M;.----$ FIBERGLASS PATIO DOOR AND SIDELITES PAVERS OVER SHIM SPACER WITH SLOPED INSULATION TO ROOF DRAlt,I NOTE: METAL PANEL SPACING TO ALIGN WITH EDGE OF WINDOWS AND CENTER OVER MULLION, EXCEPT AT PATIO DOOR TYPE 2, SPACE EQUALLY BETWEEN MAX 3'-8" 8 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION B • 5TH FLOOR 3/32 ft = 1·-0· PREFINISHED METAL PARAPET y CAST STONE CAP ALL RETAINING WAI.LS, 8 EA ST EXTERIOR ELEVATION D-GLENHURST AVE 3132"= 1'-0" B WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION A 3132·= 1·-0· JOIST B�I��----$ TRU����:----$ �.OSLAB@�J� 8 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION· B 3/32"= 1'-0" BulldlngMllterials(ElevatlonaB,C) Stona VanNt(Mt lStud) 1.022SF Stone v,� r;,Nd Stud) 2,695 SF FlbefglassWll'lOOWS 3,298,SF FlbefglassPatloDoors 1,83SSF Metal Panel 5,801SF AlumlnlumStorafront 3,170SF JOIST B�I��----$- ---- -- - TRU���;:--$ ---- -- ---13�/.-$ ---- -- -126�8�-$ �J---$ �------ALUM STOREFRONT ALUMINUM RAIL WITHGL.ASS INFILL CAST STONE CAP �J----$ �o Ii. Zo � �n;-���e W�ong � 1·:t�a::�r, I ca ....,�!!! .� wo :E_g 0 !::,i� 11n,5�,� a::a�co m:<{ �i .l§ i•ti i!L geii �· ij,I ;1;J 1H.. �11 �.z hi� r Jl !"I i H� �.� ;!H ijh i i.pHJ �!I r, i; �·i. hmi, !I ;I!� ,�.� 11.�.3� � � m ;; ;; !! j A200P City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Title: Parkway 25 – PUD Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 Page 17 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Award Bid for Texas Avenue Reconstruction Project (4017-1101) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Park Construction Company the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $3,228,888.95 for the Texas Avenue Reconstruction- (Project No. 4017-1101). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to continue to implement our Pavement Management program and components of Connect the Park? SUMMARY: A total of five (5) bids were received for this project. Please see bid results below. CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT Park Construction Company $3,228,888.95 C.S. McCrossan Construction Inc.$3,257,739.45 Valley Paving Inc. $3,475,495.81 Shafer Contracting Co. Inc. $3,582,705.45 Thomas and Sons Construction Inc. $4,065,232.22 Engineers Estimate $3,582,113.00 A review of the bids indicates Park Construction Company submitted the lowest bid. Park Construction has successfully completed work in our City. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $3,228,888.95. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project was planned for and included in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2017. This project will be funded using a combination of Municipal State Aid, Utility Funds, and General Obligation Bonds. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Title: Bid Tabulation: Award Bid for Connect the Park Sidewalk Project (4017-2000) DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Bids were received on April 14, 2017 for the Texas Avenue Reconstruction Project. Texas Avenue is one of only 4 continuous north/south routes in the City and carries 8200 vehicles a day. Due to the designation of being an MSA road, it is eligible for state gas tax funds as long as the road is reconstructed to state aid standards. Texas Avenue Reconstruction The following items are included in the final design of Texas Avenue: •Two vehicle travel lanes •Directional on-street bike lanes •On-street parking bays •Additional lanes, as needed, at the intersections for turning movements •Reconstruction of sidewalk with grass boulevard •Bump outs at intersections for speed management •Digital speed display sign for speed management •ADA improvements at intersections and at signals •Stormwater management •Private utility replacement of 24 inch and 10 inch gas main. An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on March 23, 2017. In addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com. Email notification was provided to five minority associations and final printed plans were available for viewing at Dodge Data, Construct Connect, Minnesota Builders Exchange, and at City Hall. Sixty one (61) contractors/vendors purchased plan sets with five (5) Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) identifying themselves as subcontractors. Financial Consideration: Staff has analyzed the bids and determined that Park Construction Company is a qualified contractor that can complete this work during the 2017 construction season. Based on the low bid received, cost details are as follows: Estimate Low Bid Construction Cost $3,422,769.00 $3,228,888.95 Contingencies (10%) $342,276.90 $322,888.90 Engineering & Administration (25%) $855,692.25 $807,222.24 Total $4,620,738.15 $4,359,000.10 Construction Timeline: The private utility work by CenterPoint Energy is underway. City construction is anticipated to begin in early May and should be completed by November of 2017. Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Temporary Liquor License for the Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary Liquor License for the Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School for their Annual Meeting to be held on June 11, 2017, at the Sabes Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Road in St. Louis Park. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the application meet the requirements of City code? SUMMARY: The Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School has applied for a Temporary Liquor License for a 6:00 pm reception prior to their Annual Meeting to be held on Sunday, June 11, at the Sabes Jewish Community Center at 4330 Cedar Lake Road. The reception is to recognize and thank the donors to the school. The mission of HMJDS is to provide “a strong academic foundation in general and Jewish studies in an environment in which students feel positive about themselves and others.” The Police Department has completed the background investigation on the principals and has found no reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant has met all requirements for issuance of the license, and staff is recommending approval. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100.00 per day of the event. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant – City Clerk’s Office Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Approve Parking Agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC for Louisiana Oaks Park RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve a parking agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC (Louisiana Oaks Apartments) to lease 20 parking spaces to accommodate overnight guests of the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex provided a permit is displayed on the vehicle. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the City Council comfortable continuing this lease arrangement for another two years? SUMMARY: The City entered into a trial period in 2004. We have had an official lease agreement since 2014 to allow twenty (20) parking spaces in the south row of the south lot of Louisiana Oaks Park for overnight guest parking of the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex. Guests would display a permit in their vehicle indicating they were from the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex. MSP Property Management sold the Louisiana Oaks apartments to Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC. Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC is asking that the lease arrangement be extended for two more years. Sidal will print and distribute the vehicle parking permits. Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC will pay the city $100 per space per year for twenty (20) spaces. In addition, they will plow the parking spaces in the winter and will reimburse the city for any damages to the parking lot resulting from its use by Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC and its authorized users. Staff has not had any concerns with this arrangement in the past and supports the two year lease continuation. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC will pay the City $100 per space per year to lease twenty (20) parking spaces. This funding will go into the Operations and Recreation park maintenance budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Parking Lot Lease Agreement Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant Reviewed by: Rick Beane, Park Superintendent Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager 1 175395v1 PARKING LOT LEASE AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 1st day of April, 2017, by and between SIDAL CROSSROADS COMPANY, LLC a Minnesota limited liability company (“Sidal Crossroads”), located at 6730 Walker Street, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55426, and the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) located at 3700 Monterey Drive, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416- 4902. WHEREAS, the City is the owner of Louisiana Oaks Park located at 3520 Louisiana Avenue South, St. Louis Park, which includes an area designated as the South Parking Lot; and WHEREAS, Sidal Crossroads is the owner of the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex located at 7201 Walker Street, St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, Sidal Crossroads is in need of additional overnight parking for guest parking; and WHEREAS, Sidal Crossroads will supply a permit that is to be displayed on rear view mirror of guest vehicles; and WHEREAS, for two years, the City has a limited number of parking spaces which can be made available to Sidal Crossroads for overnight parking only; and WHEREAS, the lease of these spaces to Sidal Crossroads will generate income for the City until such time as the parking spaces are needed for the operation of Louisiana Oaks Park. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Title: Approve Parking Agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC for Louisiana Oaks Park Page 2 2 175395v1 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1.Leases of Spaces. The City will lease to Sidal Crossroads, for the exclusive use of its tenants and other authorized users, twenty (20) parking spaces in the south row of the South Lot of Louisiana Oaks Park as shown on Exhibit “A” attached hereto at a rate of $100 per space per year. 2.Term. The lease shall be for a term of two (2) years commencing on April 1, 2017 and terminating on March 31, 2019, unless extended by written agreement of the parties. 3.Rent Amount. Sidal Crossroads will pay to the City annual rent of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000) for the twenty (20) parking spaces ($100 per parking space). The rent shall be paid on or before April 1, 2017 and April 1, 2018. 4.Permits Displayed. All cars parked in the twenty (20) parking spaces shall display a permit issued by Sidal Crossroads authorizing the use of the spaces. 5.Snow Plowing. Sidal Crossroads will plow the parking spaces and reimburse the City for any damages to the parking lot resulting from its use by Sidal Crossroads and its authorized users. 6.Indemnification. A.The City shall not be liable to Sidal Crossroads or its tenants, agents, employees, guests or invitees, using the parking lot for any loss or damage due to personal injury or property damage for any reason whatsoever. B.Sidal Crossroads shall be liable to the City for any loss or damage to the parking lot or its facilities occasioned by, or in connection with the use of the parking lot by Sidal Crossroads or its tenants, agents, employees, guests or invitees. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Title: Approve Parking Agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC for Louisiana Oaks Park Page 3 3 175395v1 C.Sidal Crossroads agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents or employees from any and all claims, demands, costs, damages, losses, actions, causes of action or judgments of whatever nature arising out of the use of the parking lot by Sidal Crossroads or its tenants, agents, employees, guests or invitees, including any and all claims for bodily injury or death or property loss or damage sustained as a result of the use of the parking lot. FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK: Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor (seal) Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Cynthia Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation SIDAL CROSSROADS COMPANY, LLC Bruce Rubinger, Owner City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Title: Approve Parking Agreement with Sidal Crossroads, Co., LLC for Louisiana Oaks Park Page 4 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Consent Agenda Item: 4f OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MARCH 15, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Person, Carl Robertson STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Jack Sullivan, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call Chair Peilen called the meeting to order. 2. Approval of Minutes of February 1, 2017 Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to approve the minutes of February 1, 2017. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 3. Public Hearings A. PLACE Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; Preliminary and Final PUD; Preliminary and Final Plat Location: 5605 W. 36th Street Applicant: PLACE E-generation One, LLC Case No: 17-04-CP, 17-05-S, 17-06-PUD, 17-07-VAR Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. Ms. Monson provided the development summary and site information. She said for the last 20 years the city has anticipated the site to redevelop and has actively purchased properties around the site for that redevelopment. The expectation is that it would redevelop into a transit oriented mixed use development. Ms. Monson spoke about the land use and transportation studies in the area which identify the site as future transit oriented development. Ms. Monson provided background on PLACE’s proposal which began with discussions in November, 2013. She reviewed the public process for PLACE which has occurred since that time. The applicant requests a change to the future land use designation of the site to MX Mixed Use to create a pedestrian scale mixed use building with retail service or other commercial uses on the ground floor, and residential or office uses on upper floors. Ms. Monson stated that MX Mixed Use is intended to facilitate a diversity of uses in certain areas of the community. She reviewed the goals and vision of the Mixed Use designation City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 in the Comprehensive Plan and the availability of infrastructure which staff uses to analyze requests. Ms. Monson spoke about the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) which has been completed. The comment period for the EAW ends on April 5, 2017. Ms. Monson discussed city improvements to be made to the transportation network related to SWLRT and the PLACE development. Ms. Monson provided staff analysis of the request for Preliminary and Final Plat which would combine nine properties in the northeast quadrant of Wooddale Ave. and W. 36th Street intersection. Ms. Monson discussed the PUD request, including the helical wind turbine to be located on the property. She discussed the robust mobility plan which includes a bike share and car share. She discussed parking, building materials, landscaping, sustainability and energy efficiency. Ms. Monson stated on Feb. 23, 2017 PLACE held its 8th neighborhood meeting with 60 people in attendance. Concerns included increased traffic, inadequate parking, density, hotel, number of affordable units and increase of neighborhood taxes. Support included the density near light rail, dedication to car-free living, building design, inclusion of affordable housing and the community offered by the project such as the woonerf and urban forest. Chris Velasco, applicant, PLACE E -generation One, stated that PLACE exists for the purpose of building healthy communities for all and specializes in creating communities that are for the arts and feature a high degree of sustainable design. He provided examples of live/work spaces in the project. Mr. Velasco spoke about Marriott’s interest in the proposed hotel. This would bundle housing and jobs together. He said three independent market studies completed for hotel at the site were positive. He spoke about PLACE and Marriott’s relationship with Park Nicollet Health Services. Patients and families could stay one-half mile from Park Nicollet clinics and the hospital. Mr. Velasco explained the sustainability features of the project. He discussed benefits of the development to the St. Louis Park community. Commissioner Carper asked how residents would commute until 2021 when SWLRT is projected to begin. Ms. Monson responded that the city is requiring the developer to offer a shuttle for the first three years or until SWLRT is complete. The hotel will also be providing a shuttle to and from the airport. Commissioner Carper and Ms. Monson discussed standards, height, pole, location, sound and code regarding the proposed helical turbine. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 3 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 Mr. Velasco provided dimensions for the proposed turbine. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, noted that code would allow a helical style turbine, however the ordinance contemplated a rotary style. The main modification being requested through PUD is to allow a rooftop mounted turbine rather than a ground mounted turbine. He said staff believes that would also reduce the overall height of the turbine that is required. Commissioner Rickert asked if apartments would be sound proofed for musicians. Mr. Velasco responded that is very difficult to do for apartment units. Four soundproof rooms will be built, however. Commissioner Rickert asked who would have access to the Urban Forest area. Mr. Velasco said anyone in the community would have access to the Urban Forest area, all year long. Commissioner Kanne asked what would happen if the hotel fails. Mr. Velasco responded he thinks the relationship PLACE has with Park Nicollet and Methodist Hospital would prevent that from happening. Their use of the hotel will assure high occupancy. He said the three feasibility studies done on a proposed hotel do not indicate failure. Commissioner Kanne spoke about the email sent by resident Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., which referenced the Schmidt Artist Lofts in St. Paul as a development community for artists. Commissioner Kanne said she understands one of the problems with that development is that artists are resisting rules and regulations. Mr. Velasco stated he has a great deal of experience in development for the arts and live/work units. He spoke about very specific rules called house privileges and commitments which are shared with applicants. Chair Peilen asked how traffic would proceed south on Wooddale Ave. Jack Sullivan, staff engineer reviewing PLACE, and staff liaison for SWLRT, said a small percentage of drivers will want to make a left turn. He said driver behavior and habits will transition over time for right turn movements at that location. Vehicle movements will use Hwy. 100 and Hwy. 7 access locations. He said he anticipates very little traffic heading to or from the Sorensen neighborhood. He added that the removal of the left turn out would have happened with or without the PLACE development. Chair Peilen said the number of required parking spots has been reduced but less car-use is an experiment. She asked if that doesn’t work is there a way to get more parking spaces. Ms. Monson said the developer has been required to provide a Proof of Parking document which shows they could provide another 55 parking spaces. There are also other opportunities where spaces could be leased in the neighborhood. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 4 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 Chair Peilen said two-thirds of the units are affordable housing. She asked if PLACE would have the budget to maintain the building with those lower rents. Mr. Velasco said developers must contribute heavily to capitalized operating and replacement reserves upfront and those are deemed sufficient for maintenance and improvements. Chair Peilen commented that her biggest concern is that so much of the project is predicated on light rail occurring. Commissioner Johnston-Madison read from Walker Parking consultant conclusion on page eight. She said she is concerned about the lag time between light rail operation and the time people start moving into PLACE. She said she is concerned during those three years there will be parking and traffic in the neighborhood. She said she’s concerned that this is an experiment. She asked about the Level of Service summary. Mr. Sullivan stated that the Level of Service designation is per intersection. Level of Service D or better is what the Council and Engineering department have historically used as acceptable. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the city needs to have developments that don’t perpetuate Level of Service D throughout this entire quadrant. She said the City Council has heard from many people that they are unhappy with this and it doesn’t seem the issue is being listened to. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about incentives for not driving. Mr. Velasco said the car-free perks include a $70/month stipend to not have a car. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about poor bus service prior to light rail. Mr. Velasco spoke about discussions held with Metro Transit about improved levels of bus service prior to light rail operation. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about a January 2016 neighborhood meeting where PLACE spoke about additional organic waste to be shipped in for the generator. She asked why this has been dropped from plans. Mr. Velasco said PLACE had been discussing working with the City’s organic program for this but there was a mis-match in sorting. He said it seems the best thing to do was to scale down the E-generation facility. Spent grain will also be provided by Steel Toe Brewery to bolster PLACE’s local collection. Commissioner Carper asked about shading. Mr. Walther responded that there are exceptions to shading when the shadow occurs within the PUD. On this site the northwest corner of 36th & Yosemite would be impacted. The west wall of the existing one-story commercial building would be impacted. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 5 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. Roger Onken, 3600 Wooddale Ave. S. #212, stated he loves the philosophy and design. He doesn’t like the height of the building. He said he thinks six stories for St. Louis Park is too high. Reducing the height would reduce the number of units and parking spaces. He doesn’t feel assured that enough people would choose to go car-free at the development, particularly with the delay of light rail. He said he doesn’t like the inadequate tree and shrub count. He said the employees and customers related to live/work units would require more parking. He said he is concerned about the impact of a hotel of that size on the neighborhood. He said he felt there is a lot of unknown with the proposal. He stated he is concerned about his building’s driveway exit to get on to Highway 7. There will be a better sense of the perfect scenario with light rail in 2021. He said he thought the turbine would be intrusive with the height of the building. He said he didn’t like the proposed setback on 36th and Wooddale. Sheila Asato, Monkey Bridge Arts, 6801 W. Lake St., said PLACE sounds ideal for studio space and light rail. She asked if units are rental or for sale. James McDonough, 2840 Cavell, a 42-year resident, said he is heavily involved in the arts in St. Louis Park. He said he is fully supportive of the project and understands creative visioning involves a risk. He said that is the way with all progress and development. Mr. McDonough said his hope is that PLACE’s rental apartment development will be his next destination. He said he encourages the Commission’s strong and full support for the project. Russell Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave S. #14, commented that as a creative he couldn’t be more excited about PLACE. He said it is exactly what St. Louis Park needs and it is the reason he was attracted to this community. He said he doesn’t think it is an experiment with the traffic. He said we live in a time where car-free desire is here, now. He stated members of his family would love to have living space which is car-free. Alonso Ramos, 3738 Dakota Ave. S., stated that he just bought his first house and is new in the neighborhood. He said he is concerned about decrease of property values related to affordable. He said the project minimizes winter and car concerns. He said he used to live in affordable housing in Minnesota. He spoke about problems and disrespect he experienced. He said he is concerned about security and safety with affordable housing with light rail. He said the Lake and Hiawatha rail station is scary. He spoke about a study which shows higher housing property crimes in areas with affordable housing. He said he isn’t opposed to the project but the location is the wrong location. Mr. Ramos distributed copies of his notes. Danielle Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #14, stated her background is public health and she works to better the health of families and communities to make the healthy choice the easy choice. She said is excited about walkability and sustainability which is why her family moved to St. Louis Park and she is in full support of the project. J.W. Starrett, 5825 Goodrich Ave. S., said his concern is traffic and parking. He said it is a very exciting project for the community. He said he feels like they’ve been backed into this. The expectations and innovation are good in the beginning. He said the expectations City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 6 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 have all moved backwards to a point where an adequate level is met for right now. He said he is excited about the future but we aren’t ready for 2021. He said he doesn’t think the traffic numbers are giving the right picture and he recommends that the Planning Commission conduct another traffic study. It will make a big difference as to why this works. Mr. Starrett said he has concerns about all the new rental units in the city which are at full occupancy which affects traffic and parking. He said Fair Housing will make sure everyone gets in and the management won’t be able to force everyone to be an artist or to follow the rules. He said the city needs to be realistic about the numbers and that we haven’t backed ourselves into a project. Chair Peilen acknowledged the receipt of an email dated March 14, 2017, from Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #5, expressing concerns about the project. Also received is a letter dated March 13, 2017, from Joel A. Hilgendorf, attorney representing Standal Properties, objecting to the request for variance to the shading requirement. Chair Peilen closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak. Chair Peilen stated that the city has very stringent rental regulations and she is assured that PLACE will be required to do background checks on all rental applicants. She said there is a very strong inspections and complaint process in the city as well as very strong rental housing laws. Mr. Walther said the live/work spaces for employee parking was factored in to studies. Peak times are studied as largest demand in parking studies. Peak time for live/work spaces is daytime. Peak time for hotel is around 9 p.m. Parking is not public; it is for commercial uses, for residents and for hotel guests on the site. Mr. Walther spoke about hotel experience in the city. The city’s parking requirement for hotels is recognized by staff as being high and is routinely reviewed for reductions. Hotel market professionals say .8 or 1 space per room is the going demand for parking for most of the hotel chains. The city’s requirement is 1.5 spaces which covered other mixed uses on a site. He said PLACE’s hotel is a limited service hotel and restaurant parking is calculated separately. Mr. Walther said all units are rental apartments and there are no for sale units included. Mr. Walther said if the turbine is located on the E-generation building it would be closer to the range of 64-66 ft. tall which is not out of line with the height of the buildings which are proposed for the project. Ms. Monson said the 10 feet which was mentioned as setback is the amount of land that PLACE is dedicating to the city for right-of-way, it’s not the setback from the curb line. The setback on Wooddale is 15 feet and on 36th Street the setback is significantly more than 26 feet. Ms. Monson stated the way the PUD is written all live/work type 1 cannot have any outside employees working there. The maximum number of employees for live/work type 2 is two. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 7 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about car sharing. Ms. Monson said PLACE is looking at using HourCar. If for some reason there isn’t a company offering those services the developer could purchase ten cars and those could serve as car shares for the development. Ten parking spaces have been included in the requirements. Mr. Walther reviewed the Environmental Action Worksheet (EAW) process and timeline. Commissioner Carper asked for heights of the area residential developments. Ms. Monson said the proposed Elmwood development on the east side of 36th Street is 77 feet tall (6 stories). Hoigaard Village to the north is approximately 67 ft tall (5 stories). Tower Light directly south is 5 stories tall. Buildings kitty corner to PLACE are approximately 3 ½ stories tall. Ms. Monson commented that the city did a streetscape plan in 2006 looking at landscaping and setbacks on 36th St. as well as building setbacks and how the road would function with the lane width. The dedication required on 36th St. is being required to meet that plan. Chair Peilen said the project is so bold and progressive but her biggest concern are challenges if light rail doesn’t happen. The success of project seems completely linked to light rail. Mr. Velasco replied that PLACE has been working closely with SWLRT and they have said they are moving forward and have given no indication PLACE has anything to worry about in that regard. He added that if something should go wrong and there is no light rail, a good transit oriented development can still be done. He said the nature of car ownership and mobility is changing dramatically and PLACE will be able to take advantage of new technologies coming. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she has always liked the project and thinks it’s a great experiment. But all the numbers that make the project work on paper are right up to the edge on everything. She said she likes the north side of the project. But there are too many questions about hotel and wind turbine. She said she doesn’t think the project is ready. She said we can’t afford as a city to approve a project when the viability relates to unanswered questions. She said she can’t recommend approval for the plat and PUD. Commissioner Carper said he was concerned prior to the meeting but his issues have been satisfactorily cleared up. Regarding concern of concentration of affordable housing, he said developers have been encouraged to provide affordable housing through TIF. He commented that affordable housing is scarce in the city. He said he is uncomfortable with a turbine so enormous in the area but there are other existing large structures within the city. Regarding light rail, he said PLACE could be delayed three years at great expense and three years of an innovative project will have been lost. He said all developments come with a risk. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 4f) Page 8 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017 Commissioner Kanne said her biggest worry has always been about traffic. She lives in the Elmwood neighborhood and has children who ride bikes in the area. She said she has watched all the new development happen in Elmwood and said the intersection is a nightmare. She added that she is proud to live in a city that would bring such a project to the city and she is in total support of it. Commissioner Tatalovich made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from OFC –Office, BP – Business Park, RRR – Railroad, and Right-of-way to MX – Mixed Use. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Chair Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed). Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development subject to conditions. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston- Madison opposed). Mr. Walther discussed the process and schedule for EAW comments and consideration by City Council. 4. Other Business: None 5. Communications Commissioner Carper asked if the turbine issue might come up for a zoning ordinance amendment. Mr. Walther said the PLACE PUD ordinance would create the rules for that site to allow that particular use. But it does open up a larger policy question for other sites in the community. He suggested that might be discussed in the upcoming revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Walther spoke about upcoming events including Town Hall for Vision 3.0, Facebook Live for Vision 3.0, and the State of the City. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district). (The EDA will have considered establishment of the Wooddale Station TIF District earlier in the evening.) POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the establishment of the Wooddale Station TIF District to facilitate the construction of a major mixed use redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave.? SUMMARY: PLACE’s application for Tax Increment Financing assistance in connection with its proposed redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. has been extensively reviewed at multiple study sessions, EDA and City Council meetings where it received consensus support. Constructing the PLACE project is not financially feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. At its March 20th meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 1st for consideration of the proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment TIF District. It is now time to take the final step in the TIF process which is to formally authorize the creation of the Redevelopment TIF district. Such authorization enables the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the completed PLACE redevelopment as partial reimbursement for certain qualified redevelopment costs incurred in connection with the construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Creating the TIF district provides the funding vehicle to reimburse PLACE for a portion of its qualified project costs. The actual terms and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC which is also scheduled for consideration on May 1st. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Resolution TIF Plan Overview Wooddale Station TIF Plan Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 2 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, is proposing to redevelop a 5.2 site (net of easements and rights-of- way) located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. The site is divided by the CP RR line and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and located in the Elmwood Neighborhood. Location of PLACE redevelopment at Wooddale Station CURRENT PROPOSAL: PLACE proposes to acquire the subject nine properties from the EDA and City, raze two structurally substandard buildings, and construct a major mixed-use, mixed- income, transit-oriented, environmentally sustainable development. Current plans depict four buildings split on the north and south sides of the future SWLRT Wooddale Station. On April 17 the City Council approved an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the project along with the first reading of a PUD ordinance. The proposed PLACE project consists of the following components: •2 apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units between them (of which 200 would be affordable and 99 would be market-rate) including 99 mixed-income live/work units. •110-room hotel •10,200 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility §Approximately 16,200 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial/retail space for a café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses §4,000 SF small business co-working hub §Woonerf (Placemaking Plaza) •447 parking spaces (structured, surface, and street) •510,778 SF. of total program space •1 AC “urban forest” with children’s play area and public art City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 3 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District The entire project is being designed to achieve LEED Silver or Gold certification. Developer’s Request for Public Financing Assistance The Total Development Cost (TDC) to construct the proposed PLACE redevelopment is approximately $123 million. There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site. These include: environmental investigation and reporting, asbestos abatement, building demolition, contaminated soil removal and disposal, site preparation, underground stormwater retention, circulation enhancements and structured parking. Altogether, these costs exceed $9.5 million and prevent the PLACE project from achieving financial feasibility. Consequently PLACE applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these costs. Tax increment financing uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain qualified development costs incurred by that project for a limited period of time. Level and Type of Financial Assistance PLACE’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to each component of the PLACE project were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the PLACE project proformas, Ehlers determined that the PLACE project is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $5.66 million in tax increment financing. The assistance would be provided in the form of a TIF Note and would be made available to exclusively reimburse PLACE for a portion of the extraordinary site preparation costs cited above. Upon project completion, tax increment generated from the increased value of the subject property would be provided to PLACE on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the City's TIF Policy. Upon completion, the proposed project would generate the requested assistance in approximately 15 years. TIF Application Review The EDA/City Council reviewed PLACE’s TIF Application for the proposed PLACE project at the February 13th and April 3rd Study Sessions. Following discussion there was consensus support for favorably considering the Developer’s request for tax increment assistance. As a result, staff was directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment TIF District and to begin drafting a formal purchase and redevelopment contract with PLACE. TIF District Approvals At its March 20th meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 1, 2017 for consideration of the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. The EDA will consider the approval of the purchase and redevelopment contract that same evening. The Planning Commission reviewed the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing Plan on April 19th, as required by the MN TIF Act, and determined it was in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Synopsis of the Proposed Wooddale Station TIF District The subject site is located within the boundaries of the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which is the portion of the city where TIF districts may statutorily be established. Inclusion of the proposed project within a designated Redevelopment Project Area allows the EDA/City Council to establish a TIF district so as to enable the EDA to provide the proposed financial assistance to the PLACE project. The proposed Wooddale Station TIF District consists of the following nine parcels as shown in the attached TIF District Overview and Wooddale Station TIF Plan. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 4 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District • 5925 State Hwy No 7 • 5815 State Hwy No 7 • 5725 State Hwy No 7 • 3520 Yosemite Ave S • 3565 Wooddale Ave • 3548 Xenwood Ave S • 3575 Wooddale Ave • 5816 36th St W • 5814 36th St W Together, these parcels equal approximately 7 acres including adjacent rights of way. The proposed TIF district is further detailed in the attached TIF Plan. The 5925 Highway 7 property currently lies within the Elmwood TIF District. Therefore, the EDA will be asked to decertify the property from the Elmwood TIF District in order to include it in the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District. Attached is an Overview which summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District. Details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the attached Wooddale Station TIF District Plan. Both the Overview and TIF Plan were prepared by the EDA’s TIF consultant, Ehlers. In a general sense, TIF Plans may be viewed as enabling legislation. They establish the proposed TIF district’s classification, geographic boundaries, maximum duration, maximum budget authority for tax increment revenues and expenditures, fiscal disparities election as well as estimated impact on various taxing jurisdictions along with findings which statutorily qualify the district. The specific mutual obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the precise terms of the financial assistance are contained in the separate Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved in order for redevelopment projects involving tax increment to proceed. Qualifications of the Proposed TIF District Consulting firm LHB was retained to conduct a TIF district feasibility analysis to determine if the subject site qualified as a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, After inspecting and evaluating the subject properties and applying current statutory criteria, LHB made the following findings in its report entitled: Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District: [Highway 7 & Wooddale] Redevelopment TIF District, St. Louis Park, MN dated November 22, 2016): • The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 88.7 percent which exceeds the 70 percent requirement. • 100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which exceeds the 50 percent requirement. • The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District. Thus the proposed Wooddale Station TIF District met both the “Coverage Test” and the “Condition of Buildings Test” and thereby qualifies under Minnesota Statutes Section 479.174, Subdivision 10 as a redevelopment TIF district. Other findings for the qualification of the proposed TIF District are contained in Appendix G of the attached TIF Plan. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 5 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Duration of the Proposed TIF District Under the TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City of the first tax increment is expected to be 2020. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to terminate in 2045. The EDA and City have the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date. The City’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper are estimated to be satisfied in approximately 15 years. Once those obligations are satisfied, the City may terminate the District. TIF District Budget The TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to pay for certain qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District should they be necessary. It should be noted that the financing uses and project costs reflected within Subsection 2-10 (Uses of Funds) of the attached TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project budget. Fiscal Disparities Election within the Proposed TIF District The proposed redevelopment will contain commercial property therefore the proposed TIF District is subject to the fiscal disparities calculation. Consistent with the city’s TIF Policy and past practice, the Wooddale Station TIF District will contribute to fiscal disparities (as opposed to the tax base of the City making the contribution). Recommendation The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the proposed Wooddale Station TIF Plan in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven and staff; all of whom recommend approval of the resolution establishing the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. NEXT STEPS: The Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE which specifies the terms and amount of TIF assistance related to the PLACE project is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA on May 1st. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 6 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1; ESTABLISHING THE WOODDALE STATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals 1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") has heretofore established Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopted the Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the EDA and the City that the City adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") and establish the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Plans, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The EDA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused the Plans to be prepared. 1.03. The EDA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 283 having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Plans by the City Planning Commission on April 19, 2017, approval of the Plans by the EDA on May 1, 2017, and the holding of a public hearing by the Council upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. Certain written reports (the ''Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the Council and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports, including the redevelopment qualifications reports and planning documents, include data, information and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. 1.05 The City is not modifying the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1. Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Redevelopment Plan Modification 2.01. The Council approves the Redevelopment Plan Modification, and specifically finds that: (a) the land within the Project area would not be available for redevelopment without the City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 7 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District financial aid to be sought under the Redevelopment Plan; (b) the Redevelopment Plan, as modified, will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the Project by private enterprise; and (c) the Redevelopment Plan, as modified, conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 3.01. The Council hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment district" under Section 469.174, Subd. 10 of the Act. 3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan, that the TIF Plan conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise. 3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3.04. The EDA elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b of the Act, which means the fiscal disparities contribution will be taken from inside the District. Section 4. Public Purpose 4.01. The adoption of the Plans conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the City which is already built up, to provide diversified housing opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit A, the City believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the TIF Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not outweigh the primary public benefits. Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans 5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Economic Development Coordinator. 5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 8 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 5.03 The Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County ("Manager") is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the District, as described in the Plans, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the EDA is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the Manager in such form and content as the Manager may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution. 5.04. The Economic Development Coordinator is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Plans with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 4a of the Act. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 9 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. ___________ The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1.Finding that the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of 9 parcels and adjacent ROW, with plans to redevelop the area for housing and commercial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings in the District, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.) 2.Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, including costs associated with demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, and utilities; costs to finance the proposed improvements; and costs to include affordable housing, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the costs of demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, utility improvements and construction of affordable housing add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, the costs of site and public improvements and of the construction of affordable housing in the City have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. Although other projects could potentially be proposed, the City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope can be anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Page 10 Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a.The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0. b.If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $54,725,150. c.The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $13,561,004. d.Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $41,164,146 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance. 3.Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4.Finding that the TIF Plan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in diversified housing opportunities and increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Specifically, through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the EDA or City will increase the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City. Tax Increment Financing District Overview City of St. Louis Park Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. More detailed information on each of these topics can be found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan. Proposed action: Ø Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (District) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan). Ø Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 which includes the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District, which represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Ø Removal of a parcel from the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District for inclusion in the District. Type of TIF District: A redevelopment district Parcel Numbers: 16-117-21-31-007 9 16-117-21-31-000 2 16-117-21-34-004 1 16-117-21-34-006 9 16-117-21-34-002 4 16-117-21-31-0078 16-117-21-31-0071 * 16-117-21-34-0042 16-117-21-31-0076 ROW *This parcel is currently in the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District and will be removed for inclusion in the District. Proposed Development : The District is being created to facilitate the construction of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110-room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and an approximately 10,200 square foot greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. Please see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 11 Page 2 Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020. It is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. Estimated annual tax increment: Up to $1,374,529 Authorized uses:The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that may be expended: Land/Building Acquisition .................................................. $6,547,600 Site Improvements/Preparation ........................................... $2,830,000 Public Utilities .................................................................... $1,700,000 Other Qualifying Improvements ......................................... $3,502,336 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ....................................... $2,418,970 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL .............................................. $16,998,906 Interest ................................................................................ $9,609,765 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ........................................... $26,608,671 See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget authorization. Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note, and interfund loan for the land loan. Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified. Interfund Loan Requirement: The EDA will be approving an interfund loan to pay for administrative expenses not covered by the Developer, if any, and for the land loan to the Developer of $1,500,000 that will be incurred prior to receiving the first TIF dollars from the District. 4 Year Activity Rule (§ 469.176 Subd. 6) After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District: •Demolition •Rehabilitation •Renovation •Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and water) If the activity has not been started by approximately May 2021, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the commencement of a qualifying activity. 5 Year Rule (§ 469.1763 Subd. 3) Within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be expended or obligated to be expended. Any obligations in the District made after approximately May 2022, will not be eligible for repayment from tax increments. The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 12 Page 3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 13 Page 4 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 14 As of April 24, 2017 Draft for Public Hearing Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: May 1, 2017 Adopted: Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 15 Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 ........................................... 1-1 Foreword ............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District ....................... 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Foreword............................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority........................................ 2-1 Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview .............................. 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 2-2 Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District................................. 2-2 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ........... 2-4 Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 2-4 Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6 Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election.................................. 2-6 Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-8 Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions................. 2-8 Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ....................... 2-10 Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District................................ 2-11 Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-11 Subsection 2-19. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-13 Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-14 Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District ............................... 2-14 Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-14 Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-14 Subsection 2-27. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment................. 2-15 Subsection 2-28. Summary.............................................. 2-16 Appendix A Project Description ...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District ........................... B-1 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 16 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications..................................... G-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 17 Section 1 - Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. This modification represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 is recommended. It is available from the Economic Development Coordinator at the City of St. Louis Park. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Redevelopment Project No. 1. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 1-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 18 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Subsection 2-1. Foreword The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"), the City of St. Louis Park (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Redevelopment Project No. 1. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the EDA and City have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of nine parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and approximately 10,200 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The EDA has not entered into an agreement but anticipates entering into an agreement with PLACE E-Generation One LLC, a limited liability company. Development is likely to occur in late 2017 or early 2018. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District. Subsection 2-4. Redevelopment Plan Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - The EDA or City currently owns nine parcels of property within the District. The remaining property located within the District may be acquired by the EDA or City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the EDA or City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The EDA or City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 19 relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. The EDA or City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The EDA or City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District The EDA and City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, find that the District, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities, as defined in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tank facility: (i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons; (ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or (iii)have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently used; or (4) a qualifying disaster area, as defined in Subd. 10b. (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 20 (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. (d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements of paragraph (e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor; (2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority; (3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement of paragraph (e) and that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and (4) upon filing the request for certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part of a district, the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph (f). (e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. (f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a). In meeting the statutory criteria the EDA and City rely on the following facts and findings: • The District is a redevelopment district consisting nine parcels. • An inventory shows that parcels consisting of more than 70 percent of the area in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. • An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 50 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F). St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 21 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of M.S., Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the EDA or City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The EDA or City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2020, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2045, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The EDA or City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required date, including without limitation pursuant to M.S. 469.176, Subd. 1(b). Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2016 for taxes payable 2017. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2019) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. Change in tax exempt status of property; 2. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; 4. Change in the use of the property and classification; 5. Change in state law governing class rates; or 6. Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the EDA or City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2017, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2017. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Redevelopment Project No. 1, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The EDA and City request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2020. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-4 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 22 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $1,332,706 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) $84,410 Fiscal Disparities Contribution $146,425 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $1,101,871 Original Local Tax Rate 1.24745 Pay 2017 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $1,374,529 Percent Retained by the EDA 100% Tax capacity includes a 3% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in thischart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one isestimated to be $327,802. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the EDA shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found some building permits that have been issued in the past 18 months, but none that should increase the original tax capacity. The list of building permits issued within the District in the past 18 months is available in the office of the City Economic Development Coordinator. Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The EDA or City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a bond issue, pay-as-you-go note, and interfund loan. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the EDA or City to incur debt. The EDA or City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $24,189,701 Interest $2,418,970 TOTAL $26,608,671 The EDA or City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $16,998,906. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as- St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-5 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 23 you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to facilitate the development of approximately 200 affordable apartment units, 99 market rate apartment units, a 110 room hotel, approximately 16,200 square feet of commercial property, and approximately 10,200 square feet of a greenhouse/e-generation facility in the City. The EDA and City have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The EDA has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table. USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $6,547,600 Site Improvements/Preparation $2,830,000 Utilities $1,700,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $3,502,336 Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$2,418,970 PROJECT COST TOTAL $16,998,906 Interest $9,609,765 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $26,608,671 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Subsection 2-11. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, the EDA or City may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (within the District) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: (1) The original net tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-6 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 24 disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. (2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. The EDA will choose to calculate fiscal disparities by clause b. According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3: (c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in paragraph (b). Subsection 2-12. Business Subsidies The EDA and City will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as amended (the “Business Subsidy Act”) to the extent required. Pursuant to Section 116J.993, Subd. 3 of the Business Subsidy Act, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7)Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-7 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 25 (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature; (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration; and (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The EDA expects that this development will qualify for an exemption under Section 116J.993, Subd. 3(17) of the Business Subsidy Act. Subsection 2-13. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1a, the county board may require the EDA or City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the EDA or City within forty-five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the EDA and City and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The EDA and City are aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. Subsection 2-14. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the EDA or City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-8 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 26 IMPACT ON TAX BASE 2016/Pay 2017 Total Net Tax Capacity Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Upon Completion Percent of CTC to Entity Total Hennepin County 1,573,060,731 1,101,871 0.0700% City of St. Louis Park 60,531,990 1,101,871 1.8203% St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 57,161,713 1,101,871 1.9276% IMPACT ON TAX RATES Pay 2017 Extension Rates Percent of Total CTC Potential Taxes Hennepin County 0.440870 35.34% 1,101,871 485,782 City of St. Louis Park 0.478610 38.37% 1,101,871 527,366 St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 0.217400 17.43% 1,101,871 239,547 Other 0.110570 8.86%1,101,871 121,834 Total 1.247450 100.00%1,374,529 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the actual Pay 2017 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2017 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2017 rates, assuming certification of the District is made before June 30, 2017. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b): (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $24,189,701; (2) Probable impact of the District on city provided services and ability to issue debt. A minor impact of the District on police protection is expected. The City does track all calls for service including property-type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. The City estimates an increase of 50 to 100 calls per year based on development population estimates. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The development will be incorporated into police district operations. The probable impact of the District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing buildings, which will be eliminated by the new development, have public safety concerns that will be ameliorated by the new development. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-9 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 27 sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute an estimated $2,485 in sanitary sewer (SAC) fees per unit and $750 in water (WAC) connection fees per WAC unit. The probable impact of any District general obligation tax increment bonds on the ability to issue debt for general fund purposes is expected to be minimal. It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $4,216,265; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $8,548,640; (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. Subsection 2-15. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 1 (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the EDA and City's findings: • Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study (2003) Subsection 2-16. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: 1. Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed under M.S., Section 469.177; 2. The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; 3. Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; 4. Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-10 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 28 5. Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 2-17. Modifications to the District In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); 2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; 3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; 4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the EDA or City; 5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or 6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the EDA or City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, must be documented in writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the EDA agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District. The EDA or City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 2-18. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the EDA or City, other than: 1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land; 2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; 3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; 4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-11 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 29 5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits of M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36 percent) of any increment distributed to the EDA or City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 2-19. Requirement of Qualified Activity Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February 1 of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The EDA or City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately May 2021 and report such actions to the County Auditor. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-12 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 30 Subsection 2-20. Use of Tax Increment The EDA or City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; 2. To finance, or otherwise pay the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082; 3. To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; 4. To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; 5. To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the EDA or City or for the benefit of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by a developer; 6. To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178; and 7. To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/or M.S., Sections 469.178. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by Hennepin County to the EDA for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The EDA or City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for EDA or City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 2-21. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined in M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shall be used only to do one or more of the following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. The EDA or City must spend or return the excess increments under paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the EDA or City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District. Subsection 2-22. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The EDA or City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Redevelopment Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-13 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 31 following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the EDA or City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The EDA or City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the EDA or City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the EDA or City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the EDA or City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 2-23. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the EDA or City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 2-24. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the Economic Development Coordinator. Subsection 2-25. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the EDA or City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-26. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, reliance has been placed upon written representation made by the developer to such effects and upon EDA and City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use of tax St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-14 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 32 increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. More detail as to the City’s and EDA’s “but-for” findings is included in Appendix G. Subsection 2-27. Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment 1. General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay the cost of redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project No. 1 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.090 to 469.1082. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of the District. 3. Five-Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments and Six-Year Rule. Tax increments derived from the District shall be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5. 4. Redevelopment District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the EDA or City, including the cost of preparation of the development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-28. Summary The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide diversified housing options in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone (651) 697-8500. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District 2-15 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 33 Appendix A Project Description PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, intends to acquire four properties at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and five properties at the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave., raze two structurally substandard buildings and replace them with a mixed-use, mixed income, transit oriented, and environmentally sustainable development. Project components include: two apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units (200 affordable and 99 market rate), a 110-room hotel, an approximately 10,200 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility, approximately 16,200 SF of commercial/retail space, and a one acre "urban forest". The City intends to issue a PAYGO TIF Note to offset qualified costs related to redevelopment of the site. Appendix A-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 34 Appendix B Map of Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the District Appendix B-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 35 ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Wooddale Station TIF District Redevelopment Project Area No 1 Parcels March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 0.45 0 0.450.225 Miles Proposed TIF District City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 36 3575 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0024 5618 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0041 5814 36th St W PID: 16-117-21-34-0042 3565 Wooddale Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-0069 3548 Xenwood Ave PID: 16-117-21-34-00765816357558143565 5925 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0071 5815 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0079 5725 State Hwy 7 PID: 16-117-21-31-0078 3520 Yosemite Ave PID: 16-117-21-31-0031 5925 5725 5815 3520 3548 36TH ST W HIGHWAY 7HAMILTON ST 37TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SWALKE R S T ´ Wooddale Station TIF District Legend Road Centerlines Parcels Proposed TIF District March 14, 2017 Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department 330 0 330165 FeetWo o d d a l e A v e City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 37 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed below. Parcel Numbers Address Owner 16-117-21-31-0079 5815 State Hwy No. 7 City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-31-0078 5725 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-31-0002 3520 Yosemite Ave S Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-31-0071*5925 State Hwy No. 7 St. Louis Park EDA 16-117-21-34-0041 5816 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0042 5814 36th St W City of St. Louis Park 16-117-21-34-0069 3565 Wooddale Ave Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-31-0076 3548 Xenwood Ave S Hennepin County HRA 16-117-21-34-0024 3575 Wooddale Ave City of St. Louis Park *This parcel is currently in the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District and will be removed for inclusion in the District prior to the establishment of the District. Appendix C-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 38 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 39 4/21/2017Base Value AssumptionsWoodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationASSUMPTIONS AND RATESDistrictType:RedevelopmentDistrict Name/Number:County District #:Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)0.00%First Year Construction or Inflation on Value2018Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)Existing District - Specify No. Years RemainingFirst $150,0001.50%Inflation Rate - Every Year:3.00%Over $150,0002.00%Interest Rate:4.00%Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/I)2.00%Present Value Date:1-Aug-19Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental)1.25%First Period Ending1-Feb-20Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)Tax Year District was Certified:Pay 2017First $115,000 0.75%Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: 2020 Over $115,000 0.25%Years of Tax Increment 26 Non-Homestead Residential (Non-H Res. 1 Unit)Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment2045First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]Inside(B)Over $500,0001.25%Incremental or Total Fiscal DisparitiesIncrementalHomestead Residential Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio32.6027% Pay 2017 First $500,0001.00%Fiscal Disparities Metro-Wide Tax Rate150.0490% Pay 2017 Over $500,0001.25%Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: 124.745% Pay 2017 Agricultural Non-Homestead1.00%Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.)124.745%Pay 2017 State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes) 45.8020% Pay 2017 Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)0.19126% Pay 2017 Building Total PercentageTax Year Property CurrentClassAfterLandMarket Market Of Value Used Original OriginalTaxOriginalAfterConversionMap # PIDOwner Address Market Value ValueValue for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap.11611721310079City of SLP 5815 Hwy 7115,2000 115,200100% 115,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- Exempt- 11611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00027% 669,060 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental8,36311611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00063% 1,561,140 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental11,70911611721310078SLP EDA5725 Hwy 7 2,477,0001,000 2,478,00010% 247,800 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,206 11611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50027%11,745 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental147 11611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50063%27,405 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental20611611721310002HC HRA3520 Yosemite43,500043,50010%4,350 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.65 11611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00070% 1,232,700 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental15,40911611721310071SLP EDA5925 Hwy 7 1,761,0000 1,761,00030% 528,300 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.9,816 21611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00041% 142,680 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,78431611721340041City of SLP 5816 36th St W 348,0000 348,00059% 205,320 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,54031611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50041% 140,835 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental1,76031611721340042City of SLP 5814 36th St W 343,5000 343,50059% 202,665 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental1,52031611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental2,95031611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental2,65531611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00020% 236,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.3,970 4a1611721340069 HC HRA3565 Wooddale 1,128,000 52,000 1,180,00030% 354,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.6,330 4b1611721310076HC HRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90041%35,629 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental445 31611721310076HC HRA3548 Xenwood Ave 86,900086,90059%51,271 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental3853ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40015%48,960 Pay 2017 Exempt- Rental612 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40022%71,808 Pay 2017 Exempt- Aff. Rental5393ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40013%42,432 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.636 3ROWCity of SLP ROW326,4000 326,40050% 163,200 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,514 4b1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50060% 250,500 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.4,260 4a1611721340024City of SLP3575 Wooddale417,5000 417,50040% 167,000 Pay 2017 Exempt- C/I Pref.2,590 4b19,408,100 211,000 19,619,1007,100,000084,410Note:1. Base values provided by City Assessor on 3-17-17.Area/ PhaseTax Rates1098 BASE VALUE INFORMATION (Original Tax Capacity)245673Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 40 4/21/2017Base Value Assumptions Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationEstimated Taxable Total Taxable PropertyPercentage Percentage Percentage Percentage First YearMarket Value Market Value TotalMarketTaxProject Project Tax Completed Completed Completed Completed Full TaxesArea/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Sq. Ft./UnitsValueClass Tax CapacityCapacity/Unit 2018201920202021 Payable1Apartments 180,000180,000 66 11,880,000 Rental148,5002,250 50%100%100%100%20211Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 152 24,320,000Aff. Rental 148,200975 50%100%100%100%20211Bike Shop 150150 2,484 372,600 C/I Pref.6,7023 50%100%100%100%20211 Maker Space 150150 2,724 408,600C/I8,1723 50%100%100%100%20212E-Gen2020 10,800 216,000 C/I Pref.3,5700 50%100%100%100%20213Apartments 180,000180,000 285,040,000 Rental63,0002,250 50%100%100%100%20213 Live/Work Apts 180,000180,000 5900,000 Rental11,2502,250 50%100%100%100%20213Live/Work Retail150150 1,250 187,500C/I3,7503 50%100%100%100%20213Aff Apartments 160,000160,000 487,680,000Aff. Rental 46,800975 50%100%100%100%20213 Co-Working 150150 3,986 597,900C/I11,9583 50%100%100%100%20214aHotel85,00085,000 110 9,350,000 C/I Pref. 186,2501,693 50%100%100%100%20214bCafé/Coffee Shop150150 5,817 872,550C/I17,4513 50%100%100%100%2021TOTAL61,825,150655,603Subtotal Residential299 49,820,000417,750Subtotal Commercial/Ind.27,171 12,005,150237,853Note:1. Market values are based upon discussion with Assessor on 1-31-17. The apartment values assume all units have access to the same amenities and features. Total Fiscal Local Local Fiscal State-wide MarketTax Disparities Tax PropertyDisparities PropertyValueTotal Taxes PerNew UseCapacityTax CapacityCapacityTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxesTaxes Sq. Ft./UnitApartments 148,5000148,500 185,2460022,722 207,968 3,151.03Aff Apartments 148,2000148,200 184,8720046,514 231,387 1,522.28Bike Shop 6,7022,1854,5175,6353,2793,07071312,6965.11Maker Space 8,1722,6645,5086,8713,9983,74378115,3935.65E-Gen 3,5701,1642,4063,0011,7461,6354136,7960.63Apartments 63,000063,000 78,589009,64088,229 3,151.03Live/Work Apts 11,250011,250 14,034001,72115,755 3,151.03Live/Work Retail 3,7501,2232,5273,1531,8351,7183597,0635.65Aff Apartments 46,800046,800 58,3810014,689 73,069 1,522.28Co-Working 11,9583,8998,05910,0545,8505,4771,14422,5245.65Hotel 186,250 60,723 125,527 156,589 91,114 85,30617,883 350,892 3,189.93Café/Coffee Shop17,4515,68911,762 14,6728,5377,9931,66932,8715.65TOTAL 655,603 77,547 578,056 721,097 116,358 108,941 118,247 1,064,643Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, fiscal disparities and other factorswhich cannot be predicted.Total Property Taxes1,064,643Current Market Value - Est.7,100,000less State-wide Taxes(108,941)New Market Value - Est.61,825,150less Fiscal Disp. Adj.(116,358) Difference54,725,150less Market Value Taxes(118,247)Present Value of Tax Increment13,561,004less Base Value Taxes(91,312) Difference41,164,146Annual Gross TIF 629,785Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:41,164,146 WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM TIF?MARKET VALUE BUT / FOR ANALYSISTAX CALCULATIONSPROJECT INFORMATION (Project Tax Capacity)Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 41 4/21/2017Tax Increment Cashflow Woodale Station - PLACE DevelopmentCity of St. Louis Park200 Affordable Apts; 99 Market Rate Apts; 110 Unit Hotel; 16,261 sf Commercial; 10,800 sf Greenhouse/E-GenerationTAX INCREMENT CASH FLOWProject Original Fiscal CapturedLocal Annual Semi-Annual State Admin.Semi-Annual Semi-Annual PERIOD% of TaxTax Disparities TaxTax Gross Tax Gross Tax AuditoratNet Tax Present ENDING Tax PaymentOTC Capacity Capacity Incremental CapacityRate Increment Increment 0.36%10% Increment Value Yrs. Year Date-- - - 02/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485)(13,413) 120,720 116,033 0.52020 08/01/20100% 327,802 (84,410) (27,562) 215,830 124.745% 269,237 134,618 (485)(13,413) 120,720 229,790 12020 02/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 490,668 1.52021 08/01/21100% 655,603 (84,410) (66,335) 504,858 124.745% 629,785 314,893 (1,134) (31,376) 282,383 746,431 22021 02/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454)292,083 1,005,792 2.52022 08/01/22100% 675,271 (84,410) (68,662) 522,200 124.745% 651,418 325,709 (1,173) (32,454) 292,083 1,260,068 32022 02/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,517,885 3.52023 08/01/23100% 695,529 (84,410) (71,058) 540,062 124.745% 673,700 336,850 (1,213) (33,564) 302,074 1,770,647 42023 02/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,026,894 4.52024 08/01/24100% 716,395 (84,410) (73,526) 558,459 124.745% 696,650 348,325 (1,254) (34,707) 312,364 2,278,117 52024 02/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,532,771 5.52025 08/01/25100% 737,887 (84,410) (76,068) 577,409 124.745% 720,289 360,144 (1,297) (35,885) 322,963 2,782,432 62025 02/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,035,471 6.52026 08/01/26100% 760,024 (84,410) (78,686) 596,927 124.745% 744,637 372,319 (1,340) (37,098) 333,880 3,283,550 7202602/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,534,954 7.52027 08/01/27100% 782,824 (84,410) (81,383) 617,031 124.745% 769,715 384,858 (1,385) (38,347) 345,125 3,781,430 82027 02/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,031,182 8.52028 08/01/28100% 806,309 (84,410) (84,161) 637,738 124.745% 795,546 397,773 (1,432) (39,634) 356,707 4,276,036 92028 02/01/29100% 830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,524,118 9.52029 08/01/29100%830,498 (84,410) (87,022) 659,066 124.745% 822,152 411,076 (1,480) (40,960) 368,637 4,767,335 102029 02/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,013,732 10.52030 08/01/30100% 855,413 (84,410) (89,969) 681,034 124.745% 849,556 424,778 (1,529) (42,325) 380,924 5,255,297 112030 02/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,499,994 11.52031 08/01/31100% 881,076 (84,410) (93,005) 703,661 124.745% 877,782 438,891 (1,580) (43,731) 393,580 5,739,893 122031 02/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 5,982,878 12.52032 08/01/32100% 907,508 (84,410) (96,131) 726,967 124.745% 906,855 453,427 (1,632) (45,180) 406,616 6,221,099 132032 02/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,462,360 13.52033 08/01/33100% 934,733 (84,410) (99,351) 750,972 124.745% 936,800 468,400 (1,686) (46,671) 420,042 6,698,891 142033 02/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208)433,872 6,938,419 14.52034 08/01/34100% 962,775 (84,410) (102,668) 775,697 124.745% 967,643 483,822 (1,742) (48,208) 433,872 7,173,251 152034 02/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,411,036 15.52035 08/01/35100% 991,658 (84,410) (106,085) 801,164 124.745% 999,412 499,706 (1,799) (49,791) 448,116 7,644,159 162035 02/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421) 462,788 7,880,194 16.52036 08/01/36100% 1,021,408 (84,410) (109,604) 827,395 124.745% 1,032,133 516,067 (1,858) (51,421) 462,788 8,111,601 172036 02/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,345,878 17.52037 08/01/37100% 1,052,050 (84,410) (113,228) 854,412 124.745% 1,065,837 532,918 (1,919) (53,100) 477,900 8,575,562 182037 02/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 8,808,077 18.52038 08/01/38100% 1,083,612 (84,410) (116,961) 882,241 124.745% 1,100,551 550,276 (1,981) (54,829) 493,465 9,036,032 192038 02/01/39100%1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,266,778 19.52039 08/01/39100% 1,116,120 (84,410) (120,806) 910,904 124.745% 1,136,307 568,154 (2,045) (56,611) 509,497 9,493,001 202039 02/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,721,975 20.52040 08/01/40100% 1,149,604 (84,410) (124,767) 940,427 124.745% 1,173,136 586,568 (2,112) (58,446) 526,011 9,946,460 212040 02/01/41100% 1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,173,660 21.5204108/01/41100% 1,184,092 (84,410) (128,846) 970,836 124.745% 1,211,069 605,535 (2,180) (60,335) 543,019 10,396,404 222041 02/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,621,827 22.52042 08/01/42100% 1,219,615 (84,410) (133,048) 1,002,157 124.745% 1,250,140 625,070 (2,250) (62,282) 560,538 10,842,829 232042 02/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,066,473 23.52043 08/01/43100% 1,256,203 (84,410) (137,376) 1,034,417 124.745% 1,290,384 645,192 (2,323) (64,287) 578,582 11,285,732 242043 02/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,507,596 24.52044 08/01/44100% 1,293,889 (84,410) (141,833) 1,067,646 124.745% 1,331,835 665,917 (2,397) (66,352) 597,168 11,725,111 252044 02/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 11,945,196 25.52045 08/01/45100% 1,332,706 (84,410) (146,425) 1,101,871 124.745% 1,374,529 687,265 (2,474) (68,479) 616,311 12,160,966 262045 02/01/46 Total24,277,098 (87,398) (2,418,970) 21,770,731 Present Value From 08/01/2019 Present Value Rate 4.00%13,561,004 (48,820) (1,351,218) 12,160,966 Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates OnlyN:\Minnsota\St. Louis Park\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\Wooddale Station TIF District\TIF Plan Run 3-27-17 - FinalCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 42 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development) A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's activity by April 1 of the following year. Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFForm.htm for information and forms. Appendix E-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 43 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District Appendix F-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 44 Report of Inspection Procedures and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a Redevelopment District Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District St. Louis Park, Minnesota November 22, 2016 Prepared For the City of St. Louis Park Prepared by: LHB, Inc. 701 Washington Avenue North, Suite 200 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 LHB Project No. 160699 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 45 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 11 Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................ 2 Purpose of Evaluation ................................................................................ 2 Scope of Work ........................................................................................... 2 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 3 PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS ....... 3 A.Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 3 B.Condition of Buildings Test ................................................................... 4 C.Distribution of Substandard Buildings ................................................... 5 PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED ......................................................................... 6 PART 4 – FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... 6 A.Coverage Test ...................................................................................... 6 B.Condition of Building Test ..................................................................... 7 1.Building Inspection .................................................................... 7 2.Replacement Cost ..................................................................... 7 3.Code Deficiencies ..................................................................... 8 4.System Condition Deficiencies .................................................. 8 C.Distribution of Substandard Structures ................................................. 9 PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS .................................................................................. 10 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 46 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 11 Final Report PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PURPOSE OF EVALUATION LHB was hired by the City of St. Louis Park to inspect and evaluate the properties within a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District (“TIF District”) proposed to be established by the City. The proposed TIF District is located at Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue (Diagram 1). The purpose of LHB’s work is to determine whether the proposed TIF District meets the statutory requirements for coverage, and whether two (2) buildings on nine (9) parcels and two (2) right of way parcels, located within the proposed TIF District, meet the qualifications required for a Redevelopment District. Diagram 1 – Proposed TIF District SCOPE OF WORK The proposed TIF District consists of nine (9) parcels and two (2) right of way parcels with two (2) buildings. Two (2) buildings were inspected on September 27, 2016 and October 14, 2016. Building code and Condition Deficiency Reports for the buildings that were inspected are located in Appendix B. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 47 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 3 of 11 Final Report CONCLUSION After inspecting and evaluating the properties within the proposed TIF District and applying current statutory criteria for a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, it is our professional opinion that the proposed TIF District qualifies as a Redevelopment District because: •The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 88.7 percent which is above the 70 percent requirement. •100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which is above the 50 percent requirement. •The substandard buildings are reasonably distributed. The remainder of this report describes our process and findings in detail. PART 2 – MINNESOTA STATUTE 469.174, SUBDIVISION 10 REQUIREMENTS The properties were inspected in accordance with the following requirements under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), which states: INTERIOR INSPECTION “The municipality may not make such determination [that the building is structurally substandard] without an interior inspection of the property...” EXTERIOR INSPECTION AND OTHER MEANS “An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard.” DOCUMENTATION “Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3(1).” QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10 (a) (1) requires three tests for occupied parcels: A.COVERAGE TEST …“parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or paved or gravel parking lots…” City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 48 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 4 of 11 Final Report The coverage required by the parcel to be considered occupied is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures.” B.CONDITION OF BUILDINGS TEST Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(a) states, “…and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;” 1.Structurally substandard is defined under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), which states: “For purposes of this subdivision, ‘structurally substandard’ shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.” a.We do not count energy code deficiencies toward the thresholds required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b) defined as “structurally substandard”, due to concerns expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. 2.Buildings are not eligible to be considered structurally substandard unless they meet certain additional criteria, as set forth in Subdivision 10(c) which states: “A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence.” “Items of evidence that support such a conclusion [that the building is not disqualified] include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.” LHB counts energy code deficiencies toward the 15 percent code threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c)) for the following reasons: •The Minnesota energy code is one of ten building code areas highlighted by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry website where minimum construction standards are required by law. •Chapter 13 of the 2015 Minnesota Building Code states, “Buildings shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the International Energy Conservation Code.” Furthermore, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1305.0021 Subpart 9 states, “References City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 49 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 5 of 11 Final Report to the International Energy Conservation Code in this code mean the Minnesota Energy Code…” •The Senior Building Code Representative for the Construction Codes and Licensing Division of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry confirmed that the Minnesota Energy Code is being enforced throughout the State of Minnesota. •In a January 2002 report to the Minnesota Legislature, the Management Analysis Division of the Minnesota Department of Administration confirmed that the construction cost of new buildings complying with the Minnesota Energy Code is higher than buildings built prior to the enactment of the code. •Proper TIF analysis requires a comparison between the replacement value of a new building built under current code standards with the repairs that would be necessary to bring the existing building up to current code standards. In order for an equal comparison to be made, all applicable code chapters should be applied to both scenarios. Since current construction estimating software automatically applies the construction cost of complying with the Minnesota Energy Code, energy code deficiencies should also be identified in the existing structures. C.DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10, defines a Redevelopment District and requires one or more of the following conditions, “reasonably distributed throughout the district.” (1)“Parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2)the property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities, or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3)tank facilities, or property whose immediately previous use was for tank facilities…” Our interpretation of the distribution requirement is that the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the district as compared to the location of all buildings in the district. For example, if all of the buildings in a district are located on one half of the area of the district, with the other half occupied by parking lots (meeting the required 70 percent coverage for the district), we would evaluate the distribution of the substandard buildings compared with only the half of the district where the buildings are located. If all of the buildings in a district are located evenly throughout the entire area of the district, the substandard buildings must be reasonably distributed throughout the entire area of the district. We believe this is consistent with the opinion expressed by the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals in the Walser Auto Sales, Inc. vs. City of Richfield case filed November 13, 2001. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 50 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 6 of 11 Final Report PART 3 – PROCEDURES FOLLOWED LHB inspected two (2) of the two (2) buildings during the day of September 27, 2016 and October 14, 2016. PART 4 – FINDINGS A.COVERAGE TEST 1. The total square foot area of the parcel in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 2.The total square foot area of buildings and site improvements on the parcels in the proposed TIF District was obtained from City records, GIS mapping and site verification. 3.The percentage of coverage for each parcel in the proposed TIF District was computed to determine if the 15 percent minimum requirement was met. The total square footage of parcels meeting the 15 percent requirement was divided into the total square footage of the entire district to determine if the 70 percent requirement was met. FINDING: The proposed TIF District met the coverage test under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(e), which resulted in parcels consisting of 88.7 percent of the area of the proposed TIF District being occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures (Diagram 2). This exceeds the 70 percent area coverage requirement for the proposed TIF District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision (a) (1). City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 51 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 7 of 11 Final Report Diagram 2 – Coverage Diagram Shaded area depicts a parcel more than 15 percent occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures B.CONDITION OF BUILDING TEST 1.BUILDING INSPECTION The first step in the evaluation process is the building inspection. After an initial walk- thru, the inspector makes a judgment whether or not a building “appears” to have enough defects or deficiencies of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. If it does, the inspector documents with notes and photographs code and non- code deficiencies in the building. 2.REPLACEMENT COST The second step in evaluating a building to determine if it is substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance is to determine its replacement cost. This is the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on site. Replacement costs were researched using R.S. Means Cost Works square foot models for 2016. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 52 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 8 of 11 Final Report A replacement cost was calculated by first establishing building use (office, retail, residential, etc.), building construction type (wood, concrete, masonry, etc.), and building size to obtain the appropriate median replacement cost, which factors in the costs of construction in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Replacement cost includes labor, materials, and the contractor’s overhead and profit. Replacement costs do not include architectural fees, legal fees or other “soft” costs not directly related to construction activities. Replacement cost for each building is tabulated in Appendix A. 3.CODE DEFICIENCIES The next step in evaluating a building is to determine what code deficiencies exist with respect to such building. Code deficiencies are those conditions for a building which are not in compliance with current building codes applicable to new buildings in the State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), specifically provides that a building cannot be considered structurally substandard if its code deficiencies are not at least 15 percent of the replacement cost of the building. As a result, it was necessary to determine the extent of code deficiencies for each building in the proposed TIF District. The evaluation was made by reviewing all available information with respect to such buildings contained in City Building Inspection records and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB utilizes the current Minnesota State Building Code as the official code for our evaluations. The Minnesota State Building Code is actually a series of provisional codes written specifically for Minnesota only requirements, adoption of several international codes, and amendments to the adopted international codes. After identifying the code deficiencies in each building, we used R.S. Means Cost Works 2016; Unit and Assembly Costs to determine the cost of correcting the identified deficiencies. We were then able to compare the correction costs with the replacement cost of each building to determine if the costs for correcting code deficiencies meet the required 15 percent threshold. FINDING: Two (2) out of two (2) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District contained code deficiencies exceeding the 15 percent threshold required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c). Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis reports for the buildings in the proposed TIF District can be found in Appendix B of this report. 4.SYSTEM CONDITION DEFICIENCIES If a building meets the minimum code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), then in order for such building to be “structurally substandard” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(b), the building’s defects or City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 53 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 9 of 11 Final Report deficiencies should be of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” Based on this definition, LHB re-evaluated each of the buildings that met the code deficiency threshold under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10(c), to determine if the total deficiencies warranted “substantial renovation or clearance” based on the criteria we outlined above. System condition deficiencies are a measurement of defects or substantial deterioration in site elements, structure, exterior envelope, mechanical and electrical components, fire protection and emergency systems, interior partitions, ceilings, floors and doors. The evaluation of system condition deficiencies was made by reviewing all available information contained in City records, and making interior and exterior inspections of the buildings. LHB only identified system condition deficiencies that were visible upon our inspection of the building or contained in City records. We did not consider the amount of “service life” used up for a particular component unless it was an obvious part of that component’s deficiencies. After identifying the system condition deficiencies in each building, we used our professional judgment to determine if the list of defects or deficiencies is of sufficient total significance to justify “substantial renovation or clearance.” FINDING: In our professional opinion, two (2) out of two (2) buildings (100 percent) in the proposed TIF District are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance, because of defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. This exceeds the 50 percent requirement of Subdivision 10a(1). C.DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES Much of this report has focused on the condition of individual buildings as they relate to requirements identified by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. It is also important to look at the distribution of substandard buildings throughout the geographic area of the proposed TIF District (Diagram 3). FINDING: The parcels with substandard buildings are reasonably distributed compared to all parcels that contain buildings. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 54 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 10 of 11 Final Report Diagram 3 – Substandard Buildings Shaded green area depicts parcels with buildings. Shaded orange area depicts substandard buildings. PART 5 - TEAM CREDENTIALS Michael A. Fischer, AIA, LEED AP - Project Principal/TIF Analyst Michael has 30 years of experience as project principal, project manager, project designer and project architect on planning, urban design, educational, commercial and governmental projects. He has become an expert on Tax Increment Finance District analysis assisting over 100 cities with strategic planning for TIF Districts. He is a Senior Vice President at LHB and currently leads the Minneapolis office. Michael completed a two-year Bush Fellowship, studying at MIT and Harvard in 1999, earning Masters degrees in City Planning and Real Estate Development from MIT. He has served on more than 50 committees, boards and community task forces, including a term as a City Council President and as Chair of a Metropolitan Planning Organization. Most recently, he served as Chair of the Edina, Minnesota planning commission. Michael has also managed and designed several award-winning City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 55 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 11 of 11 Final Report architectural projects, and was one of four architects in the Country to receive the AIA Young Architects Citation in 1997. Philip Waugh – Project Manager/TIF Analyst Philip is a project manager with 13 years of experience in historic preservation, building investigations, material research, and construction methods. He previously worked as a historic preservationist and also served as the preservation specialist at the St. Paul Heritage Preservation Commission. Currently, Phil sits on the Board of Directors for the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. His current responsibilities include project management of historic preservation projects, performing building condition surveys and analysis, TIF analysis, writing preservation specifications, historic design reviews, writing Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, preservation planning, and grant writing. Phil Fisher – Inspector For 35 years, Phil Fisher worked in the field of Building Operations in Minnesota including White Bear Lake Area Schools. At the University of Minnesota he earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology. He is a Certified Playground Safety Inspector, Certified Plant Engineer, and is trained in Minnesota Enterprise Real Properties (MERP) Facility Condition Assessment (FCA). His FCA training was recently applied to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Facilities Condition Assessment project involving over 2,000 buildings. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\160699 20161122 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF Report.docx APPENDICES APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet APPENDIX B Building Code and Condition Deficiencies Reports APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 56 APPENDIX A Property Condition Assessment Summary Sheet City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 57 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF DistrictSt. Louis Park, MinnesotaProperty Condition Assessment Summary SheetTIF Map No.PID # Property AddressImproved or VacantSurvey Method UsedSite Area(S.F.)Coverage Area of Improvements(S.F.)Coverage Percent of ImprovementsCoverageQuantity(S.F.)No. of BuildingsBuildingReplacementCost15% of Replacement CostBuilding Code DeficienciesNo. of Buildings Exceeding 15% CriteriaNo. of buildings determined substandardA1611721310071 5925 State Hwy No 7 Improved Exterior 97,84624,41825.0%97,8460B1611721310079 5815 State Hwy No 7 Improved Exterior 23,06010,49745.5%23,0600C1611721310078 5725 State Hwy No 7 Improved Interior/Exterior 77,41063,61682.2%77,4101$3,270,521 $490,578 $970,57511D1611721310002 3520 Yosemite Ave S Vacant Exterior 17,40000.0%00E1611721340069 3565 Wooddale Ave Improved Interior/Exterior28,19825,29489.7%28,1981$1,880,429 $282,064 $373,72911F1611721340024 3575 Wooddale Ave Improved Exterior 15,80314,99694.9%15,8030G1611721340041 5816 36th St W Improved Exterior 16,05316,053100.0%16,0530H1611721340042 5814 36th St W Improved Exterior 10,73510,735100.0%10,7350I1611721310076 3548 Xenwood Ave S Vacant Exterior 34,76400.0%00ROW 1NANAImproved Exterior 164,46955,88134.0%164,4690ROW 2NANAVacant Exterior 3,28600.0%00TOTALS489,024433,574 22288.7%100.0%O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Final Report\[160699 20161118 St Louis Park Hwy 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF Summary Spreadsheet.xlsx]Property Info100.0%Total Coverage Percent:Percent of buildings exceeding 15 percent code deficiency threshold: Percent of buildings determined substandard: Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF DistrictLHB Project Number 160699Page 1 of 1Property Condition Assessment Summary SheetCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing DistrictPage 58 APPENDIX B Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Reports City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 59 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Page 1 of 2 Building Report LHB Project No. 160699 Parcel C Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report November 18, 2016 Map No. & Building Name: Parcel C – Commercial Building Address and Parcel ID: 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road, St Louis Park, MN 55416 PID 16.117.21.31.0078 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): September 27, 2016 12:30 PM Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: -Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. -Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $3,270,521 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $970,575 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 29.68% Defects in Structural Elements 1.Lintels over doors and windows are rusting. Combination of Deficiencies 1.Essential Utilities and Facilities a.There is no ADA code required accessible route into the building. b.There is are ADA code required accessible restrooms. c. There is no water service to the building. d.Exterior glass doors require a 10-inch kick plate per code. e.Interior door hardware is not ADA code compliant. f.Thresholds do not meet ADA code compliance for height. 2.Light and Ventilation a.There is no electrical service to the building. b.There is no code required operable HVAC system. 3.Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a.There is no code required operable emergency lighting system in the building. b.There is no code required sprinkler system in the building. c. Damaged floor tile creates impediment to emergency egress. d.There is no code required emergency notification system within the building. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 60 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Page 2 of 2 Building Report LHB Project No. 160699 Parcel C 4.Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a.Interior walls are damaged. b. Interior flooring is damaged and/or removed. c.Interior ceiling tile system is damaged and or missing. d.There is graffiti present throughout the building. e.There is mold present throughout the building. f.Carpet has been removed in numerous places. g.Block walls need to be repaired and repainted. 5.Exterior Construction a.Exterior brick and block work is cracked indicative of differential settlement allowing for water intrusion. b.Exterior mortar joints are missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. c.Windows are damaged or missing allowing for water intrusion. d.The roof is leaking in numerous places. e.Caulking is missing allowing for water intrusion. Description of Code Deficiencies 1.An accessible route into and out of the building needs to be created to meet ADA code. 2.Accessible restrooms need to be installed to meet ADA code. 3.Water service needs to be provided per building code. 4.Electrical service needs to be provided per building code. 5.Exterior glass doors need to have ADA code approved 10-inch kick plates installed. 6.Thresholds need to meet ADA code for height. 7.Install ADA code required door hardware. 8.Lintels that are rusting need to be repaired and painted per building code. 9.An operable HVAC system needs to be installed per mechanical code. 10.An operable emergency lighting system is required per building code. 11.An operable emergency notification should be installed per fire code. 12.An operable sprinkler system should be installed per fire code. 13.Floor tile should be repaired/replaced to create an unimpeded route for emergency egress per code. 14.Exterior brick and concrete block should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 15.Mortar joints should be repaired to prevent water intrusion per building code. 16.Windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 17. Caulking should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 18.Roofing material should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. Overview of Deficiencies This warehouse building has been vacant for several years. Vandalism has occurred inside the building. Electrical services have been stripped along with mechanical service. There are no ADA code required restrooms present in the building. The sprinkler system has been made inoperable. Windows are damaged allowing for water intrusion. The roofing system is compromised allowing for water intrusion. Exterior block and brick work is in need of repair and pointing of the mortar joints. All interior finishes need to be repaired/replaced. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Building Reports\160699 5725 Hwy 7 Condition Report.doc City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 61 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Page 1 of 2 Building Report LHB Project No. 160699 Parcel E Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Building Code, Condition Deficiency and Context Analysis Report November 18, 2016 Map No. & Building Name: Parcel E – Commercial Building Address and Parcel ID: 3565 Wooddale Avenue South, St Louis Park, MN 55416 PID 16.117.21.34.0069 Inspection Date(s) & Time(s): October 14, 2016 10:00 am Inspection Type: Interior and Exterior Summary of Deficiencies: It is our professional opinion that this building is Substandard because: -Substantial renovation is required to correct Conditions found. -Building Code deficiencies total more than 15% of replacement cost, NOT including energy code deficiencies. Estimated Replacement Cost: $1,880,429 Estimated Cost to Correct Building Code Deficiencies: $373,729 Percentage of Replacement Cost for Building Code Deficiencies: 19.87% Defects in Structural Elements 1.Lintels over doors and windows are rusting. Combination of Deficiencies 1.Essential Utilities and Facilities a.There is no ADA code compliant route to the second floor. b. The stairs leading to the second floor are damaged and a OSHA code hazard. c.Thresholds do not meet the ADA code for height compliance. d.Door hardware is not ADA code compliant. e.Second floor restrooms are not ADA code compliant. 2.Light and Ventilation a.Electrical wiring is exposed. b.HVAC system does not meet current mechanical code. c. Second floor fuse box does not meet current electrical code. 3.Fire Protection/Adequate Egress a.Carpeting is damaged, creating an impediment to emergency egress. 4.Layout and Condition of Interior Partitions/Materials a.Interior walls are damaged with holes. b.Second floor interior ceiling tile is damaged/missing. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 62 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Page 2 of 2 Building Report LHB Project No. 160699 Parcel E 5. Exterior Construction a.Exterior concrete block and mortar joints are cracking/missing and allowing for water intrusion. b.Exterior caulking is missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. c.Windows are broken allowing for water intrusion. d.Second floor window frames are rotting allowing for water intrusion. e. Exterior surfaces need to be repainted. f.Fascia is missing and/or damaged allowing for water intrusion. g.Gutters are damaged and/or missing. h. Exterior doors and frames are rusting. i. Roofing is damaged and allowing for water intrusion. Description of Code Deficiencies 1.Lintels over doors and windows should be repainted to prevent rusting per building code. 2.An ADA code approved accessible route should be created to the second floor. 3. Stairs should be repaired to allow for an unimpeded emergency egress per fire code. 4.Thresholds should be modified to comply with ADA code. 5.Door hardware should be replaced with ADA code compliant hardware. 6.Second floor restrooms should be modified to meet ADA code compliance. 7.Electrical wiring should be concealed per electrical code. 8.HVAC system should be replaced to meet current mechanical code. 9.Fuse boxes should be removed/replaced with electrical code compliant devices. 10.Carpeting should be replaced to allow for a fire code required unimpeded route for emergency egress. 11.Exterior concrete block should be repaired/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 12.Mortar joints should be re-pointed to prevent water intrusion per building code. 13. Exterior caulking should be removed/replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 14.Broken windows should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 15.Second floor window frames should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 16.Missing fascia should be replaced to prevent water intrusion per building code. 17.Exterior doors and frames should be repaired/repainted to prevent water intrusion per building code. 18.Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code. Overview of Deficiencies This retail/warehouse building was constructed in 1947. It has a two-story portion that is not ADA accessible. The second-floor stairs are damaged and not in a safe condition for general use. The ceiling is missing on the second floor and the second-floor restrooms are not ADA compliant. The exterior of the building is predominantly block construction that is failing. There are numerous cracks in the block walls that are indicative of differential settlement. The HVAC system does not meet current mechanical code. The roofing material has been compromised as noted by the numerous water stains throughout the building. O:\16Proj\160699\400 Design\406 Reports\Building Reports\160699 3565 Wooddale Condition Report.doc City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 63 APPENDIX C Building Replacement Cost Reports Code Deficiency Cost Reports Photographs City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 64 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/4/2016 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale City of St Louis Park 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road , St Louis Park , Minnesota , 55416 Building Type: Warehouse with Brick Veneer / Reinforced Concrete Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):24 Floor Area (S.F.):30000 Labor Type:OPN Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2016 Quarter 2 Cost Per Square Foot:$109.03 Building Cost:$3,270,521.35 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 9.42% 9.84 295,322.30 A1010 Standard Foundations 1.46 43,791.80 0.97 29,221.54 0.49 14,570.26 A1030 Slab on Grade 6.23 187,024.20 6.23 187,024.20 A2010 Basement Excavation 0.19 5,750.40 0.19 5,750.40 A2020 Basement Walls 1.96 58,755.90 1.96 58,755.90 55.52% 58.03 1,740,840.48 B1010 Floor Construction 7.58 227,334.42 2.98 89,536.26 1.7 50,964.38 1.89 56,721.45 1 30,112.33 B1020 Roof Construction 15.31 459,247.80 15.31 459,247.80 Concrete I beam, precast, 18" x 36", 790 PLF, 25' span, 6.44 KLF superimposed load Cast‐in‐place concrete beam and slab, 7.5" slab, two way, 12" column, 25'x25' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 149 PSF total load Fireproofing, concrete, 1" thick, 8" steel column, 1 hour rating, 110 PLF Precast double T, lightweight, 2" topping, 80' span, 32" deep, 10' wide, 40 PSF superimposed load, 113 PSF total load Cast‐in‐place concrete column, 20", square, tied, minimum reinforcing, 500K load, 10'‐14' story height, 375 lbs/LF, 4000PSI Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. A Substructure Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 100K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 4' ‐ 6" square x 15" deep Slab on grade, 5" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 30,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Shell Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 65 B2010 Exterior Walls 23.74 712,204.65 23.74 712,204.65 B2020 Exterior Windows 4.17 125,156.64 4.17 125,156.64 B2030 Exterior Doors 1.33 39,798.28 0.21 6,319.98 0.28 8,293.48 0.84 25,184.82 B3010 Roof Coverings 5.56 166,835.36 1.68 50,523.90 2.93 87,826.50 0.66 19,887.56 0.29 8,597.40 B3020 Roof Openings 0.34 10,263.33 0.03 962.62 0.31 9,300.71 6.22% 6.52 195,059.90 C1010 Partitions 1.52 45,524.82 0.3 9,085.03 0.24 7,267.89 0.58 17,415.62 0.39 11,756.28 C1020 Interior Doors 0.15 4,359.48 0.09 2,555.15 0.06 1,804.33 C2010 Stair Construction 0.97 29,193.70 0.97 29,193.70 C3010 Wall Finishes 0.82 24,465.43 0.21 6,338.75 0.1 2,850.39 0.51 15,276.29 C3020 Floor Finishes 2.28 68,266.26 0.62 18,492.30 1.37 41,074.83 0.29 8,699.13 C3030 Ceiling Finishes 0.78 23,250.21 Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, maximum Vinyl, composition tile, maximum 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator C Interiors Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, no base,3 ‐5/8" @ 24" OC framing, same opposite face, no insulation Gypsum board, 1 face only, exterior sheathing, fire resistant, 5/8" Add for the following: taping and finishing Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8", birch, hollow core Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" Stairs, steel, grate type w/nosing & rails, 20 risers, with landing Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back‐up, 8" thick, perlite core fill, 3" XPS Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3' Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 10'‐0" opening Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐ 0" opening Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, electric operator, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, loosely laid, stone ballast Insulation, rigid, roof deck, extruded polystyrene, 40 PSI compressive strength, 4" thick, R20 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 66 0.78 23,250.21 21.95% 22.94 688,132.75 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures 0.51 15,445.75 0.19 5,829.89 0.04 1,318.56 0.11 3,289.85 0.11 3,243.80 0.06 1,763.65 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution 0.22 6,489.35 0.22 6,489.35 D2040 Rain Water Drainage 0.54 16,257.24 0.4 11,998.58 0.14 4,258.66 D3020 Heat Generating Systems 4.99 149,610.56 4.99 149,610.56 D3050 Terminal & Package Units 0.83 24,813.27 0.83 24,813.27 D4010 Sprinklers 3.96 118,856.70 3.96 118,856.70 D4020 Standpipes 2.32 69,483.60 0.49 14,679.90 1.83 54,803.70 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution 0.55 16,557.38 0.1 2,959.13 0.07 2,189.25 0.38 11,409.00 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring 6.3 189,088.65 2.62 78,696.00 0.15 4,475.25 0.16 4,927.50 0.06 1,874.70 2.49 74,669.85 0.81 24,445.35 D5030 Communications and Security 2.72 81,530.25 2.53 75,795.00 Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 100 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Wall switches, 1.0 per 1000 SF Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 2.4 watt per SF, 60 FC, 15 fixtures @ 32 watt per 1000 SF Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 5 per 1000 SF, .6 watts per SF Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 75.5 MBH input, 63 GPH Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 5" diam piping, for each additional foot add Warehouse ventilization with heat system 24,000 CFM Supply and Exhaust Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, offices, 3,000 SF, 9.50 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, grooved steel, black, sch 40 pipe, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, 1 floor Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, additional floors Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH Acoustic ceilings, 3/4"mineral fiber, 12" x 12" tile, concealed 2" bar & channel grid, suspended support D Services Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 18" x 15" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 67 0.19 5,735.25 1.72% 1.79 53,845.80 E1030 Vehicular Equipment 1.79 53,845.80 0.28 8,496.00 1.51 45,349.80 0%0 0 0%0 0 100% $99.12 $2,973,201.23 10.00% $9.91 $297,320.12 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $109.03 $3,270,521.35 User Fees Total Building Cost F Special Construction G Building Sitework SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit E Equipment & Furnishings Architectural equipment, dock boards, heavy duty, 5' x 5', aluminum, 5000 lb capacity Architectural equipment, dock levelers, hydraulic, 7' x 8', 10 ton capacity Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 68 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Commercial Property 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road, St Louis Park, MN 55416 - PID: 16.117.21.31.0078 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Access into and out of building 8.50$ SF 800 6,800.00$ Restrooms Create code required accessible restrooms 0.51$ Ea 30,000 15,300.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with ADA code 100.00$ Ea 15 1,500.00$ Glass doors Install 10-inch kick plates on glass entrance doors per ADA code 150.00$ Ea 6 900.00$ Door hardware Install ADA code required door hardware 250.00$ Ea 30 7,500.00$ Structural Elements Lintels Repair/replace lintels per building code 15.00$ LF 200 3,000.00$ Exiting Flooring Replace damaged VCT to create an unimpeded egress per code 0.29$ SF 30,000 8,700.00$ Fire Protection Sprinkler Install sprinkler system per building code 6.28$ SF 30,000 188,400.00$ Emergency lighting Install operable emergency lighting per building code 250.00$ Ea 25 6,250.00$ Emergency notification Install operable emergency notification system per fire code 2.72$ SF 30,000 81,600.00$ Exterior Construction Brick 4.15$ SF 30,000 124,500.00$ Block 0.25$ SF 30,000 7,500.00$ Caulking Replace caulking to prevent water intrusion per building code 3.75$ LF 1,500 5,625.00$ Repair/replace damaged brick per building code to prevent water intrusion Repair/replace damaged block per building code to prevent water intrusion Modify sidewalk to create an accessible route into and out of building Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 69 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Windows 4.17$ SF 30,000 125,100.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Remove existing roofing 0.95$ SF 30,000 28,500.00$ Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code 5.56$ SF 30,000 166,800.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical Replace HVAC system per mechanical code 5.82$ SF 30,000 174,600.00$ Plumbing Connect water service per building code 1,500.00$ Ea 1 1,500.00$ Electrical Install operable electrical service per electrical code 0.55$ SF 30,000 16,500.00$ Total Code Improvements 970,575.00$ Replace damaged windows to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 70 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Photos: Parcel C, 5725 Hwy 7 Service Road Page 1 of 12 P1090722.JPG P1090723.JPG P1090724.JPG P1090725.JPG P1090727.JPG P1090728.JPG P1090729.JPG P1090730.JPG P1090731.JPG P1090732.JPG P1090733.JPG P1090734.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 71 Page 2 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090735.JPG P1090736.JPG P1090737.JPG P1090738.JPG P1090739.JPG P1090740.JPG P1090741.JPG P1090742.JPG P1090743.JPG P1090744.JPG P1090745.JPG P1090746.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 72 Page 3 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090747.JPG P1090748.JPG P1090749.JPG P1090750.JPG P1090751.JPG P1090752.JPG P1090753.JPG P1090754.JPG P1090755.JPG P1090757.JPG P1090758.JPG P1090759.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 73 Page 4 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090760.JPG P1090761.JPG P1090762.JPG P1090763.JPG P1090764.JPG P1090765.JPG P1090767.JPG P1090768.JPG P1090769.JPG P1090770.JPG P1090771.JPG P1090772.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 74 Page 5 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090773.JPG P1090775.JPG P1090776.JPG P1090778.JPG P1090779.JPG P1090780.JPG P1090781.JPG P1090782.JPG P1090784.JPG P1090787.JPG P1090788.JPG P1090789.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 75 Page 6 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090790.JPG P1090791.JPG P1090792.JPG P1090793.JPG P1090794.JPG P1090795.JPG P1090797.JPG P1090798.JPG P1090799.JPG P1090800.JPG P1090801.JPG P1090802.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 76 Page 7 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090803.JPG P1090804.JPG P1090805.JPG P1090806.JPG P1090807.JPG P1090808.JPG P1090809.JPG P1090810.JPG P1090811.JPG P1090812.JPG P1090813.JPG P1090814.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 77 Page 8 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090815.JPG P1090816.JPG P1090817.JPG P1090818.JPG P1090819.JPG P1090820.JPG P1090821.JPG P1090822.JPG P1090823.JPG P1090824.JPG P1090825.JPG P1090826.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 78 Page 9 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090827.JPG P1090828.JPG P1090829.JPG P1090830.JPG P1090831.JPG P1090832.JPG P1090833.JPG P1090834.JPG P1090835.JPG P1090836.JPG P1090837.JPG P1090838.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 79 Page 10 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090839.JPG P1090840.JPG P1090841.JPG P1090842.JPG P1090843.JPG P1090844.JPG P1090845.JPG P1090846.JPG P1090847.JPG P1090848.JPG P1090849.JPG P1090850.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 80 Page 11 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090851.JPG P1090852.JPG P1090853.JPG P1090854.JPG P1090855.JPG P1090856.JPG P1090857.JPG P1090858.JPG P1090859.JPG P1090860.JPG P1090861.JPG P1090862.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 81 Page 12 of 12Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel C P1090863.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 82 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Replacement Cost Report Square Foot Cost Estimate Report Date:10/17/2016 SLP Hwy 7 and Wooddale Bldg B City of St Louis Park 3565 Wooddale St Louis Park , Minnesota 55416 Building Type: Warehouse with Brick Veneer / Reinforced Concrete Location:MINNEAPOLIS, MN Story Count:1 Story Height (L.F.):24 Floor Area (S.F.):17200 Labor Type:STD Basement Included:No Data Release:Year 2016 Quarter 2 Cost Per Square Foot:$109.34 Building Cost:$1,880,429.01 % of Total Cost Per S.F. Cost 10.82% 12.97 222,985.76 A1010 Standard Foundations 2.29 39,444.59 1.74 29,937.06 0.55 9,507.53 A1030 Slab on Grade 6.8 116,911.84 6.8 116,911.84 A2010 Basement Excavation 0.22 3,709.01 0.22 3,709.01 A2020 Basement Walls 3.66 62,920.32 3.66 62,920.32 61.18% 52.87 909,400.61 B1010 Floor Construction 10.59 182,187.18 5.6 96,319.43 2.78 47,814.47 2.21 38,053.28 B1020 Roof Construction 5.14 88,408.00 5.14 88,408.00 B2010 Exterior Walls 25.10 431,720.00 25.1 431,720.00 Strip footing, concrete, reinforced, load 11.1 KLF, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 12" deep x 24" wide Estimate Name: Costs are derived from a building model with basic components. Scope differences and market conditions can cause costs to vary significantly. A Substructure Spread footings, 3000 PSI concrete, load 100K, soil bearing capacity 6 KSF, 4' ‐ 6" square x 15" deep Slab on grade, 5" thick, non industrial, reinforced Excavate and fill, 30,000 SF, 4' deep, sand, gravel, or common earth, on site storage Foundation wall, CIP, 4' wall height, direct chute, .148 CY/LF, 7.2 PLF, 12" thick B Sh ell Cast‐in‐place concrete column, 20", square, tied, minimum reinforcing, 500K load, 10'‐14' story height, 375 lbs/LF, 4000PSI Concrete I beam, precast, 18" x 36", 790 PLF, 25' span, 6.44 KLF superimposed load Cast‐in‐place concrete beam and slab, 7.5" slab, two way, 12" column, 25'x25' bay, 40 PSF superimposed load, 149 PSF total load Wood roof, flat rafter, 2" x 12", 16" O.C. Brick wall, composite double wythe, standard face/CMU back‐up, 8" thick, perlite core fill, 3" XPS Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 83 B2020 Exterior Windows 3.50 60,200.00 3.5 60,200.00 B2030 Exterior Doors 1.4 24,020.08 0.23 3,888.13 0.29 4,921.30 0.88 15,210.65 B3010 Roof Coverings 6.51 112,012.97 1.79 30,768.22 3.07 52,830.49 1.15 19,774.66 0.5 8,639.60 B3020 Roof Openings 0.63 10,852.38 0.06 1,017.60 0.57 9,834.78 6.64% 7.96 136,880.19 C1010 Partitions 2.34 40,296.88 0.34 5,820.99 0.27 4,671.04 1.02 17,489.55 0.72 12,315.30 C1020 Interior Doors 0.15 2,646.00 0.09 1,572.36 0.06 1,073.64 C2010 Stair Construction 1.77 30,364.60 1.77 30,364.60 C3010 Wall Finishes 1.26 21,680.99 0.24 4,111.12 0.11 1,840.45 0.91 15,729.42 C3020 Floor Finishes 2.44 41,891.72 0.67 11,609.23 1.45 24,959.33 0.31 5,323.16 21.36% 25.60 440,214.36 D2010 Plumbing Fixtures 0.56 9,644.26 0.21 3,561.19 0.05 865.33 Door, aluminum & glass, with transom, narrow stile, double door, hardware, 6'‐0" x 10'‐0" opening Windows, aluminum, sliding, standard glass, 5' x 3' Gypsum board, 1 face only, exterior sheathing, fire resistant, 5/8" Door, steel 18 gauge, hollow metal, 1 door with frame, no label, 3'‐0" x 7'‐ 0" opening Door, steel 24 gauge, overhead, sectional, electric operator, 12'‐0" x 12'‐0" opening Roofing, single ply membrane, EPDM, 60 mils, loosely laid, stone ballast Insulation, rigid, roof deck, extruded polystyrene, 40 PSI compressive strength, 4" thick, R20 Roof edges, aluminum, duranodic, .050" thick, 6" face Gravel stop, aluminum, extruded, 4", mill finish, .050" thick Roof hatch, with curb, 1" fiberglass insulation, 2'‐6" x 3'‐0", galvanized steel, 165 lbs Smoke hatch, unlabeled, galvanized, 2'‐6" x 3', not incl hand winch operator C Interiors Concrete block (CMU) partition, light weight, hollow, 6" thick, no finish Metal partition, 5/8"fire rated gypsum board face, no base,3 ‐5/8" @ 24" OC framing, same opposite face, no insulation Water closet, vitreous china, bowl only with flush valve, wall hung Add for the following: taping and finishing Door, single leaf, wood frame, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8", birch, hollow core Door, single leaf, kd steel frame, hollow metal, commercial quality, flush, 3'‐0" x 7'‐0" x 1‐3/8" Stairs, steel, grate type w/nosing & rails, 20 risers, with landing 2 coats paint on masonry with block filler Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Painting, interior on plaster and drywall, walls & ceilings, roller work, primer & 2 coats Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, minimum Concrete topping, hardeners, metallic additive, maximum Vinyl, composition tile, maximum D Services Urinal, vitreous china, wall hung Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 84 0.12 2,098.27 0.12 2,025.47 0.06 1,094.00 D2020 Domestic Water Distribution 0.23 3,952.53 0.23 3,952.53 D2040 Rain Water Drainage 0.7 11,986.62 0.44 7,575.10 0.26 4,411.52 D3020 Heat Generating Systems 5.28 90,858.87 5.28 90,858.87 D3050 Terminal & Package Units 0.95 16,393.54 0.95 16,393.54 D4010 Sprinklers 4.44 76,296.62 4.44 76,296.62 D4020 Standpipes 2.56 43,946.46 0.54 9,278.08 2.02 34,668.38 D5010 Electrical Service/Distribution 1.01 17,365.88 0.19 3,190.13 0.14 2,362.50 0.69 11,813.25 D5020 Lighting and Branch Wiring 6.94 119,416.58 2.91 50,085.54 0.17 2,963.13 0.18 3,023.76 0.07 1,194.02 2.72 46,744.18 0.9 15,405.95 D5030 Communications and Security 2.93 50,353.00 2.73 46,965.46 0.2 3,387.54 0%0 0 E1090 Other Equipment 0 0 0%0 0 0%0 0 Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, additional floors Lavatory w/trim, wall hung, PE on CI, 18" x 15" Service sink w/trim, PE on CI,wall hung w/rim guard, 24" x 20" Water cooler, electric, wall hung, wheelchair type, 7.5 GPH Gas fired water heater, commercial, 100< F rise, 75.5 MBH input, 63 GPH Roof drain, DWV PVC, 5" diam, 10' high Roof drain, steel galv sch 40 threaded, 5" diam piping, for each additional foot add Warehouse ventilization with heat system 24,000 CFM Supply and Exhaust Rooftop, single zone, air conditioner, offices, 3,000 SF, 9.50 ton Wet pipe sprinkler systems, grooved steel, black, sch 40 pipe, ordinary hazard, 1 floor, 10,000 SF Wet standpipe risers, class III, steel, black, sch 40, 6" diam pipe, 1 floor E Equipment & Furnishings Overhead service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 200 A Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW wire, 200 A Switchgear installation, incl switchboard, panels & circuit breaker, 120/208 V, 1 phase, 400 A Receptacles incl plate, box, conduit, wire, 5 per 1000 SF, .6 watts per SF Wall switches, 1.0 per 1000 SF Miscellaneous power, to .5 watts Central air conditioning power, 3 watts Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 0.8 watt per SF, 20 FC, 5 fixtures @32 watt per 1000 SF Fluorescent fixtures recess mounted in ceiling, 2.4 watt per SF, 60 FC, 15 fixtures @ 32 watt per 1000 SF Communication and alarm systems, fire detection, addressable, 100 detectors, includes outlets, boxes, conduit and wire Fire alarm command center, addressable without voice, excl. wire & conduit F Special Construction G Building Sitework Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 3 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 85 100% $99.40 $1,709,480.92 10.00% $9.94 $170,948.09 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 0.00% $0.00 $0.00 $109.34 $1,880,429.01 Total Building Cost SubTotal Contractor Fees (General Conditions,Overhead,Profit) Architectural Fees User Fees Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 4 of 4 Replacement Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 86 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Code Deficiency Cost Report Commercial Property 3565 Wooddale Avenue South, St Louis Park, MN 55416 - PID: 16.117.21.34.0069 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Accessibility Items Elevator Install elevator to second floor to comply with ADA code 85,000.00$ Ea 1 85,000.00$ Thresholds Modify thresholds to comply with ADA code 150.00$ Ea 4 600.00$ Door Hardware Install ADA code compliant hardware 250.00$ Ea 12 3,000.00$ Restrooms Modify second floor restrooms to comply with ADA code 10,000.00$ Ea 2 20,000.00$ Structural Elements Lintels Repaint lintels to prevent rusting per building code 10.00$ LF 100 1,000.00$ Exiting Stairs 75.00$ Ea 15 1,125.00$ Carpet 3.51$ SF 2,000 7,020.00$ Fire Protection -$ -$ Exterior Construction Mortar Joints Re-point mortar joints per building code to prevent water intrusion 2.00$ SF 15,000 30,000.00$ Block 0.25$ SF 15,000 3,750.00$ Caulking 2.75$ LF 1,000 2,750.00$ Windows 3.50$ SF 2,500 8,750.00$ 350.00$ Ea 1 350.00$ Fascia 10.00$ LF 50 500.00$ Replace missing fascia to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace stair treads to allow for unimpeded emergency egress per code Replace carpet to allow for an unimpeded emergency egress per code Repair/replace damaged block per building code to prevent water intrusion Replace caulking to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace damaged windows to prevent water intrusion per building code Replace broken window to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 1 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 87 Code Related Cost Items Unit Cost Units Unit Quantity Total Doors 350.00$ EA 4 1,400.00$ Roof Construction Roofing Remove existing roofing 0.90$ SF 15,200 13,680.00$ Replace roofing to prevent water intrusion per building code 6.51$ SF 15,200 98,952.00$ Mechanical- Electrical Mechanical Replace HVAC system per mechanical code 6.26$ SF 15,200 95,152.00$ Electrical Conceal exposed wiring per electrical code 50.00$ Ea 4 200.00$ Replace fuse box with code approved device 500.00$ Ea 1 500.00$ Total Code Improvements 373,729.00$ Repair/re-paint exterior doors to prevent water intrusion per building code Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Page 2 of 2 Code Deficiency Cost Report Parcel E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 88 Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District Photos: Parcel E, 3565 Wooddale Avenue Page 1 of 10 P1090864.JPG P1090866.JPG P1090867.JPG P1090868.JPG P1090869.JPG P1090870.JPG P1090871.JPG P1090872.JPG P1090873.JPG P1090874.JPG P1090875.JPG P1090877.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 89 Page 2 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090878.JPG P1090879.JPG P1090880.JPG P1090881.JPG P1090882.JPG P1090883.JPG P1090884.JPG P1090885.JPG P1090886.JPG P1090887.JPG P1090888.JPG P1090889.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 90 Page 3 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090892.JPG P1090893.JPG P1090894.JPG P1090895.JPG P1090897.JPG P1090898.JPG P1090899.JPG P1090900.JPG P1090901.JPG P1090902.JPG P1090903.JPG P1090904.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 91 Page 4 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090905.JPG P1090906.JPG P1090907.JPG P1090908.JPG P1090909.JPG P1090910.JPG P1090911.JPG P1090912.JPG P1090913.JPG P1090914.JPG P1090915.JPG P1090916.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 92 Page 5 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090917.JPG P1090918.JPG P1090919.JPG P1090920.JPG P1090921.JPG P1090922.JPG P1090923.JPG P1090924.JPG P1090925.JPG P1090926.JPG P1090927.JPG P1090928.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 93 Page 6 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090929.JPG P1090930.JPG P1090931.JPG P1090932.JPG P1090933.JPG P1090934.JPG P1090935.JPG P1090936.JPG P1090937.JPG P1090938.JPG P1090939.JPG P1090942.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 94 Page 7 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090943.JPG P1090944.JPG P1090945.JPG P1090946.JPG P1090947.JPG P1090948.JPG P1090949.JPG P1090950.JPG P1090951.JPG P1090952.JPG P1090953.JPG P1090954.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 95 Page 8 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090955.JPG P1090956.JPG P1090957.JPG P1090958.JPG P1090959.JPG P1090960.JPG P1090961.JPG P1090962.JPG P1090963.JPG P1090964.JPG P1090965.JPG P1090966.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 96 Page 9 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090967.JPG P1090968.JPG P1090969.JPG P1090970.JPG P1090971.JPG P1090972.JPG P1090974.JPG P1090975.JPG P1090976.JPG P1090977.JPG P1090978.JPG P1090979.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 97 Page 10 of 10Highway 7 and Wooddale Redevelopment TIF District LHB Project No. 160699 Photos Parcel E P1090980.JPG City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 98 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of 9 parcels and adjacent ROW, with plans to redevelop the area for housing and commercial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings in the District, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.) 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, including costs associated with demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, and utilities; costs to finance the proposed improvements; and costs to include affordable housing, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax increment assistance. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the costs of demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, utility improvements and construction of affordable housing add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, the costs of site and public improvements and of the construction of affordable housing in the City have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. Although other projects could potentially be proposed, the City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope can be anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0. Appendix G-1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 99 b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $54,725,150. c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $13,561,004. d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $41,164,146 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in diversified housing opportunities and increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Specifically, through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the EDA or City will increase the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City. But-For Analysis Current Market Value 7,100,000 New Market Value - Estimate 61,825,150 Difference 54,725,150 Present Value of Tax Increment 13,561,004 Difference 41,164,146 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 41,164,146 Appendix G-2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 6a) Title: Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District Page 100 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution certifying the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) as an adequate examination of the environmental impacts and accepting the Record of Decision, declaring no need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the PLACE redevelopment project. (Requires 4 affirmative votes.) POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision for the EAW satisfy the requirements for making a negative declaration regarding the need for an Environmental Impact Statement? SUMMARY: Requested is an adoption of findings regarding the EAW for the PLACE redevelopment. The city council received a written report regarding the EAW on March 13, 2017. The EAW examined the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Projects determined to have the potential for significant negative environmental effects must do further environmental review, in the form of an environmental impact statement (EIS). The city received 16 sets of comments from agencies and individuals/groups. Most of the comments focused on one of four topic areas, including the anaerobic digester, transportation/traffic, parking, and finance/management. The comments, and responses to all substantive comments, are included in the attached Findings of Fact and Record of Decision document (Exhibit A to the Resolution). Responses will be sent to the individual commenters following the city council’s record of decision in accordance with Minnesota Rules. Review of the EAW is complete. City staff find that the PLACE redevelopment project does not have the potential for significant negative environmental effects and does not warrant an EIS. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Resolution Findings of Fact & Record of Decision (Exhibit A to Resolution) PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Prepared by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The city council received a written report regarding the EAW on March 13, 2017. The EAW has been available for review by the public since at least March 7, 2017 and the formal comment period was open from March 6 through April 19, 2017. The city received 16 sets of comments from agencies and individuals/groups. The comments, and the responses to all substantive comments, are included in the attached Findings of Fact and Record of Decision document (Exhibit A to the Resolution). The city will send the formal responses to the individual commenters following the city council’s record of decision in accordance with Minnesota Rules. Please note that there are several other items and staff reports regarding the PLACE redevelopment project included in the city council agenda packet for May 1, 2017. This report will attempt to avoid duplication of information provided elsewhere in this agenda. The attached supporting documents, including the EAW and Findings of Fact and Record of Decision document. They provide much of the detail and background information reading potential impacts; therefore, there are brief summaries provided in the discussion section of the report and the detailed information is not repeated here. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Staff recommends adoption of findings regarding the PLACE St. Louis Park Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), record of decision, and a negative declaration regarding the need for an environmental impact statement. The new material that has not been available for city council review previously is contained in the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision document. It includes all the EAW comments we received and the responses to those comments. None of the regulatory agency comments indicated the need for an environmental impact statement. Many of the comments from community members focused on four topic areas, including the anaerobic digester, transportation/traffic, parking, and finance/management. A brief summary of those topic areas is provided below. Anaerobic Digester: In summary, the digester is a self-contained small volume (approximately 600 tons per year) unit manufactured by SEaBEnergy called the Flexibuster. The unit itself will be inside a building designed to control, contain, and filter out odors produced. The Flexibuster is relatively new having been invented in 2009-10, but to date has not exhibited problems in operation. The Flexibuster will be used to process the organic material for the PLACE project and possibly spent grains from a nearby local brewery. Truck traffic to and from the digester site will be very infrequent and the amount of biogas generated very small in comparison to the large commercial and agricultural methane operations elsewhere. The energy content present in the Flexibuster at any one time will be equivalent of 3.17 gallons of diesel fuel. The owner of the facility will be responsible for meeting all building and fire codes related to the construction and installation of the building and equipment, state and local permitting requirements, and meeting the performance standards in the ordinance. This is a much smaller City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision operation than many of the examples identified by the commenters. More details about the system and State and local review of the system will occur as part of the final design and permitting of the building and system. While the potential exists for nuisances, and if nuisance issues occur, the city has the authority to fine, shut down, or revoke permits issued for the use if there are violations. The owner would be responsible to address any issues that arise or abandon the use if the issues cannot be corrected. It is noteworthy to add that the proposer shares in the interest to avoid such issues, as they will own the residential and commercial properties in the development, which will also be sensitive to these issues. Transportation/Traffic: The traffic impact study completed by SEH on behalf of the city was a detailed review of traffic operations. This information was presented to the community at a neighborhood meeting in the summer of 2016. The study concluded the existing and future traffic operations are safe and operate at an acceptable level of service. Several comments were regarding potential delays in LRT and suggestions that the PLACE redevelopment should not proceed, or not proceed until the status of LRT is known or actually in service. The comments indicated that the development and study relied on LRT to be successful and avoid traffic impacts. There were also comments regarding safety and congestion in the immediate area. The Metropolitan Council’s regional transportation plan and the City’s comprehensive plan have identified light rail in the corridor for over 10 years. This has resulted in significant planning and investment along the corridor. Certain contracts for construction of LRT are currently out for bid. Therefore, the study assumed the presence of the METRO Green Line Extension/Southwest Light Rail Transit Wooddale Station (LRT) and several other improvements included in the LRT project base plan. In addition, it included city improvements to Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street and the Wooddale Avenue bridge that are programmed for 2018-2019 and coincide with LRT work. The traffic impact study did not include the mobility plan elements in its modeling of traffic generation, to be conservative. The mobility measures, especially the car-free units, have the potential to reduce the trips from the site similarly to the trip reductions that the traffic study assumed with the presence of Southwest Light Rail. If the LRT truly does not proceed or is significantly delayed, additional traffic analysis will be completed to decide precisely what, if any, mitigation measures should be implemented. Parking: The appropriate supply of parking was assessed by the applicant, city staff and an independent consultant. Staff’s assessment and recommendation of appropriate parking reductions based upon the site location, was more directly tied to the Mobility Plan for the project than the presence of LRT. The Mobility Plan is a commitment of the proposer and required with or without LRT. It is also a requirement of the approvals and agreements that would be associated with the planned unit development. In addition, the proposer submitted a proof-of-parking plan that could be required to be implemented if the Mobility Plan or adjustment thereto are not effective enough to deter undue on-street parking that causes a nuisance for the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the city has the ability to manage the on-street parking through various restrictions to address observed issues. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 4 Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Finance/Management: Another category of concerns related to the financing of the project and experience of the proposer to deliver the project and successfully manage it. Several of these concerns related to a misunderstanding of the extent of the city’s involvement and funding of the project. The market studies for the project contemplated the feasibility of the project with and without SWLRT and determined that it is feasible under both scenarios. The presence or absence of the SWLRT project improvements is not expected to significantly impact the construction cost of the PLACE project. The PLACE team has stated they have experience in the creation of other similar projects for public benefit, none of which have ever been in default or foreclosure. The PLACE Board of Directors and Advisory Board include other developers, architects, real estate professionals, academics, and executives from substantial corporations and the finance industry. The City’s and Economic Development Authority’s fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project found it to be consistent with industry standards. The City’s engineering staff and independent engineering consultants have reviewed the project. The fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project on behalf of the proposer and the city found it to be consistent with industry standards. The responses to the comments and the staff reports in this agenda regarding the tax increment financing district plan and the proposed purchase agreement and redevelopment agreement describe in detail the level of the City/Economic Development Authority involvement. The development agreement will address project requirements/objectives and the consequences if requirements are not met. Resolution of any project cash flow issues is not the City’s or Economic Development Authority’s responsibility under the purchase and redevelopment agreement. It is solely the responsibility of the developer/owner and their lenders. Any delinquency on a mortgage is also an event of default on the purchase and redevelopment agreement. The City/Economic Development Authority is not responsible for the financial success or failure of the PLACE project. Other topics: Regulatory agency EAW comments included, but were not limited to, requests for continued coordination with State and Regional agencies to ensure compatibility with existing and planned regional improvements, awareness of contamination issues in the area, and permitting requirements. The individual comments included, but were not limited to, topics such as affordable housing, E- generation system, Rusty Patch Bumble Bee, and soil conditions. NEXT STEPS: If the attached resolution is approved, staff will distribute the findings per Minnesota Rules to the EQB distribution list, surrounding jurisdictions and individual commenters. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 5 Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision RESOLUTION NO. 17-_____ APPROVING RECORD OF DECISION AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PLACE ST. LOUIS PARK REDEVELOPMENT Southeast Quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and Northeast Quadrant of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street WHEREAS, PLACE (“Proposer”) proposes to redevelop nine brownfield parcels in St. Louis Park into a mixed-use environmentally sustainable, transit oriented community. The project will include 299 mixed-income living spaces, including live/work space for artists; a 110-room hotel; retail space; structured and surface parking; and neighborhood amenities like an urban forest; and an e-generation facility that would digest all compostable materials generated on the site (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project falls within the mandatory environmental assessment worksheet (“EAW”) category of Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, Subpart 32; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is the Responsible Governmental Unit (“RGU”); and WHEREAS, an EAW was prepared by Stantec, on behalf of the Proposer, who submitted completed data portions of the EAW to the City of St. Louis Park consistent with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1400; and WHEREAS, the EAW was prepared using the form approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board for EAWs in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1300; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park submitted a copy of the EAW to all public agencies on the EAW distribution list and published EAW availability in the EQB Monitor on March 6, 2017, in accordance with applicable State laws, rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the EAW comment period lasted from March 6 to April 19, 2017 and 16 regulatory agencies and members of the public submitted written comments during the comment period; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park acknowledges the comments received from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Historical Society, Metropolitan Council, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park acknowledges the comments received from Steve May, Claudia Johnston, Daniel Kriete, Patrick Wells, Jackie Doyle, Judy Wells, Daniel Kriete on behalf of the Sorenson Neighborhood Steering Committee, Laura Jensen, Renee Klemetsen, Douglas Mezera, and Pam Reierson; and WHEREAS, City staff reviewed the proposed Record of Decision and finds it to be consistent with the evidence submitted to the City and the applicable statutes and regulations, to the best of their knowledge, and recommends the City Council approve the Findings of Fact and City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 6 Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Record of Decision dated April 2017 and determine that no environmental impact statement (“EIS”) is necessary, reasonable or warranted with respect to the Project under the circumstances; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make findings of fact and a record of decision that no EIS is required with respect to the Project (“Negative Declaration”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby: 1. Adopt and approve the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision on the PLACE St. Louis Park Environmental Assessment Worksheet in the form which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby makes the Findings of Fact and Conclusions which are contained therein; and 2. Find and determine that, based upon the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision, no environmental impact statement is required for the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act or Minnesota Rules Parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk PLACE St. Louis Park Findings of Fact and Record of Decision City of St. Louis Park April 2017 EXHIBIT A City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 7 PLACE St. Louis Park ii April 2017 Table of Contents 1. Administrative Background .................................................................................................................. 1 2. Findings of Fact .................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Corrections to the EAW or Changes to the Project since the EAW was Published...................... 2 2.3 Agency and Public Comments on the EAW ................................................................................. 3 2.4 Decision Regarding Need for an Environmental Impact Statement ............................................. 4 3. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix A: Responses to Substantive Comments .................................................................................... 16 Minnesota Historic Preservation Office .................................................................................................. 17 Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) .............................................................................. 17 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District ..................................................................................................... 18 Metropolitan Council .............................................................................................................................. 19 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) ....................................................................................... 20 Steve May ................................................................................................................................................ 23 Claudia Johnston ..................................................................................................................................... 23 Daniel Kriete ........................................................................................................................................... 24 Patrick Wells ........................................................................................................................................... 26 Jackie and Jim Doyle ............................................................................................................................... 28 Judy Wells ............................................................................................................................................... 29 Daniel Kriete on behalf of the Sorenson Neighborhood Steering Committee ........................................ 32 Laura Jensen ............................................................................................................................................ 43 Renee Klemetsen ..................................................................................................................................... 44 Douglas Mezera ....................................................................................................................................... 45 Pam Reierson ........................................................................................................................................... 46 Anaerobic Digester: Supplemental Information ...................................................................................... 48 Appendix B: Original Comment Letters ..................................................................................................... 51 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 8 PLACE St. Louis Park 1 April 2017 1. Administrative Background PLACE, a 501(c)(3), proposes to redevelop nine brownfield parcels in St. Louis Park into a mixed-use, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented community. The project will include 299 mixed-income living spaces, including live/work space for artists; a 110-room hotel; retail space; and neighborhood amenities like an urban forest. The project will also include an e-generation facility that will digest all compostable materials generated on site. The City of St. Louis Park is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this project. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has been prepared in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410. The EAW was mandatory per Minnesota Rules, part 4410.4300, subpart 32. The EAW was filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and circulated for review and comment to the required EAW distribution list. A notice of availability was published in the EQB Monitor on March 6, 2017. A notice was also published in the Sun Sailor newspaper and on NextDoor websites for surrounding neighborhoods. This notice included a description of the project, information on where copies of the EAW were available, and invited the public to provide comments. The EAW was made available electronically on the City of St. Louis Park’s website at https://www.stlouispark.org/develoment-planning-study/place-st-louis-park-environmental-assessment- worksheet-eaw.html and in hard copy at the following locations: • St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • St. Louis Park Library, 3240 Library Lane, St. Louis Park, MN 55426 The EAW comment period extended from March 6 to April 19, 2017. Written comments were received from 16 agencies and members of the public during the comment period. All comments received were considered in determining the potential for significant environmental impacts. Comments and responses to comments are included in Appendix A. Based on the information in the record, which is composed of the EAW for the proposed project, the comments submitted during the public comment period, the responses to comments, and other supporting documents, the City of St. Louis Park makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 9 PLACE St. Louis Park 2 April 2017 2. Findings of Fact 2.1 Project Description PLACE, a 501(c)(3), proposes to redevelop nine brownfield parcels in St. Louis Park into a mixed-use, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented community. The project is being developed on parcels north and south of an existing rail line. Descriptions of the proposed development on the northern and southern sites is provided below. 2.1.1 Northern Site Proposed development on the northern site includes: • 218 apartments (including affordable, market-rate, and live-work) • Commercial bike shop • E-Generation facility, which will use PLACE’s patent-pending portfolio of renewable energy systems to convert locally-sourced organic waste into energy for the project and a soil amendment byproduct that will be used in the on-site greenhouse. The E-generation facility will anaerobically digest food waste material generated from the residences, hotel, and commercial establishments on-site to produce methane that will power a 30 kilowatt (kW) generator. The heat and electrical power from the generator will be used in residences and the hotel on the project site. • 0.88 acres of urban forest • Buildings, site, and program designed to support a multigenerational community where households at all stages in life and income feel welcome • Mobility Plan with car/bike sharing, shuttle, and car-free living incentives • Green roofs for additional stormwater management and habitat 2.1.2 Southern Site Proposed development on the southern site includes: • 81 apartments (including affordable, market-rate, and live-work) • 110-room Fairfield by Marriott hotel • Commercial space for a café, coffee house, and five microbusinesses • Green roofs for additional stormwater management and habitat • Structured parking • “Placemaking plaza” adjacent to the Wooddale LRT Station to provide pedestrian-oriented multiuse space 2.2 Corrections to the EAW or Changes to the Project since the EAW was Published There has been one change to the proposed project design since the EAW was published. The two 1 MW combined heat and electrical power generators at the E-Generation facility are no longer part of the proposed development. The summary of impacts and mitigation provided in Section 2.4.1 of this document reflects the current proposed design and no longer references the two 1 MW generators. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 10 PLACE St. Louis Park 3 April 2017 The following corrections to the EAW are needed and are incorporated into the EAW by reference: • Page 3: The last bullet in the description of the southern site is revised to: o Structured parking o “Placemaking plaza” adjacent to the Wooddale LRT Station to provide pedestrian- oriented multiuse space • Page 5: Table 8-1 Required Permits is revised to remove the City of St. Louis Park shading variance • Page 6: Table 8-2 Direct Public Funding Sources is revised to include the following row: Unit of Government Type of Application Status City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Land Purchase Financing Pending in 2017 • Page 29: The first item in the list in response to Question 18a is revised to, “1) Proposed parking includes 447 [total] parking spaces: 216 on the north and 231 on the south.” 2.3 Agency and Public Comments on the EAW The City of St. Louis Park received written comments during the comment period from the following 16 agencies and members of the public: • Minnesota Historic Preservation Office • Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) • Minnehaha Creek Watershed District • Metropolitan Council • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) • Steve May • Claudia Johnston • Daniel Kriete • Patrick Wells • Jackie and Jim Doyle • Judy Wells • Daniel Kriete on behalf of the Sorenson Neighborhood Steering Committee • Laura Jensen • Renee Klemetsen • Douglas Mezera • Pam Reierson Consistent with state environmental review rules, responses have been prepared for all substantive comments submitted during the comment period. Written responses have been provided for substantive comments pertaining to analysis conducted for and documented in the EAW (see Appendix A). Original comments in their entirety are included in Appendix B. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 11 PLACE St. Louis Park 4 April 2017 2.4 Decision Regarding Need for an Environmental Impact Statement The City of St. Louis Park finds that the analysis completed for the EAW and the additional information considered in this Findings of Fact and Conclusions document are adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects based on consideration of the four criteria identified in Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, subpart 7 (described in the four sections that follow). 2.4.1 Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Impacts The City of St. Louis Park finds that the analysis completed for the EAW is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW described the type and extent of impacts to the natural and built environment anticipated to result from the proposed project. This document provides corrections, changes, and new information since the EAW was published. The proposed design for the project includes features to mitigate the identified impacts. Based on the EAW analysis and mitigation commitments, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in substantial impacts. Below is a summary of the findings regarding potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and the design features included to avoid, minimize, and mitigate these impacts. 2.4.1.1 Land Use The project will be compatible with nearby land uses and with land uses planned in anticipation of the 2021 opening of the Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT ). The project will incorporate several measures to minimize traffic impacts on adjacent properties and promote bicycle and transit ridership, as described in Section 2.4.1.10. 2.4.1.2 Geology, Soils, and Topography/Land Forms Geology No geologic features were identified that will be likely to require any modifications to project designs or mitigation measures. Soils and Topography Gentle slopes on the project site result in a relatively low erosion potential during both construction and operational activities. The existing and newly installed catch basins in the project site will be protected with appropriate erosion and sediment control devices during construction to limit erosion and potential runoff to surface water bodies until permanent erosion control measures are established. Mitigation strategies to limit erosion and runoff are described in Section 2.4.1.3. 2.4.1.3 Water Resources S urface Waters The project site does not contain any surface waters or wetlands. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 12 PLACE St. Louis Park 5 April 2017 Groundwater The project site is overlapped by the Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) for the Wellhead Protection Plans of the cities of St. Louis Park and Edina. Proposed project activities and planned land uses are believed to pose relatively low threat to bedrock aquifers that supply the City’s drinking water wells. To further reduce the threat to groundwater resources, mitigation measures will include storing fuels and fuel-containing equipment over impervious surface during site construction activities, with containment available to capture leaks and spills before they infiltrate into soils. Any observed leaks and spills will be reported immediately to the Minnesota Duty Officer, so any required investigation and cleanup activities can be conducted with State supervision. Wastewater The E-generation facility will produce a maximum volume of 1,000 gallons per day of wastewater from dewatering of the digested organic solids (the digested food waste coming out of the anaerobic digester system). Some of this wastewater will be used in the on-site greenhouse, but the majority will be discharged to the publicly owned sanitary sewer system. This sewer system connects to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor system, which discharges to the Metro Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) in St. Paul. The Metro WWTF treats about 250 million gallons per day, with the capacity to treat 300 million gallons per day. The wastewater is expected to contain less than 100 mg/l Total Suspended Solids and less than 100 mg/l Biochemical Oxygen Demand, tested over five days (BOD5). The wastewater is expected to contain very high concentrations of ammonia-nitrogen and phosphorus. However, due to the very low volume of wastewater, the total amount of ammonia and phosphorus discharged to the sanitary system will be minimal. No pretreatment of the wastewater is needed prior to discharge to the public sanitary sewer. Stormwater Stormwater runoff from the project site will be directed north to the MnDOT trunk storm system via pipes and catch basins from the northern site, and to the W 35th Street and the W 36th Street storm systems from the southern site. The north site will drain to an existing MnDOT pond to the east then be conveyed through storm sewer to Bass Lake. The south site will drain to an existing city pond, then be conveyed through storm sewer to Bass Lake. Runoff from both the north and south sites will be treated on site prior to discharging to downstream waters. The entire project site will be managed by gravity systems that will convey runoff to the east. The north site has a total area of 4.14 acres, and 2.58 of those acres are routed to Best Management Practices (BMPs), including a tree trench, green roof, iron-enhanced sand filtration, and stormwater reuse. A hydrologic model of the proposed north site provides a 100-year runoff rate of 13.1 cubic feet per second (cfs). This is based on the TP-40 100-year, 24-hour rainfall of 6.0 inches. The City’s rate control requirement calls for a maximum runoff rate of 17.7 cfs, which corresponds to the runoff rate of the 10- year rain event under existing conditions. The south site has a total area of 1.96 acres, and approximately 1.15 acres are routed to BMPs including green roofs, permeable pavement, and inline storm sewer filtration. The south site drains to an existing stormwater pond to the east, and rate control is assumed to be provided by this pond. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 13 PLACE St. Louis Park 6 April 2017 Water Appropriation The project will generate an estimated annual water demand of 14.3 million gallons per year to serve residential and commercial needs. All water will be obtained from a connection to the City of St. Louis Park’s municipal water supply system. The City has sufficient capacity to meet current and projected demands with existing wells. 2.4.1.4 Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes Pre-Project Site Conditions Phase I environmental site assessments (ESAs) were completed for the northern site in July 2015 and the southern site in September 2016. Four Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) were identified on each site. Phase II ESAs were completed for both sites in September 2016. Results of the Phase II ESA for the northern site indicated the following: • Arsenic soil concentrations at three locations and diesel range organics (DRO) concentrations at eight locations exceeded their respective MPCA criteria • Soil gas concentrations at four locations exceeded the MPCA’s 10-times residential intrusion screening values (10X ISVs) for one or more of the following compounds: 1,3-butadiene, chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, ethyl benzene, and xylenes Results of the Phase II ESA for the southern site indicated the following: • Exceedances of the screening Soil Leaching Values (SLVs) for arsenic, cadmium, and silver at one location and tetrachloroethylene (PCE) in two locations • Exceedances of the residential Soil Reference Values (SRVs) for arsenic, cadmium, and lead in soil samples collected from one location • Elevated diesel range organics (DRO) concentrations were present beneath a building • Soil gas concentrations at four locations exceeded the 10X ISVs for one or more of the following compounds: 1,3-butadiene, benzene, trichloroethylene (TCE), and PCE Based on the elevated soil gas concentrations detected across the project site and the impacted groundwater located beneath the project site, vapor mitigation for future buildings on the project site is necessary to minimize the potential release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) via the soil gas pathway to the indoor air. Response Action Plans (RAPs) for the northern and southern sites were prepared in September 2016, as summarized below: • Northern site o Excavate and dispose of contaminated materials off the project site, including residual impacts that may be detected around the abandoned in-place underground storage tanks o Design a mitigation system for the proposed building • Southern site o Excavate and dispose of contaminated soils off-site o Backfill excavations with clean soil to accommodate the development City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 14 PLACE St. Louis Park 7 April 2017 o Design and install a vapor mitigation system for the proposed building Asbestos containing materials (ACMs) and regulated building materials were identified during a pre- demolition survey conducted in September 2016. The identified ACMs and regulated building materials will be removed prior to building demolition in accordance to applicable state and federal laws. Project-Related Generation/Storage of Solid Wastes Solid waste is a common occurrence on construction projects. During demolition: • Waste generated will consist of wood, metal, brick, black, concrete, and other typical building materials • All hazardous and regulated materials will be removed before demolition commences. • Materials will be segregated as best as possible into three categories: clean concrete/brick, scrap metal, construction/demolition debris o The clean concrete or brick will be crushed and re-used on site, or hauled to a recycling facility for use on other projects o The metal will be processed and delivered to a salvage yard for reuse o The construction/demolition debris will be hauled to a licensed landfill for disposal. • Material will be reused as appropriate according to MPCA guidance • Excess material or material not meeting MPCA solid waste beneficial uses will be disposed of in accordance with state and federal requirements During operations: • Solid waste generated may include paper, plastic, food, glass, tin, and wood o Solid waste will be stored in appropriate containers and licensed commercial waste haulers will be contracted to properly dispose of the solid wastes that cannot be recycled o Recycling will be strongly encouraged, and implementation will be the responsibility of the developer and/or the construction contractor • Operation of the E-Generation facility will include temporary short term storage of food waste from on-site sources in 60 gallon containers designed for such wastes o The containers of food waste will be emptied into the digester system at an average rate of about two containers per hour o The digested food waste discharge from the anaerobic digester will be dewatered on site, and the E-Generation facility will house storage space for dewatered digested food waste solids. o The dewatered digested food waste will be sold or given to organic farmers for soil amendment. o A small amount of these organic solids will be used on-site in the greenhouse Project-Related Use/Storage of Hazardous Materials Chemicals/hazardous materials anticipated to be present on-site during construction include petroleum products such as gasoline and other engine fluids for maintaining construction equipment, and materials used in construction including paints, adhesives, and other building products. No above or underground City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 15 PLACE St. Louis Park 8 April 2017 ground storage tanks are anticipated for use during or after the construction project. Any hazardous materials used during construction will be stored in leak-proof containers and secured while not in use. The contractor will be responsible for ensuring safe handling of any chemicals/hazardous materials during the construction. The only hazardous wastes expected to be used during commercial/household operations are universal wastes and very small quantities of cleaning and maintenance products. All wastes will be disposed of according to applicable law(s). If a spill of chemical/hazardous materials should occur during or after the construction, the Minnesota Duty Officer will be notified as necessary. Any contaminated spills or leaks that occur during construction are the responsibility of the contractor and will be responded to according the MPCA containment and remedial action procedures. Project-Related Generation/Storage of Hazardous Wastes No hazardous waste is anticipated to be generated on the project site during or after construction. 2.4.1.5 Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) The proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on federally- or state-listed threatened and endangered species. Northern Long-Eared Bat A small number of trees are present within the project site, which may be utilized by the northern long- eared bat (NLEB). Under the Final 4(d) Rule of the Endangered Species Act, tree clearing is not prohibited as there are no records of NLEB maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within the project site or a 0.25-mile buffer. Mitigation strategies will include: • Prior to tree clearing within the project site, the list of NLEB records for Minnesota from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) must be consulted to ensure activities will not 1) result in removing a known occupied maternity roost tree, 2) occur within 150 feet of a known occupied maternity roost tree from June 1 through July 31, or 3) occur within 0.25 mile of a hibernaculum at any time • If possible, tree clearing will occur outside of the NLEB pup season (June 1 – July 31) to minimize impacts on the NLEB, if present • If a known occupied maternity roost tree or hibernaculum is identified near the project site, additional steps, including but not limited to field surveys, must be completed Rusty Patched Bumble Bee The rusty patched bumble bee (RPBB) may occur in the woodland present at the project site, and more of this species may be drawn to the project site following the development of residential parks and gardens. To minimize impacts to the RPBB: • Native plants that are beneficial to pollinators will be used for landscaping, including areas such as the urban forest, entrances, boulevards, property borders, parking islands, and infiltration zones City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 16 PLACE St. Louis Park 9 April 2017 • The use of herbicides within the project site will be minimized or eliminated during construction and future maintenance activities, where possible Migratory Birds Construction activities in grassland, roadsides, shrubland, or tree habitats within the project site may result in the taking of migratory birds, eggs, young and/or active nests, if present. Although the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are applicable throughout the entire year, most migratory bird nesting activity in Minnesota occurs approximately from mid-March to August 15. When possible, removal of vegetation will occur outside of the bird nesting window to minimize potential take of migratory birds, if present. If vegetation clearing cannot be avoided during the peak breeding season for migratory birds (approximately mid-March to August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey within the project site to determine the absence or presence of breeding birds and their nests. Pre-construction breeding bird surveys will meet the following criteria: • Pre-construction surveys will occur no more than two weeks before tree and shrub clearing activities commence. The area surveyed will include the areas where potential suitable habitat has been identified and tree or shrub clearing has not been completed. • If an occupied nest is observed during the survey, tree and shrub clearing activities will not be permitted within a 0.12-mile buffer of the nest site during the breeding season or until the fledglings have left the area. The Proposer will consult with the USFWS to avoid take of the species. • Upon completion, the survey results will be submitted to the USFWS, as appropriate. If breeding birds are not present, construction can proceed with no restrictions. If breeding birds or active nests are present, additional consultation will be performed. Invasive Species Construction activities that involve soil disturbance can result in the introduction and spread of invasive species. Native plants will be used for landscaping within the project site to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive plants and noxious weeds. 2.4.1.6 Historic Properties A rchaeological Resources The project is not anticipated to affect any unlisted or unknown archaeological resources. Architectural Resources No direct impacts to architectural resources are anticipated, but two resources listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are located within the 0.5-mile area of potential effect (APE) for indirect effects: • The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Depot (approximately 0.06-miles from the project Site), now the home of the St. Louis Park Historical Society • The Peavey Haglin Concrete Grain Elevator (approximately 0.4-miles from the project site) Based on its review of the project information, the Minnesota Historic Preservation Office has concluded there are no properties listed in the National or State Registers (including those listed above) in the area City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 17 PLACE St. Louis Park 10 April 2017 that will be affected by this project. Likewise, there are no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. 2.4.1.7 Visual Generators used at the E-Generation facility will emit a vapor plume that may sometimes be visible during cold weather if the moisture in the exhaust forms condensation. The methane used to fuel the 30 kW generator will undergo treatment to minimize the moisture content; however, some moisture will remain in the methane and in the exhaust. 2.4.1.8 Air Station Source Emissions No stationary source emissions are anticipated as a result of the project’s commercial, retail, or hotel uses. The 30 kW combined heat and power generator that will be used for the E-Generation facility will burn methane produced from the anaerobic digestion of food waste from the on-site residences, hotel, and commercial establishments. Exhaust from the methane burning generator will contain maximum emissions of: 200 grams per hour (g/hr) of carbon monoxide (CO), 80 g/hr of nitrous oxides (NOx), and 40 g/hr of volatile organic carbons (VOCs). These emissions will be below MPCA permit thresholds. Vehicle Emissions MnDOT has developed a screening method designed to identify intersections that may cause a CO impact above state standards. This method requires an intersection to be heavily congested (Level of Service (LOS) F) and have a traffic volume of greater than 140,000 vehicles per day in order to be considered to have the potential for causing CO air pollution problems. None of the intersections in the study area exceed the criteria that will lead to a violation of the air quality standards. All intersection levels of service are expected to be LOS D or better, meaning the corridor is moderately congested and the per vehicle delay is acceptable. Dust and Odors The project’s E-Generation facility will include ventilation and odor control equipment to capture and mitigate odors from the food waste and from the anaerobic digestion facility. Intensity of odors from food waste is expected to be low as containers will have lids. Ventilation and odor control equipment will also capture and mitigate odors from the dewatered organics. Intensity of odors from digested organics is expected to be low as organics have been stabilized. Odor generation can occur throughout the day; therefore, ventilation and odor control equipment will operate continuously. 2.4.1.9 Noise The operation of the development will have minimal noise impacts to the surrounding area. However, the proposed development will occur in an area where existing noise levels exceed state noise standards, so the development will be exposed to that noise. Potential mitigation could include the use of windows that do not open, arranging the property such that residential units face away from the TH 7, and/or a noise wall. These mitigation measures are not considered reasonable because they will have limited effectiveness at high cost, and because noise exceedances are not a result of the proposed development. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 18 PLACE St. Louis Park 11 April 2017 2.4.1.10 Transportation Traffic analysis was performed for baseline conditions and various development and traffic volume scenarios at the 2020 and the 2040 horizons. Future congestion and queuing issues at existing intersections will largely be addressed with the proposed connection from the south site to W 35th Street. Increased trips resulting from development of the project site, all of which are served with the W 35th Street connection option in place, do have an impact on the roadway network. However, the overall intersection operations are still at a LOS D or better. There is queueing between intersections due to capacity constraints and the close spacing of the four intersections along Wooddale Avenue. Measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project-related transportation impacts include: • Constructing the driveway connection to W 35th Street in order to serve the proposed development demands without causing an undue burden to W 36th Street o This connection to W 35th Street provides access to the traffic signal at W 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue and provides development traffic with controlled access and greater route choices • Implementing all SWLRT Base Improvements as follows: o Traffic signals at the TH 7 ramp terminal intersections on Wooddale Avenue o Restripe Wooddale Avenue to a 4-lane section o New signal system and gates for the freight and LRT crossings o New grade-separated trail crossing for the Cedar Lake Regional Trail at Wooddale Avenue • Constructing a left-turn lane on southbound Wooddale Avenue to the Frontage Road • Widening the Wooddale Avenue Bridge and reconfiguring the bridge corners to improve sight distance • Constructing right-in/right-out access to the south site at W 36th Street • Constructing an eastbound left turn lane at Xenwood Avenue/W 36th Street (150-feet) o Maintain the existing northbound, southbound, and westbound geometry o The intersection geometry should be reviewed as part of any specific redevelopment plan and/or street improvement • Adding flashing yellow arrow signal heads for eastbound W 36th Street at Xenwood Avenue • Identifying travel demand management strategies for the site including but not limited to reducing the number of parking spaces allowed from current code requirements and providing secure bicycle storage for residents and visitors 2.4.2 Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects Cumulative effects result from the incremental impact of the proposed project when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Analysis of cumulative effects is summarized by issue area in the following sections. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 19 PLACE St. Louis Park 12 April 2017 2.4.2.1 Land Use A development proposal for a six-story, mixed-use residential and commercial project called The Elmwood was approved by the City of St. Louis Park City Council in March 2017. Because this project is consistent with land uses anticipated in the Wooddale Avenue Station Area Plan and in the background traffic growth forecasted for the area analyzed for the traffic analysis, no cumulative potential effects are anticipated in relation to the proposed project. 2.4.2.2 Geology, Soils, and Topography/Land Forms Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.3 Water Resources Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.4 Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.5 Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.6 Historic Properties Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.7 Visual Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.8 Air Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.9 Noise Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 2.4.2.10 Transportation Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. Overall, the proposed development scenario with identified transportation improvements shows minimal impact to the existing roadway network under 2020 traffic demand. PLACE will implement numerous travel demand management strategies to promote use of the regional trail, bus stops, and future LRT station. The development will offer car sharing, bike sharing, and a Car-Free Perks program. 2.4.3 Extent to which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority The mitigation of environmental impacts will be designed and implemented in coordination with regulatory agencies and will be subject to the plan approval and permitting process. Permits and approvals that have been obtained or may be required prior to project construction are shown in Table 1. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 20 PLACE St. Louis Park 13 April 2017 Table 1. Required Permits Unit of Government Type of Application Status Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater management permit Application not submitted Erosion control permit Application not submitted Three Rivers Park District Trail connection permit Application not submitted Metropolitan Council Comprehensive plan amendment administrative review Application not submitted City of St. Louis Park Preliminary plat Submitted February 6, 2017 Final plat Submitted February 6, 2017 Comprehensive plan amendment Submitted February 6, 2017 Preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD) Submitted February 6, 2017 Demolition permits Application not submitted Public right-of-way permit Application not submitted Sewer and water permit Application not submitted Building permits (including building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing) Application not submitted Sign permits Application not submitted Erosion control permit Application not submitted Fence permit Application not submitted MPCA Notification of intent to perform a demolition Application not submitted Construction site stormwater permit Application not submitted Sewer connection permit Application not submitted Air permit for E-Generation facility Application not submitted Review of E-Generation anaerobic digestion design Application not submitted Minnesota Department of Health Notification of asbestos-related work Application not submitted Water extension permit Application not submitted DNR Water appropriation permit Not needed based on existing municipal well capacity MnDOT Driveway access permits and utility permits Application not submitted Drainage permit Application not submitted Permit for use of or work on TH 7 Application not submitted 2.4.4 Extent to which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result of Other Environmental Studies The City of St. Louis Park has previous multiuse development experience, and similar projects have been designed and constructed throughout the county. Design and construction staff are familiar with the project area. No problems are anticipated that staff has not encountered and successfully solved previously in similar projects in or near the project area. The City finds that the environmental effects of City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 21 PLACE St. Louis Park 14 April 2017 the project can be anticipated and controlled as a result of environmental review and experience on similar projects. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 22 PLACE St. Louis Park 15 April 2017 3. Conclusions 1. All requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have been met. 2. The EAW and the permit development processes related to the project have generated information that is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects. 3. Areas where potential environmental effects have been identified will be addressed during the final design of the project. Mitigation will be provided where impacts are expected to result from project construction, operation, or maintenance. Mitigation measures are incorporated into project design and have been or will be coordinated with state and federal agencies during the permit process. 4. Based on the criteria in Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 5. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the proposed project. For the City of St. Louis Park Tom Harmening City Manager Date City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 23 PLACE St. Louis Park 16 April 2017 Appendix A: Responses to Substantive Comments City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 24 PLACE St. Louis Park 17 April 2017 Minnesota Historic Preservation Office Comment: Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 CFR § 800. If this project is considered for federal financial assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, then review and consultation with our office will need to be initiated by the lead federal agency. Be advised that comments and recommendations provided by our office for this state-level review may differ from findings and determinations made by the federal agency as part of review and consultation under Section 106. Response: Thank you for your comment. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Comment: The City of St Louis Park is going to deed over to MnDOT the Right-of-Way that the City currently owns that is shown to the south of the east bound ramp to TH7. Response: Comment noted. Comment: Work within MnDOT right-of-way will require a permit and a plan set. Permit forms are available from MnDOT’s utility website at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/utility/. Include one plan set formatted to 11 x 17 size with each permit application. Response: Comment noted. Requirements will be followed. Comment: MnDOT’s comment letter from the Plat (MnDOT review # P17-012) are still in effect. The letter has been attached for reference (P17-012 PLACE.pdf). Response: The property line and building are setback 22 feet from the ramp curb, leaving 22 feet of additional MnDOT right-of-way. The frontage road has been redesigned to allow on-street parking to occur only on the south side of the road. No on-street parking is provided along the north side of the frontage road until after the entrance into the E-Generation facility. The drawings have been updated to include the reconfigured ¾ intersection at the frontage road. The landscape plan has been revised, and there are no trees within the MnDOT right-of-way. A MnDOT Drainage Permit will be obtained prior to construction, and a MnDOT Right-of-Way Permit will be obtained prior to any work within MnDOT right-of-way. Comment: MnDOT’s goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf. version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via e-mail at metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is under 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Although submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: MnDOT – Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 25 PLACE St. Louis Park 18 April 2017 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disc. 4. Plans can also be submitted to MnDOT’s External FTP Site. Please send files to: ftp://ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/pub/incoming/MetroWatersEdge/Planning Internet Explorer doesn’t work using ftp so please use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, please send a note to metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. Response: Comment noted. The City will follow this process for plan submittal. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Comment: The Applicant has noted that a previously existing wetland was filled on the project site during the construction of the Wooddale Avenue Bridge. The MCWD had approved 0.15-acre of wetland impact to a 0.25-acre Type-1 wetland under the Replacement Plan Notice of Decision (W09-03) issued on September 28th, 2009. The hydrology to the remaining 0.1-acre of wetland was to be maintained as a condition of the Decision. Since hydrology was not maintained, the City of St. Louis Park is required to provide replacement for 0.1 acre of wetland impact at a 2:1 ratio per the conditions of the Decision. Response: The City will be replacing the wetland impacts associated with the TH 7 project, specifically the loss of this wetland. Due to the changes in grade associated with the TH 7 bridge project, the site no longer has the hydrology to support a wetland. Comment: This Project will require a MCWD Stormwater Management permit for a redevelopment project resulting in an increase of impervious surface. The City of St. Louis Park regulates the District's Erosion Control rule and will issue the Erosion Control permit. Response: Thank you for your comment. The permit requirements will be met. Comment: The Applicant notes the presence of a contaminated groundwater plume on-site and that opportunities for infiltration are limited. As part of the Stormwater Management permit, abstraction through filtration will be credited at 50 percent. Additionally, District will require that any Stormwater filtration BMPs that are located in areas of known contamination must be protected with an impermeable liner. Response: Thank you for your comment. The permit requirements will be met. Stormwater BMPs within the boundary of the groundwater contamination plume will minimize infiltration. Filtration BMPs that will be used within the contamination plume boundary will be lined with an impermeable layer to minimize the infiltration. Drain tile will be used to outlet the filtered stormwater to the storm sewer system. Stormwater reuse will also be used within the groundwater contamination plume boundary. The reuse system will collect runoff from rooftops to be used for irrigation, and the infiltration potential to the groundwater is seen as minimal. Infiltration BMPs will be located outside of the groundwater contamination plume in the northeast portion of the site. Impervious surfaces that will be routed to infiltration BMPs primarily include rooftops. Comment: Utilizing TP-40, the Applicant has estimated that the proposed run-off rates will meet the City's rate control requirement. When preparing the MCWD Stormwater Management Application, the City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 26 PLACE St. Louis Park 19 April 2017 Applicant should model the Existing and Proposed Atlas-14 1-, 10-, and 100- Year storm events in order to demonstrate proposed rates will not increase from existing rates. Response: Thank you for your comment. The permit requirements will be met. This area was included in a regional stormwater treatment facility at Hoigaard Village. The proposed discharge rates will meet the City's requirements at this location. Comment: The Applicant proposes stormwater reuse as a Stormwater Management BMP. As stated in previous correspondence, the Applicant should identify how and where the water will be used to show that the BMP will drawdown within 48 hours. Response: Comment noted. The requirement will be followed and documented with the MCWD permit submittal. Metropolitan Council Comment: The project proposer needs to continue to coordinate their design with the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) Project to resolve pedestrian and access conflicts that exist with their current design. Design coordination items include, but are limited to, pedestrian access, maintenance access, vehicle access and parking, location and amount of lighting, location and amount of signage, additional retaining walls, sidewalks, stairs, accessible ramps, and landscaping. Once design coordination is complete, changes will likely need to be made to pedestrian access to the Wooddale Station to accommodate the PLACE design. These changes will result in a Change Order to the SWLRT project that are not in the project scope or budget and will need to be paid for by others. Response: The design will continue to be coordinated to resolve conflicts and improve access and function for the project and SWLRT. The design modifications will strive to be cost-neutral for the SWLRT project. Comment: The EAW indicates that additional land not needed for the project would be platted as outlots and dedicated to adjacent properties, including to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail corridor. Staff from the City of St. Louis Park indicated that Outlot A would include a trail serving as a "onramp" from Wooddale Avenue to provide access to the regional trail corridor. Please note that this "on-ramp" trail would be considered a local trail, not part of the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail. Three Rivers Park District does not own the property that the regional trail traverses, but has a lease agreement with the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority for use of the corridor. City staff indicated that the outlot may be dedicated to the City of St. Louis Park, which would be appropriate for this local trail connection to the regional trail corridor. Council staff recommends that the City and developer coordinate fencing, landscaping, and access between the development and the regional trail as well as any detours during project construction with Three Rivers Park District. Response: Thank you for your comment. The City and PLACE will coordinate with Three Rivers Park District as requested. Comment: Metropolitan Council Forcemain Interceptors (8041-A and 8041-B) are within the Highway 7 service road right-of way, which runs through the project location. The interceptors were built in 2011 and are 24-inch PVC pipes at depths of approximately 7 to 10 feet. There are specific processes that must City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 27 PLACE St. Louis Park 20 April 2017 be followed before encroachment on our property can be granted. Before an encroachment will be allowed, an Encroachment Agreement will be required. To assess the potential impacts to our interceptor system, prior to initiating this project, preliminary plans should be sent to Scott Dentz, Interceptor Engineering Manager, (651-602-4503) at the MCES for review and comment. Response: Thank you for your comment. Plans were sent to Scott Dentz on April 17, 2017. Comment: A draft set of TAZ forecasts for 2040 has been prepared by Met Council and reviewed by the City in 2016. The proposed development site is a very small part of TAZ #1400. The zone is predominantly residential west of Wooddale and mostly commercial east of Wooddale. The zone is currently forecasted to gain 620 households during 2014-2040. The additional housing expected from the proposed development fits within that forecast. Please consult with Metropolitan Council staff if a TAZ forecast adjustment is needed. Response: Thank you for your comment. Comment: The EAW refers to TP-40 modeled rainfall events, which were used to estimate storm water runoff rates and volumes. TP-40 data have been superseded with new data. In June 2013, the National Weather Service Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center released new precipitation frequency estimates in the publication NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates. Please refer to the following online resources: www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/noaa atlas 14.html http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds map cunt.html?bkmrk=mn In the Twin Cities metropolitan area, new precipitation estimates are generally higher for the average 50- and 100-year recurrence 24-hour rainfall events. New estimates for the average 100-year recurrence interval for the proposed project location is approximately 7.47". The project proposer should utilize this new data in the calculation of runoff to ensure that on-site treatment and off-site stormwater conveyance facilities have been properly sized to accommodate future runoff events. Response: The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and City of St. Louis Park requirements for stormwater management will be met. The City of St. Louis Park has a higher standard for discharge from proposed conditions than the MCWD and MPCA. These rates will be met in the regional stormwater facility at Hoigaard Village. Comment: Page 32 of the EAW recommends that the City of St. Louis Park or the developer construct a left-turn lane on southbound Wooddale Ave to the Frontage Road. Page 5 of the Traffic Impact Study states that the "City has recently requested that this access be modified to include a southbound left turn lane onto the east leg of the Frontage Road, this is currently under consideration by SPO." Please note that this improvement is not part of the SWLRT project scope or budget. The stated SWLRT improvements are otherwise consistent with current plans. Response: Thank you for your comment. It is noted. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Comment: Please note that an MPCA Solid Waste Permit may be needed for the anaerobic digester. For additional information, please contact Mike Mondloch at 651-757-2578. Response: Thank you for your comment. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 28 PLACE St. Louis Park 21 April 2017 Comment: The EAW refers to a net 32,680 cubic yards of excavated excess soil material that will be removed from the property and used as fill on "other active construction sites in the area." Please note that this activity is regulated by the MPCA because of the historic contamination present on the site. The MPCA has extensive guidance available on the reuse of fill material off-site. Please see the MPCA web page https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/cleanup-guidance ("Offsite reuse of fill materials" button) for further information on the requirements for reuse of fill material from the PLACE development. Response: Applicable MPCA requirements will be followed for the regulated materials. Comment: There are three monitoring wells located on the south property. These wells are owned by the MPCA and are part of the groundwater investigations for the Reilly Tar Superfund Site and the St. Louis Park Solvent Plume Superfund Site (the wells are: W38 - UN00216060, Wl17 - UN00160031, W101 - UN00149711). These wells are located in front of the former Nash Frame building located at 3565 Wooddale Avenue South in a landscaped area in the middle of the parking lot. Each of the three wells monitors a different aquifer and are critical to these State and Federal Superfund sites and will be required to either be protected during construction or sealed and replaced in a more accessible location after completion of the development. In addition, the County Well Index locates another well (UN 00462932) near the northeast portion of the property or on the adjacent property (northeast corner of 5802 36th Street West) where the properties intersect with the Yosemite Avenue South right-of-way. The actual location of the well is approximately 900 feet west of the PLACE redevelopment site. This well should not be an issue for the redevelopment. Response: Thank you for the comments. The proposer and city are aware of the monitoring wells and will coordinate with MPCA. The wells will either be protected and accommodated to maintain accessibility by the development plans, or they will be sealed and replaced in a more accessible location. Comment: Please be aware that stormwater runoff in this area has been shown to contain the chemicals perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) at widely variable concentrations. These chemicals are highly mobile in the environment and care should be taken to minimize the infiltration of contaminated storm water into the subsurface. Best management practices (BMPs) generally do not recommend construction of stormwater infiltration features in areas of waste and/or soil or groundwater contamination. Infiltration of stormwater into the subsurface could contribute to the groundwater contamination plumes associated with several sites in this area. Be advised that stormwater features are regulated by the Stormwater Management Program at MPCA and not by the Remediation Programs. Segments of the process may be regulated in both programs if there is waste or contaminated media present. Response: Stormwater BMPs within the boundary of the groundwater contamination plume will minimize infiltration. Filtration BMPs that will be used within the contamination plume boundary will be lined with an impermeable layer to minimize the infiltration. Drain tile will be used to outlet the filtered stormwater to the storm sewer system. Stormwater reuse will also be used within the groundwater contamination plume boundary. The reuse system will collect runoff from rooftops to be used for irrigation, and the infiltration potential to the groundwater is seen as minimal. Infiltration BMPs will be located outside of the groundwater contamination plume in the northeast portion of the site. Impervious surfaces that will be routed to infiltration BMPs primarily include rooftops. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 29 PLACE St. Louis Park 22 April 2017 Comment: The PLACE redevelopment site is located within the St. Louis Park Groundwater Plume Superfund Site. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) St. Louis Park Vapor Intrusion Site/MPCA Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue Vapor Intrusion Study, EPA Reilly Tar & Chemical Superfund Site, Curwood Minnesota/Alcan Packaging, the Douglas Corporation Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Site, and several other sites are located nearby. Widespread groundwater contamination beneath the property is a concern. Contaminants known to be present in groundwater at or nearby the PLACE development properties include trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), PFOA, PFOS, cis-1,2-dichloroethene (c-1,2-DCE), vinyl chloride (VC), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), hexavalent chromium, lead, arsenic, petroleum hydrocarbons, and other chemicals. The presence of groundwater contaminants can lead to increased potential for soil vapor intrusion. The EAW refers to the Response Action Plan (RAP) that was developed for the site in September 2016. Neither the EAW nor the RAP discussions address the potential for the presence of PFOA and PFOS compounds. Similarly, neither the RAP nor the EAW are specific regarding the need for subsurface vapor intrusion mitigation. Vapor intrusion mitigation will be necessary for each building constructed. Plans for removal of contaminated soil will not address groundwater contamination and the potential for soil vapor intrusion. Because of this, MPCA recommends that each building constructed incorporate sub-slab depressurization into the design and construction of the buildings. Active sub-slab depressurization may be necessary in the residential buildings. Upon completion of construction, the developer will be required to demonstrate that the mitigation systems installed provide the necessary level of protection. The design and implementation of any vapor intrusion mitigation system should comply with MPCA BMPs for vapor intrusion mitigation and EPA design criteria for vapor and radon mitigation systems. Response: Active soil vapor intrusion mitigation measures will be designed to comply with MPCA BMPs and installed in all of the proposed buildings. Comment: Subsurface investigation results cited in the EAW indicate the presence of contamination in soil samples that exceed regulatory criteria. Contaminants detected include TCE, PCE, c-1,2-DCE, VC, PAHs, hexavalent chromium, lead, arsenic, cadmium, petroleum hydrocarbons, and other chemicals. These contaminants were detected in soil, groundwater, and/or soil gas. In addition, PFOA and PFOS have been detected in the soil, groundwater, and stormwater from nearby sites including the Douglas Corporation RCRA Corrective Action site. The determination of the extent and magnitude of contamination across both properties is incomplete. In addition, some contamination issues (PFOA and PFOS) have not been addressed. The properties lie within the groundwater plume areas for two Superfund sites and lie adjacent to or nearby several other cleanup sites. It is imperative that the proposer be aware of this and be prepared for unanticipated contamination issues. Response: Active soil vapor intrusion mitigation measures will be designed to comply with MPCA BMPs and installed in all the proposed buildings. A Supplemental Investigation is currently underway to further delineate shallow soil contamination and to collect additional soil gas and groundwater samples as specified by the MPCA and as detailed in the MPCA-approved Response Action Plan (RAP). This Supplemental Investigation includes approximately 20 soil probes to 12 feet below ground surface (bgs), 17 borings to 8 feet bgs to collect soil gas samples, and 3 borings to approximately 30 feet bgs for temporary groundwater monitoring wells. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 30 PLACE St. Louis Park 23 April 2017 Comment: Observations regarding the presence of hazardous substances within the existing buildings have been made. Prior to demolition, hazardous substances will need to be removed. These may include asbestos containing building materials, light ballasts, treated wood products, lead paint, lead pipes, and so on. Assessment and removal of these substances is regulated under the solid waste programs at MPCA. Additional information can be found at: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/construction-and-demolition- waste. Response: Removal of asbestos and other regulated materials will be completed per MPCA regulations. Steve May Comment: They mention soil amendments. Can they give some scientific documentation on the value of those soil amendments? That seems to be a nice term to use but what are the benefits? Response: The soil amendments referred to are for structural purposes to reduce frost susceptibility and provide for improved soil bearing capacities for footings and foundations. These amendments are not for horticultural purposes. The amendments will replace soils with poor bearing capacity with more appropriate soils such as sand and gravel. Comment: Maybe I missed it but could we get more details on the fees that the developer is going to charge. I am concerned that the developer is saying that this is intended to be a “green project” while the only green is going into his pocket. That is ok but when they need to use TIF financing to accomplish this that isn’t right. Let’s get a real public / private partnership where all the money is going to the cause or let’s say that we are helping a developer with the financing. Response: PLACE is reinvesting over 80 percent of the developer fee into the project, and this 80 percent will only be received by the developer subject to the project meeting net cash flow requirements, including TIF financing components. Ehlers was retained by the City as a third-party consultant to review the project financials. Comment: What are the costs/fines if the project doesn’t meet certain objectives? It sounds good to say that a bike shop will be in the development. Do we need another bike shop? Do we know that Fairfield wants to have a hotel there? Response: The Developer Agreement will address project requirements/objectives and the consequences if requirements are not met. The project proposer has discussed the project with Marriott (Fairfield), and they have expressed strong interest, as has the operator, Aimbridge Hospitality. Contract discussions are underway with these entities. The proposed bike shop will be focused on repair and rentals. Claudia Johnston Comment: Can you refer me to the website of the manufacturer of the anaerobic digester? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. The anaerobic digester manufacturer is SEab Energy (http://seabenergy.com/about-seab/). Comment: Direct me to the technical info on the "patent pending" process that PLACE calls E- Generation which combines anaerobic digester, solar, wind, etc. Response: E-Generation is a patent-pending system (U.S. Patent Office No. 14/215,369) for optimizing renewable energy inputs. PLACE chooses complementary renewable technologies for each location, and City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 31 PLACE St. Louis Park 24 April 2017 then optimizes the generation of energy to meet its environmental sustainability goals and provide residents with lower-cost energy. In this development, E-Generation optimizes wind, solar, anaerobic digestion of food scraps, and production of food. The development remains grid-connected for redundancy and supplementation. Each technology connected through E-Generation has been deployed, proven, and permitted elsewhere by PLACE’s technology providers for stand-alone energy generation or food production. The right-sizing, energy-balancing, and connecting infrastructure among these solutions, including noise and odor prevention, is engineered and customized by PLACE. In the current General Industrial zoning of this property, an anaerobic digester could be allowed to process up to 30,000 tons of organic waste each year. The proposed regulations for this development would allow a maximum of only 3,000 tons of material per year. The facility designed for this development is of a much smaller scale and will initially be capable of processing less than 1,000 tons per year of organic waste, food scraps, spent or spoiled grain, and vegetation from the greenhouse and grounds maintenance. Waste will come from the café, coffee house, hotel, any catering that occurs on site, and the residences. E-Generation might also accept post-brewing grain from small local sources to preserve the nutrients and energy from being wasted or from being trucked out of town at a greater carbon cost to the public. Use of E-generation at this project is not effected in any way by the status of the pending patent. Daniel Kriete Comment: 18.A.1 (page 29): Proposed parking includes 447 parking spaces: 216 on the north, and 231 on the south. PLACE is requesting approval with just 447 parking spaces rather than the 688 that would normally be required for a project of this scope per SLP City Code. This represents a total reduction of 35%. The reduction is based primarily on PLACE's Mobility/Car-Free Living Plan, but also includes reductions for shared parking and its location as a transit oriented development. Questions: • What are the consequences to parking capacity on the site if PLACE is unable to attain the car- free goal(s) used in the parking calculations? • What is the plan if PLACE is unable to implement/maintain the mitigations that are the basis for the reduction in on-site parking requirements requested in its Final PUD submission? • Why is PLACE getting a reduction for shared parking when the parking study by Walker Parking Consultants indicates that the peak parking for all uses occurs at the same hours, which by SLP code disqualifies the project for that reduction? • Who will be responsible for monitoring PLACE’s implementation and maintenance of the mitigations in its mobility plan? • If the SWLRT is not built, will PLACE lose that portion of its parking reduction? Where will those cars park? Response: If PLACE is unable to attain the car-free goal(s), they may be required to construct additional parking or lease parking spaces off-site where surplus parking is available. The City required PLACE to submit proof of parking, demonstrating how and where additional parking can be added to the site. This City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 32 PLACE St. Louis Park 25 April 2017 includes a parking ramp located near the E-Generation facility, the installation of compact parking spaces, and leased spaces from nearby parking lots. The peak parking for the development is at 10 p.m., a time when the coffee shop, cafe, Makers Space, co- working space, and bike shop will either be closed or will have limited service. This allows for a parking reduction due to shared parking. Additionally, PLACE will collaborate with the hotel operator and commercial enterprises to hire employees from within the residential component of the development, lessening the need for additional employee parking spaces. PLACE will be required to report the mobility/travel demand management (TDM) plan annually to the City for review as per the Planning Development Contract. If issues arise, PLACE will be required to revise their mobility/TDM plan or construct additional parking to alleviate any parking issues. The parking reductions for PLACE are based upon car-free living and shared parking, not on transit. The City does offer a 10 percent reduction for commercial units when adjacent to an area served by bus transit, but those reductions were not applied to the PLACE development. Regardless of SWLRT, PLACE will be required to manage parking onsite. If SWLRT is not approved and parking is an issue, the developer will be required to add additional mobility measures and/or construct additional parking onsite. Comment: (Page 32): Those who choose to be car-free and receive the benefits must agree as part of their lease that they will remain car-free. Questions: • How will this be enforced and what would the penalty be? • What would prevent a resident who initially has no car, and then has a legitimate need for one, from maintaining their perks by parking off-site on city streets? Response: PLACE will be required to manage the parking provided onsite and will be required as part of the Planning Development Contract to submit a parking management plan to the City. If there are parking issues, the City will ensure compliance with the parking management plan. If the parking management plan does not meet the City's expectations, the plan will be revised and/or additional parking will be constructed. PLACE believes the car-free perks package will be highly sought and will make sure that anyone enrolled in that program will not have ownership of a car. If there are cars parking on city streets, the City will treat this issue similar to other areas where people are parking on-street and will further manage parking in the area based on the issues observed. Additionally, the City anticipates implementing controls on public parking surrounding the station area independent of the PLACE development to limit nuisance park-and-ride parking in neighborhoods. Comment: (Page 32) The Proposer will provide a car-free perks package to 90 households on a first- come, first-served basis. Question: Why on a first-come first-served basis, are there not enough for 90 households? Or do they expect more than 90 households to want car-free perks? Response: PLACE anticipates more than 90 households will be interested in the car-free living perks package. One of the attractions of the PLACE development is that the construction, design, and location make living car-free more accessible, and PLACE believes there will be a wait list of people interested in the car-free living perks package. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 33 PLACE St. Louis Park 26 April 2017 Patrick Wells Comment: The St. Louis Park Planning Commission recently approved The Place Project. The Place Project will be located close to the Spanish Immersion School at Hwy 7 and Wooddale at the old McGarvey Coffee site. The Place Project will include an anaerobic digester, residential housing, a hotel, and freight rail (including oil) all in the same place. There is the potential for unprecedented problems. Response: Thank you for your comment. Please note that the planning commission has an advisory role and makes recommendations to city council. The city council makes the final decision. Comment: Is the garbage digester technology legitimate? The patent pending for the project (Life to Waste to Energy Complex) has been rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Communities have had trouble with the digesters. Can we believe that the digester will be order free and safe? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: Where are the reputable CPA projections and independent professional engineering evaluations for the project? The project cost is estimated at $123,000,00 with the estimated market value at completion at $62,000,000. How can this be a good deal? Response: The project proposer hired Novagradac and the City retained Ehlers for financial analyses. Many projects built for public benefit have a similar economic profile. Comment: Is the developer capable? Negative history in Ventura California. Is the developer a CPA or an engineer? Does the developer have skin in the game? Deferred developers fees are soft money and should be viewed with skepticism. Where are the reputable CPA projections and independent professional engineering evaluations for the project? Response: The PLACE team has stated they have experience in the creation of other similar projects for public benefit, none of which have ever been in default or foreclosure. The members of the limited liability company that was formed to complete this project in St. Louis Park have contributed a combination of cash and in-kind equity to the project financing. The project consultant team includes CPAs and engineers. The PLACE Board of Directors and Advisory Board include other developers, architects, real estate professionals, academics, and executives from substantial corporations and the finance industry. The City’s and Economic Development Authority’s fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project found it to be consistent with industry standards. The City’s engineering staff and independent engineering consultants have reviewed the project. The fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project on behalf of the proposer and the city found it to be consistent with industry standards. Comment: Given the risks involved, with the PLACE project, should the City of St. Louis Park protect the City, the citizens, and the investors with a mitigation plan for when things go wrong? Here are suggestions for mitigating foreseen and unnecessary losses: 1. Provide by agreement with the developer that the garbage digester will be removed promptly if the digester produces unpleasant smells or is unsafe. The cost of digester removal should come first from the deferred developer fees (not real $ anyway - soft $) with the rest to come from a city contingency fund. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 34 PLACE St. Louis Park 27 April 2017 2. Create a plan to build a parking ramp to handle parking space shortages when parking space becomes a problem at The PLACE. The parking ramp will be paid for from a city contingency fund. 3. Create a workout lending process to deal with the anticipated developer cash flow problems. The workout process should include the possibility of having to buy out the first mortgage on the property, assuming that the city takes a second mortgage position. The cash flow problems and potential mortgage buyout and foreclosure should be funded from a city contingency fund. The agreement with the developer should insure that the developer does not profit if the property is foreclosed. 4. When one of the above items occur, begin a due diligence workout process which includes large firm legal advice, large firm CPA advice, and large firm engineering advice. The due diligence workout should be funded from a city contingency fund. 5. Create a basis for a City of St. Louis Park tax to fund the city contingency fund. The proposed city tax increase should be put on a 6 month review basis to provide additional taxes as needed as The PLACE problems occur. I would encourage additional mitigation suggestions. I request that the above mitigation plan be made part of the record. Response: Thank you for your comments. The anaerobic digester may only operate if it is in compliance with state and local regulations and the terms of the redevelopment agreement, purchase agreement, and planning development contract. Any cost associated with the shut down or removal of the digester will be the responsibility of the owner and operator. Plans for the expansion of parking, if needed, is a requirement of the planned unit development approval through a proof of parking plan. The cost of implementing the proof of parking plan is the responsibility of the developer/owner. Resolution of any project cash flow issues is not the City’s or Economic Development Authority’s responsibility under the purchase and redevelopment agreement. It is solely the responsibility of the developer/owner and their lenders. Any delinquency on a mortgage is also an event of default on the purchase and redevelopment agreement. The City/Economic Development Authority is not responsible for the financial success or failure of the PLACE project. Comment: The Place Project assumes that SW Light Rail will happen at the Place project site. SWLRT is not a done deal. If SWLRT happens, it could be many years away. We should wait and see what happens with the SWLRT. Response: Thank you for your comment. Comment: The present traffic problems at The Place project site are already severe. No further development at this site should be approved until the present traffic problems are resolved in a satisfactory manner. It is simply unrealistic to plan to add apartments and a hotel and to encourage residents not to drive. The Place Project will bring more traffic. Response: The traffic impact study indicates an acceptable level of service on 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. Comment: Building apartments and a hotel next to a freight rail route is unsafe and would result in unacceptable noise levels for all residents. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 35 PLACE St. Louis Park 28 April 2017 Response: The separation between the residential buildings and the freight rail line is comparable to the separation for other similar buildings in the project area. Triple-paned glazing or dual-paned glazing with acoustical applications will be evaluated for the windows, as will other acoustical enhancements to the HVAC systems. It is anticipated that the tighter building envelope required to meet the energy efficiency goals of the project will also likely result in less sound transmission into the residential units. Comment: The entire The Place project is based on economic speculation. The project depends on artists' lofts, experimental energy sources, people who do not drive, the SWLRT, etc. Response: The project proposed has completed due diligence regarding the location and timing and has supporting market feasibility studies. Jackie and Jim Doyle Comment: As a resident of the Elmwood neighborhood, we wanted to provide some feedback on the PLACE proposed development near 36th and Wooddale. We are concerned about the assumptions in the PLACE proposal that are related to the SWLRT project. If the light rail does not come to fruition, we are very concerned about the disruption to traffic flow in the area of 36th and Wooddale. I’m sure you already know that intersection gets very congested during peak traffic times. Of course, we are also concerned about what that congestion will do to our residential neighborhood. Paragraph 18C of the EAW is an example of an assumption associated with the SWLRT project that is for mitigating adverse traffic impact by moving a driveway but primarily relying on the changes associated with the SWLRT project and other SLP capital projects that may or may not happen (see excerpt below). Another example is the assumption in the Walker Parking Consultant report related to factors incenting lower car dependency (see second excerpt below). There are several incentives cited, but I have to believe that the light rail is more significant than a hotel shuttle, car share, bike share or “temporary” residential shuttle they plan until the light rail is operational. That brings up another question regarding the residential shuttle and the viability of that as a permanent option if the SWLRT project is significantly delayed or cancelled. It seems it might be prudent to delay the approval of this project until the future of the SWLRT, which is a significant factor in the proposal, is known. Response: The Metropolitan Council’s regional transportation plan and the City’s comprehensive plan have identified light rail in the corridor for over 10 years. This has resulted in significant planning and investment along the corridor. The traffic impact study did not include the mobility plan elements into its conservative modeling of traffic generation. The mobility measures, especially the car-free units, have the potential to reduce the trips from the site similarly to the reduction of trips that the traffic study assumed with the presence of Southwest Light Rail. If Southwest Light Rail is delayed, additional traffic analysis will need to be completed to better understand the impacts associated with this development and to identify mitigation measures. The City could program some of the improvements that the traffic impact study assumed would occur with Southwest Light Rail. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 36 PLACE St. Louis Park 29 April 2017 Judy Wells Comment: I am concerned about the anaerobic garbage digester being planned as part of the PLACE project to be located at Highway 7 and Wooddale. I am a SLP homeowner and live about 4 blocks away from the proposed site. I have loved living in the Park for the past 38 years. Most digesters appear to be safe, but things can go wrong (faulty or aging equipment, operator error, equipment sparks, lightening, welding, repair or cleaning people being overcome by gas fumes, for example). If the garbage supply is not carefully and safely transported from point of collection until being fed into the garbage digester, there can be problems with odor, vermin, flies. News stories about garbage digester accidents report that residents were told by developers/owners that the digester was safe, and forward looking, but were irate when the garbage digester failed and stink filled their air. As I understand it, the gases that can cause issues are methane, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide. Most garbage digester installations appear to be in farm, rural, or industrial locations, not in high density residential areas. The PLACE project is planning a high density residential community – low income housing, artists lofts, a hotel – very close to the garbage digester location. Senior housing and a child care facility are also nearby. Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: The EAW does not give adequate information about the garbage digester planned for Wooddale/Hwy7. When was the digester invented / patented? How long has it been in use? Who produces/manufactures it? How is it constructed? What does it look like visually? Who is responsible for the installation/contractor? How many of this type digester are currently in use? What is its safety record? Are other garbage digesters similar to this one located in high density residential communities? What do residents living near it say about its performance? What safety procedures will be in place? How does the garbage get collected, stored, and transferred to the digester? Who will train the residents and staff as to what can and cannot be sent to the digester (garbage rules)? Who is responsible for enforcing garbage rules compliance? What plans are there for the digester operators safety training? How will air quality be measured and what steps will be taken if there are issues? How is water quality monitored (part of the garbage dewatering process)? How is the exhaust from the “vapor plume” monitored and who is responsible for doing this? Will monitored safety level information be available to the public? Will the fire department be trained to deal with a fire or explosion, if it should occur? Will the Council be employing an independent professional engineering consultant to evaluate the viability of the digester project or do you rely on City Hall engineering staff? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 37 PLACE St. Louis Park 30 April 2017 With regard to the "vision" aspect of the garbage digester, I have the following additional questions: Who owns our neighborhood garbage? The city? Or does the hauler obtain rights through a contract? Can citizens opt out of municipal garbage collection and make separate arrangements for garbage removal? Do citizens have garbage privacy rights? If the garbage digester at Wooddale needs additional garbage from SLP residents in order to provide energy for PLACE project residents only (energy is not sent to the grid), will the owner of the SLP garbage agree to sell (or give?) local garbage to the digester operators? Does this require a contract? Something like this may happen in Texas: http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/article/Beaumont- could-make-400K-annually-selling-your-5684399.php Can residents wanting fertilizer have free access to the digestate/fertilizer produced by this project? Who would be responsible for ensuring that only appropriate garbage would be sold to digester operators (no batteries, glass, plastic, metal, animal waste and such)? What kind of sorting, investigating, x-ray, electromagnetic processing is needed? Do residents bear any liability for garbage sorting mistakes? If we expand the Wooddale garbage digester project to include garbage from SLP residents living outside the PLACE project, will the increased traffic in the area from numerous garbage trucks be a problem? Is there adequate space for parking waiting garbage trucks. If the garbage digester at Wooddale is successful, is it part of the city vision to install a garbage digester in each neighborhood or ward in St Louis Park? Would this be safe, economically feasible, able to be scaled to match existing garbage levels, visually attractive, acceptable to residents? Thank you for carefully considering safety and other issues that affect the community that we all love. Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48 for more information. The organics recycling material is owned by the property owner until it is collected. At the time of collection the hauler takes ownership. By contract, the City has the right to determine where the hauler takes the material to be processed. Citizens can opt out of City organized collection, if they provide annual verification of the disposal/processing location to ensure the material is being properly disposed of. Residents are not allowed to hire another contractor to collect in the city. The City’s organics material contains compostable paper and plastics and is collected with grass clippings, leaves, and brush; therefore, the City informed PLACE that our material is not conducive to be processed in the proposed anaerobic digester. Comment: I am concerned about transit opportunities for tenants of the apartments, for hotel guests, for visitors, and for employees at the proposed PLACE project. This project is designed to encourage public transportation and to discourage car use. The following information is from the PLACE EAW p. 30: The site is served by Metro Transit bus routes 615 and 17. Route 17 picks up passengers on W. 36th Street and provides regular route service to downtown Minneapolis. Route 615 also stops on W. 36th Street and provides hourly service between Minnetonka, Hopkins and St. Louis Park. I am a homeowner and have lived near the PLACE project site for over 30 years. I believe in using public transportation and have been a bus rider during the entire time I have lived here. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 38 PLACE St. Louis Park 31 April 2017 Bus service at the PLACE site is not good. The Route 17 has very limited service at W 36th street. Except for a few trips to this area, nearly all regular 17 bus trips go down Minnetonka Blvd in this area of SLP and not W 36th Street. Buses on this special W 36th Street 17 route to downtown stop here at 6:57am, 7:18am, 7:55am and 3:04pm weekdays. Weekdays only. That is it. No weekend service. If you want to use the bus towards downtown at other times during the day or anytime at night, or on weekends, you will need to find another route, the regular 17 bus route which runs down Minnetonka Blvd or the 12 route which runs down Excelsior Blvd. Both of these choices involve a substantial hike to the nearest bus stop. Older people, people with disabilities, or people with children may find this hike difficult, especially in the rain, snow, cold, or summer heat. You can use the other bus choice, the Route 615, to transfer to the route 12 or 17 buses during some parts of the day. Route 615 does not go downtown. It runs across town from Excelsior Blvd to Ridgedale. Smaller shuttle style buses run on this route. Eastbound 615 buses stop on 36th Street near the PLACE development site eastbound once an hour from 7:38am to 7:38pm and westbound once an hour from 7:56am to 6:56 pm. Slightly less hourly service is available on Saturday and there is no service on Sunday. Because these 615 shuttle buses run only once and hour and do not run at night or on Sunday, they do not provide the kind of transport option most people would choose. The scheduled service does not provide the flexibility people need, and it is time consuming to take these buses. Bus service to, for example, the University East Bank on Friday at 9:30 am would take an hour and 13 minutes and would involve taking the 615, transfer to the 12x, transfer to the 6, then transfer to the 2C (this is the route recommended by the Metro Transit Trip Planner). What could go wrong with that? If light rail is available eventually at this site, transit opportunities for people living and working at the PLACE development site would improve. Without the light rail, most people living at, working at, or visiting this site would want to have a car in order to have the kind of travel flexibility everyone needs. I read about plans for car/bike sharing at this site, but that would have to involve many vehicles/bicycles and need to be carefully scheduled in order to adequately meet the needs of all the tenants, employees, and hotel guests. If we go ahead with the PLACE development without light rail, the city needs to work with Metro Transit to get better bus service at this bus stop. Otherwise, the project developers need to plan for more tenant, visitor, employee and hotel guest parking at this site. We may have a vision of a car free future, but at this point, people have to deal with their transit realities. Response: Thank you for your comment. The City and PLACE recognize public transit includes limitations regarding service and routes. LRT is expected to greatly improve transit to the area. The PLACE Mobility Plan includes a number of measures to help residents navigate the existing transit system, as well as other options such as car share and shuttle to help access transit or other destinations. Comment: I think residents need more time to consider the environmental worksheet for the PLACE project. The comment deadline comes just after our holy weeks for Passover and Easter. People have a lot of other things on their minds this week and may not have the time to give careful consideration to the PLACE EAW. Please give us some additional time to study the issues and make informed responses. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 39 PLACE St. Louis Park 32 April 2017 Response: The EAW was available March 6th, with the comment period originally scheduled to end April 5th. It was extended two weeks to end on April 19th. Daniel Kriete on behalf of the Sorenson Neighborhood Steering Committee Comment: Per section 13b of the PLACE EAW, "The Rusty Patch Bumble Bee is known to inhabit prairies, grasslands, wetlands, woodlands, agricultural areas, and residential parks and gardens. It is active from April to September, and needs a constant source of floral resources throughout that time period. Although woodland and maintained grassland is present, due to the lack of prairies, wetlands, residential parks and gardens, it is unlikely the project site contains suitable habitat for the RPBB." However, according to Fish and Wildlife Service website, which was referenced in the EAW, the development sight falls within .56 miles of a "high potential zone" (red polygons on map) for the RPBB and within a "low potential zone." (yellow polygons) Please see maps below. For high potential zones Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act, requires federal agencies to consult with the FWS to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize a species' continued existence. The FWS recommends scientific recovery permits and nonlethal surveys in the low potential zones. Under step 1 of Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act: Due to the species' restricted distribution (see maps), agencies should first determine whether an action (i.e. development) area overlaps with locations where the species is likely to be present - high potential zones. The action area is not only the immediate area involved in the action, but includes all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action (50 CFR § 402.02). The action area is not always limited to the "footprint" of the action, but encompasses the biotic, chemical, and physical impacts to the environment resulting directly or indirectly from the action. The PLACE development will most likely have biotic, chemical, and physical impacts to the high potential zone. Response: The Rusty Patched Bumble Bee (RPBB) is a federally listed species. No federal action is required for this development, and there is no requirement to consult with US Fish and Wildlife Service or complete a survey. Since the project is 0.56 miles outside of the high potential zone, USFWS consultation is not required. USFWS recommends surveys within the low potential zones; however, it is not required by the agency. USFWS recommends surveys in the low potential zone so they can collect additional data which will further refine the distribution model. Considering the existing vegetation and the prime habitat identified by USFWS for the species, this site is does not contain suitable habitat for the species. Comment: There is no evidence in the EAW that a survey was conducted in the area. There was no reference to how the process of development could adversely affect this highly endangered species. In section 13c of the EAW Stantec writes: The RPBB may occur in the woodland present at the project site, and more of this species may be drawn to the project site following the development of residential parks and gardens. To minimize impacts to the RPBB, native plants which are beneficial to pollinators will be used for landscaping, including areas such as the urban forest, entrances, boulevards, property borders, parking islands, and infiltration zones. In addition, the use of herbicides within the project site will be minimized or eliminated during construction and future maintenance activities, where possible. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 40 PLACE St. Louis Park 33 April 2017 Planting a few beneficial pollinators after destroying multiple acres of potential zones will not minimize nor negate the impacts to the RPBB. My question is: As the initial financing of the development and the financial sustainability of this project is dependent on various federal and state funding sources, and federal agencies are required to consult with the FWS before taking an action that may jeopardize a species' continued existence, why hasn't a survey been conducted? Response: This project does not involve a federal action, and no survey or consultation is required. Comment: It has been indicated in the PUD application that there may be a Helical-type Wind Energy Conversion System associated with the E-Gen facility: What danger does this present to birds, waterfowl and bats? What danger do birds, waterfowl and bats present to the WECS? Response: The proposed wind turbine is a Windside WS-4B vertical turbine (www.windside.com). According to the manufacturer's literature, these vertical wind turbines produce no vibration, are soundless (0 dB) measured at a 2 meter distance from the vane, and are safe for people and animals (i.e., they do not kill birds). Comment: As residents that live roughly 700 to 1000 feet from the freight rail tracks, we can hear the train and feel the vibrations as it travels through the corridor. Has PLACE included additional structural, vibration and noise mitigations in their building designs? Response: The design team includes experts regarding noise and vibration issues. Triple-paned glazing or dual-paned glazing with acoustical applications will be evaluated for the windows, as will other acoustical enhancements to the HVAC systems. It is anticipated that the tighter building envelope required to meet the energy efficiency goals of the project will also likely result in less sound transmission into the residential units. Opportunities to minimize the transmission of vibration into and within the buildings from the freight rail will be explored, recognizing the noise and vibration properties of the proposed construction types. Comment: (page 29): Proposed parking includes 447 parking spaces: 216 on the north, and 231 on the south. PLACE is requesting approval with just 447 parking spaces rather than the 688 that would normally be required for a project of this scope per SLP City Code. This represents a total reduction of 35%. The reduction is based primarily on PLACE's Mobility/Car-Free Living Plan, but also includes reductions for shared parking and its location as a transit oriented development. Questions: • What are the consequences to parking capacity on the site if PLACE is unable to attain the car free goal(s) used in the parking calculations? • What is the plan if PLACE is unable to implement/maintain the mitigations that are the basis for the reduction in on-site parking requirements requested in its Final PUD submission? • Why is PLACE getting a reduction for shared parking when the parking study by Walker Parking Consultants indicates that the peak parking for all uses occurs at the same hours, which by SLP code disqualifies the project for that reduction? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 41 PLACE St. Louis Park 34 April 2017 • Who will be responsible for monitoring PLACE's implementation and maintenance of the mitigations in its mobility plan? • If the SWLRT is not built, will PLACE lose the TOD portion of its parking reduction? Where will those cars park? Response: If PLACE is unable to attain the car-free goal(s), they may be required to construct additional parking or lease parking spaces off-site where surplus parking is available. The City has required PLACE to submit proof of parking, demonstrating how and where additional parking can be added to the site. This includes a parking ramp located near the E-Generation facility, the installation of compact parking spaces, and leased spaces from nearby parking lots. The peak parking for the development is at 10 p.m., a time when the coffee shop, cafe, Makers Space, co- working space, and bike shop will either be closed or will have limited service. This allows for a parking reduction due to shared parking. Additionally, PLACE has collaborated with the hotel operator and commercial enterprises to hire employees from within the residential component of the development, lessening the need for additional employee parking spaces. PLACE will be required to report the mobility/travel demand management (TDM) plan annually to the City for review as per the Planning Development Contract. If issues arise, PLACE will be required to revise their mobility/TDM plan or construct additional parking to alleviate parking issues. The parking reductions for PLACE are based upon car-free living and shared parking, not on transit. The City does offer a 10 percent reduction for commercial units when adjacent to an area served by bus transit, but those reductions were not applied to the PLACE development. Regardless of SWLRT, PLACE will be required to manage parking onsite. If SWLRT is not approved and parking is an issue, the developer will be required to add additional mobility measures and/or construct additional parking onsite. Comment: Some of these apartments are designated as live/work spaces, the renters will want to sell their merchandise (i.e.: art fairs and special events) which will bring traffic to the area. Was this additional traffic factored into SEHs traffic study? Also with the planned reduction in parking as this is a transit orientated community, where will the customers park? What types of businesses are allowed to be run out of PLACE? If businesses like daycares are allowed, they generate multiple trips a day, were those additional traffic trips factored into SEHs traffic study? Response: The draft planned unit development (PUD) ordinance includes performance standards for home occupations allowed in the live/work spaces. These uses will be the same or similar to the lists allowed in other residential districts in the city. Certain home occupations will specifically be prohibited, and others must conform the current city regulations. The draft ordinance for this development excludes group day care facilities and will either prohibit or strictly limit family day cares in the PUD. The traffic consultants took into account live/work units. Regarding the possibility of special events, the City has permitting requirements for such events and the logistics associated with those events are handled on a case-by-case basis. Comment: (Page 32) Travel Demand Management Strategies: The Proposer will provide a car-free perks package to 90 households on a first-come, first-served basis. Why on a first-come first-served basis, are there not enough for 90 households? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 42 PLACE St. Louis Park 35 April 2017 Do they expect more than 90 households to want car-free perks? Those who choose to be car-free and receive the benefits must agree as part of their lease that they will remain car-free. How will this be enforced and what would the penalty be? What would prevent a resident who initially has no car, and then has a legitimate need for one, from maintaining their perks by parking off-site on city streets? How will SWLRT riders be prevented from parking at PLACE or the immediate area? Will there be neighborhood or tenant parking permits? Who will bear the cost of signage and enforcement? Won't the potential need for parking at PLACE and SWLRT station increase the traffic congestion in the area as people look for spaces? Response: St. Louis Park and other cities along the SWLRT line are in discussions to conduct a parking management strategy plan for all SWLRT station areas, as potential “hide-and-ride” parking is not an issue unique to the Wooddale Station area. PLACE will be responsible for managing parking (signage, permitting, etc.) on their properties, and the City will be responsible for managing parking (signage, permitting, etc.) on city right-of-way. There are no SWLRT parking spaces located at the Wooddale Station. Park-and-ride facilities will be available at the Beltline Station and Louisiana Station in St. Louis Park. Comment: (page 31) Table 18 - 3 The traffic study provided uses traffic counts extrapolated from a 2013 Traffic Study to assess current and future traffic congestion. Do the numbers used reflect the increase in traffic only from PLACE or do they include the Elmwood as well? Does the actual growth in the 35th street corridor, including PLACE and The Elmwood, exceed the base growth projections used in the study for both 2020 and 2040? Will additional growth beyond that of The Elmwood and PLACE exceed the base growth projections used in the study for both 2020 and 2040? Do the numbers include the SWLRT intersection upgrades? What is the plan, going forward, as more development occurs in this area? Response: This traffic study factors in existing traffic and future growth based on the city’s established land use plan to determine traffic volumes. Analysis was completed to understand opening day (2020) traffic and 2040 traffic volumes for consistency with the Southwest Light Rail transit project. The traffic analysis incorporated the Southwest Light Rail’s and City’s planned improvements to Wooddale from TH 7 to W 36th Street. As additional development projects are proposed in the area, traffic analysis and mitigation measures may be necessary. Comment: (Page 32) Per the Traffic Impact Study, proposed intersection improvements for the area include: • Traffic signals at the TH 7 terminal intersections on Wooddale City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 43 PLACE St. Louis Park 36 April 2017 • Restripe Wooddale Ave to a 4-lane section • Restrict the full access Frontage Road intersection to right-in/right-out access (the City has requested that the access be modified to include a southbound left turn lane onto the east leg of the Frontage Road; this is currently under consideration by SPO) • New signal system and gates for the freight and LRT crossings • New grade-separated trail crossing for the Cedar Lake LRT Trail at Wooddale (underpass) • Widening of Wooddale Bridge and reconfiguration of bridge corners to improve sight lines • Construct a right-in/right-out access to the south site on W 36th St • Construct eastbound left turn lane on to Xenwood from W 36th St • Add flashing yellow arrow signal heads for eastbound traffic on W 36th St on to Xenwood Intersection proposed improvements at Hwy 7/south frontage road/freightrail/LTR crossing are tied to SWLRT, which has not broken ground yet. If SWLRT isn't built, who will pay for the necessary intersection improvements? Response: The improvements identified in the traffic impact study are a collection of capital improvement projects programmed by SWLRT and the City. It is expected that the widening of Wooddale Bridge, the 36th Street left turn lane at Xenwood, and the right-in/right-out access of the south frontage road will be built by the City with various scheduled improvements. Other improvements, such as the grade separation of the Cedar Lake Regional Trail, will be a joint effort of the City, Three Rivers Park District, and Hennepin County. Comment: The proposed south frontage road right-in/right-out access to NB Wooddale Ave (no access to Wooddale SB) is problematic: Drivers wishing to go SB on Wooddale will find another spot along Wooddale to make a u-turn to go south on Wooddale, thus creating a different traffic issue elsewhere. Wooddale Ave serves as a primary access to two schools: SLP High and Central/PSI. In the recent past, left turns from HWY 7 exit ramps were prohibited and most drivers complied, others simply made U- turns elsewhere along Wooddale to correct their course. How will you ensure the right-in/right-out access won't create other traffic issues elsewhere along Wooddale? Since the city requested left-in access, is it possible to design the intersection to allow for left-out as well? How will the safety of students walking, biking or driving be ensured? Response: The Metropolitan Council’s regional transportation model and traffic impact study project 90 percent of the traffic from the site is destined for Highway 7 or Highway 100. Less than 5 percent of the overall traffic from the entire development is projected to be destined for 36th Street. The impact of preventing vehicles from turning left out of the frontage road is projected to be very limited, especially in comparison to the much larger number of vehicles turning left from the highway exit ramps. The overall performance of Wooddale Avenue/W 36th Street is much better with the restriction of left-turns from the frontage road. The City has programmed improvements to the Wooddale bridge for 2018-2019 that will expand sidewalks and bike lanes and improve visibility at the freeway ramps. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 44 PLACE St. Louis Park 37 April 2017 Comment: Table 18 - 3 does not reflect the PM peak traffic flow reported in the SEH traffic studies for 2020 & 2040 with both PLACE and 35th Street connection in play. For 2020, there are 8 intersections at LOS D and 4 at LOS E. Two of the LOS E intersections are at PLACE access and 36th Street. For 2040, there are 6 intersections at LOS D, 8 intersections at LOS E, and 8 that are at LOS F. As 2020 is less than 3 years away, it means that the PLACE development would open in an already congested area. Is there any plan to increase the LOS to C or better? Response: The City’s standard for intersection level of service (LOS) is for LOS D or better. Individual legs of an intersection may fall below that threshold; however, the aggregate LOS for the development out to 2040 with 35th Street are all LOS D or better. Designing and building intersections with LOS C or better are not always possible in an urban environment due to economic and space constraints. Comment: Given that the TIF executive summary notes that the EDA's own financial consultant cautions there is a lack of financial feasibility of the high percentage of residential units with restrictive (affordable rents): How would future federal or state budget cuts to low income housing, vouchers, services etc. affect the financial viability I sustainability of the PLACE project? What would be the alternative resources for this funding? How much of PLACE's total revenue in their operating budget will be derivatives of this revenue stream? What other kinds of options as PLACE and City Council considered to narrow this gap? Response: The project will not be affected by cuts in future federal or state affordable housing programs. The City’s and Economic Development Authority’s financial consultant’s analyses of the project showed that the residential component of the project is not feasible but for the provision of $5.6 million in tax increment assistance. The assistance is local funding generated by the property taxes from the new development and not state or federal funds. Comment: According to the PLACE 15 year operating PROFORMA, the annual debt service payment beginning year 1 is more than 5M Dollars and the net projected cash flow annually in first 10 years never exceed $1.5M. What are the offset revenue options to maintain positive operating expense streams if any segment of the current projections ramp more slowly than anticipated (or fail)? Response: The project will maintain industry standard operating reserves. Comment: If the SWLRT project is not completed or is delayed beyond the present projections: What financial implications to the PLACE Project will there be budgetarily? How will the recent potential bus line and metro transit cuts announced in the Star Tribune on April 27, 2017 impact the transportation plans of this project if those cuts are made and how will that add to the cost of the PLACE Project? Response: There are no anticipated financial impacts on the PLACE project from SWLRT project delays; and what future funding from Metro Transit will be, and what, if any, changes to transit service in St. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 45 PLACE St. Louis Park 38 April 2017 Louis Park or the PLACE project would result, are not known. An potential cost may be the need to provide the shuttle service for a longer period of time until LRT or other transit service is available. The City will continue to work with Metro Transit to provide effective transit service. Generally, Metro Transit focuses its services on areas of high ridership opportunities and transit-oriented developments similar to the PLACE design. The market studies for the project contemplated the feasibility of the project with and without SWLRT and determined that it is feasible under both scenarios. The presence or absence of the SWLRT project improvements is not expected to significantly impact the construction cost of the PLACE project. Comment: Given that more than one third of PLACE's revenue budget is expected to come from this, according to the PLACE 15 year OPERATING PROFORMA: What are the financial commitments and what length of commitment is the Hotel entering into with Place? Is the hotel planning to accept any other non-retail hospitality revenue sources to maintain profitability? (ie, homeless vouchers, corporate relocation contracts, etc.). Will the hotel workers be a part of a union and what obligations will PLACE legally place upon the Marriott Corporation to pay a living wage and provide full time work? How will PLACE define living wage in absence of city ordinance that defines it? Response: The contract with Marriott has not been completed at this time but will be completed according to typical development timelines and standards. Comment: What is the expected occupancy rate of the hotel in years 1-5? Will Methodist Hospital or other corporate clients be committing formally to agreements with legally binding financial obligations to the Place Project? Who are these entities and who has met with them? Are minutes of those meetings and/or financial commitments available for public inspection? Response: The project proposer commissioned three independent market studies over the past 18 months. The most recent was completed in November 2016. All of these studies supported the economic viability of the hotel. Discussions with Methodist Hospital are ongoing, but a positive outcome from these discussions is not critical to the economic performance of the hotel as defined in the market studies. Comment: As the Hotel has been named by PLACE as an anchor for financial sustainability of the Project: What is the current occupancy rate of the hotel stock within 5 miles of this development (ie, the 394 business corridor and WestEnd area)? Earlier documents provided at City study sessions indicated this occupancy rates that were less than 90%; how does the PLACE budget apply occupancy swings in its formula for revenue projections and what financial resources will be budgeted and by whom (ie, PLACE or City of SLP) to keep these rooms filled? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 46 PLACE St. Louis Park 39 April 2017 Response: The project proposer commissioned three independent market studies over the past 18 months. The most recent was completed in November 2016. All of these studies supported the economic viability of the hotel. Comment: Will live/work residents be required to maintain commercial liability insurances and commercial property insurances? How will that be managed by PLACE (ie, will they be required to purchase from PLACE under an umbrella policy managed by one insurance company, show proof of insurance and each tenant will have own policy, etc.)? Could taxpayers end up with any financial liability for such? Response: The majority of the live/work units (94 out of 99) are residential units and do not have a commercial/retail function. The remaining 5 will be required to carry insurance as required for other commercial establishments in the city. Tax payers will not be subject to financial liability for these live/work units. Comment: Given that PLACE is a non-profit organization and that a high percentage of this development will be built with municipal monies, in the absence of significant equity at the front end to borrow against: Will the PLACE organization have contingency funds in the bank guaranteed in event of an unforeseen financial development, significant cost overruns, or necessitated shift in scope of project? Do the Ventura Wave Project and Curley School Project run annually in the black? How many years of the last 10 years have these projects been run at the projected income and expense budget and /or without deficit? Response: The project will maintain industry standard operating reserves. The City will require that all financing is secured before the City will sell the property to PLACE. The commercial components of the development will likely be financed with conventional terms including down payments. The project is not being built with municipal monies. The City has agreed to issue conduit revenue bonds for the PLACE project, which means the City is using its bonding authority to allow PLACE to borrow funds to finance a portion of the PLACE project. These are not the City’s monies, and the obligation to repay the borrowed funds is not the City’s responsibility. Comment: According to the PLACE website and research on the professional background, presently among the PLACE staff and the entire PLACE Board of Directors, there is no one with specific business expertise in financial management, budgeting, or finance/accounting and 50% of your board is not local to MN. How will PLACE conduct, engage, and ensure prudent and sustainable fiscal practices in the development and management of this project without staff or board expertise in this critical area? Response: The PLACE team has stated they have experience in the creation of other similar projects for public benefit, none of which have ever been in default or foreclosure. The members of the limited liability company that was formed to complete this project in St. Louis Park have contributed a combination of cash and in-kind equity to the project financing. The project consultant team includes CPAs and engineers. The PLACE Board of Directors and Advisory Board include other developers, City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 47 PLACE St. Louis Park 40 April 2017 architects, real estate professionals, academics, and executives from substantial corporations and the finance industry. The City’s and Economic Development Authority’s fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project found it to be consistent with industry standards. The City’s engineering staff and independent engineering consultants have reviewed the project. The fiscal consultants’ analyses of the proposed project on behalf of the proposer and the city found it to be consistent with industry standards. Separate management firms will be hired for the hotel and residential apartments. Comment: How will the PLACE project fund potential additional infrastructure costs that will come as a result of this development so that it does not ultimately become burdensome to the tax base of Saint Louis Park. Potential unplanned infrastructure or associated costs may be: • Public Safety and Security (including enforcement of parking restrictions, presence of urban forest, presence of retail clients • Potential Human Services support for low income residents to help them thrive in our community (i.e. ESL for schools, transportation, jobs training/re-training in Place enterprises, etc) • Schools and associated education related costs Response: The City considers impacts to city service (police, fire, public works) when preparing tax increment financing plans. Comment: The anaerobic digester, which seems to be an important part of the E-Generation for PLACE, is not well addressed in the EAW. The following questions are related to multiple Sections of the EAW, including Transportation, Air, Water, and General Safety. Is there an operating anaerobic digester of equivalent capacity in an urban setting currently operating anywhere in the United States and/or the world? How well does it fulfill the needs for which it was installed? What were the needs for that project and compare them to PLACE. What is the name(s) of the project(s) Where are they located? How does the amount of waste required for that project(s) compare with the projected amount produced at Place? Describe any similarities or dissimilarities between those and the one to be used at PLACE. Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: How will you insure the quality and appropriateness of waste materials that will be collected from tenants and put into the digester? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: How will the food waste be collected from the 299 residential units, 110 hotel rooms, cafe and coffee house for the digester? How and when will it be transported to the E-generation facility? How many trips per day? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 48 PLACE St. Louis Park 41 April 2017 What impact will this have on traffic? What impact will this have on air quality (odors)? What impact will this have on parking? How and where will the waste be stored? What impact will this have on air quality (odors)? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: The raw material has to be closely monitored or the dewatered solid waste will be unusable: Who will be responsible for monitoring the quality and consistency of the material being sent to the anaerobic digester? How many positions have been designated for the pick-up, storing, feeding and maintaining the digester? What impact will this have on parking at PLACE? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: It is stated that an average of 120 gallons of food waste per hour will be needed for the digester. (EAW pg 18) That is a total of 2880 gallons of food waste per day. Is it realistic that that much food waste will be generated on site? Where is the data to back that claim? If there is not enough daily food waste from the PLACE to run the anaerobic digester, PLACE will need to obtain matter from other sources. Is that delivery calculated in the traffic report? Will that food waste be delivered in 60 gallon containers with lids as the on-site waste is to reduce odors? affect daily operation and your financial bottom line? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: It is stated (EAW pg 18) that 357 lbs/day of dewatered waste will be produced. How much will need to be stored on site? How often will it be shipped out? Will the disposition of the dewatered waste require large trucks? Is this traffic included in the traffic study? Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: Does the number "5 daily trips" cited in the traffic study, account for the total movement of raw material to the system and the disposition of the dewatered material that is created? Does it account for the type and size of vehicle required? Response: The traffic study accounts for the total movement of materials to and from the E-Generation facility. Comment: How will air quality from the combustion process be monitored so it doesn't exceed the maximum emissions stated (pg 27) in the EAW? City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 49 PLACE St. Louis Park 42 April 2017 Response: The project will comply with MPCA requirements for air quality monitoring. Comment: The anaerobic digestion process appears to require attention for proper operation and has, under certain circumstances, resulted in explosion and fire. Who will be charged with the training, monitoring and maintenance required by the anaerobic digester? Who will be charged with maintenance of safety protocols? Who will generate those protocols? Is the SLP fire department currently trained to deal with the potential of a methane explosion and fire at the E-Gen facility? Is City staff trained to perform the necessary and required inspections of the equipment? If not, who will do so? How many positions have been designated for the pick-up, storing, feeding and maintaining the digester? Response: The City of St. Louis Park Fire Department is equipped and trained to respond to such incidents. City of St. Louis Park Inspections and Fire Departments will inspect and enforce state building and fire codes related to this type of operation. If determined during the permitting process that State of Minnesota or other third party expertise is required, the City will engage those resources. Comment: How does the PLACE project affect the immediate areas walkability score? Response: Walk scores are based on the number of amenities located within a 5-minute walk. Since PLACE is adding a cafe, coffee shop, hotel, and other amenities, the development should increase the walkability score for the surrounding area. Comment: Should there not be more 3 and 4 bedroom units for creatives with larger families, particularly single women? At the first few PLACE public meetings, PLACE stated its project would be all encompassing; singles to families. Why were the 4 bedroom apartments removed from the design? What is the adult/child maximum for each of the apartment designs? Would childcare be allowed in any of the units in the project? Response: The proposed tenant mix is supported by market research. The development includes two four-bedroom units and 27 three-bedroom units. The adult to child maximum per unit will be per Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) limits for affordable units and per MetroPlains guidelines for market rate units. The proposed planned unit development ordinance may allow licensed family day care as a home occupation on the south site only, with certain restrictions, similar to other residential zoning districts in the city. Group day care (non-residential) will not be allowed. PLACE will allow day care on the south site consistent with MHFA requirements. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 50 PLACE St. Louis Park 43 April 2017 Laura Jensen Comment: On the City of St. Louis Park website, the description of this project said that it will produce electricity via solar, wind, and co-generation. I did not find any information about the wind or solar portions of the project described in the EAW. Where can I find more details about those items? Specifically, with the wind generation, will the generation process contribute any noise or vibration to the neighborhood. Has the process been assessed for potential effects on birds or other wildlife? Response: The proposed wind turbine is a Windside WS-4B vertical turbine (www.windside.com). According to the manufacturer's literature, these vertical wind turbines produce no vibration, are soundless (0 dB) measured at a 2 meter distance from the vane, and are safe for people and animals (i.e., do not kill birds). Comment: Considering the co-generation process, my understanding was that the digesting process would produce methane and then the methane would be used to produce energy. I don’t see in the EAW how this methane will be managed. It isn’t listed in section 12c. As methane can be explosive, what steps are in place to ensure it will not pose a risk? How will the methane be controlled, contained and transported? What are the back-up plans to prevent it from posing a hazard to the neighborhood if it escapes its primary system? Response: The two 1 megawatt cogeneration units are no longer proposed for the project. See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. Comment: Section 17 discusses sensitive receivers to noise. The properties at 3600 Wooddale and 3640 Wooddale do not appear to be considered in the EAW but should also be considered. These properties are closer to the property than some of the others mentioned and do not have any noise barriers between them and the proposed e-generation site. Response: The E-Generation facility is rated by the manufacturer for 70 decibels at ten meters. Since point source noises decay at a rate of approximately 6 decibels per distance doubling, noise levels will be roughly 64 decibels at the site boundary. This noise level is lower than the noise associated with noise from traffic on Highway 7. Noise from the site will continue to decrease at greater distances and will not cause increased noise levels at adjacent sensitive receptors. The properties at 3600 and 3640 Wooddale are over 450 feet from the location of the proposed location for the E-Generation site. Noise levels at this distance will be approximately 48 decibels, which is well below the state standards for daytime and nighttime noise levels. Comment: Question 18, page 29 states that the proposed parking includes 447 parking spaces: 216 on the north and 31 on the south. 216 + 31 ≠ 447. Where will the additional parking spaces be located? I understand that residents will be incentivized to not have their own automobiles on site. I encourage the city to ensure that a mechanism exists to ensure that these incentives will be available in perpetuity. The neighborhood cannot handle overflow parking in the streets. Response: There are 231 parking spaces on the south, not 31 as originally stated in the EAW. Comment: Page 32 describes that the project will include constructing a “RI/RO access to the south site at W. 36th St.” I am concerned that this additional access may be too close to an already problematic intersection and will need to be carefully considered. The Wooddale-36th St intersection is already constrained by its non-perpendicular geometry and its close proximity to the rail road crossing. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 51 PLACE St. Louis Park 44 April 2017 Furthermore, the Village in the Park (VIP) subdivision has a Right-In/Right-Out (RI/RO) access in the near vicinity that does not appear to have been considered with the traffic study. My experience with this VIP access is that it is often not used as designed. Vehicles routinely turn left both into and out of the access area. Potential collisions from this misuse are, theoretically, mitigated by drivers having a good view and understanding the flow of traffic through the intersection. However, adding another unexpected or less-visible access to the intersection could increase the confusion and potential for increased collisions. It appears that the PLACE RI/RO access will have limited visibility to the entire intersection and will not be able to see any traffic in the northern portion of the intersection. Knowing the misuse of the VIP RI/RO, how has the PLACE RI/RO design considered safety for all parts of the intersection, and how has the PLACE RI/RO design alleviated its potential misuse? Response: The access locations studied in the traffic impact study provide satisfactory egress and safety for vehicles traveling to and from the development and 36th Street. The area will be analyzed in greater detail and additional geometric revisions could be pursued with the upcoming 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue road rehabilitation project. This could include such modifications as a RI/RO island at the driveway or a median on 36th Street. Comment: The traffic study also pointed out some challenges with the PLACE RI/RO. I agree that because it would turn from and onto a frequently queued right-turn only lane, there will be delays to both entering and exiting vehicles as well as delays to the regular traffic trying to flow through the intersection around PLACE. Also, as the study points out, “a vehicle exiting PLACE would have to execute a difficult maneuver to enter the left turn lane (to travel from 36th street) and travel southbound on Wooddale Avenue in order to access southbound TH 100.” Therefore, with these challenges, the design for the PLACE RI/RO must be carefully considered. I suggest that it is worth considering eliminating the RI/RO access. At the very least, there should be very good, abundant and clear signage directing people to use the 35th street vehicular entrance to reduce pressure on the RI/RO access. General signage at the intersection must be carefully planned as well. A sign placed at the intersection visible from westbound 36th street near the left turn lane is frequently knocked down and replaced. Response: The access locations studied in the traffic impact study provide satisfactory egress and safety for vehicles traveling to and from the development and 36th Street. The area will be analyzed in greater detail and additional geometric revisions could be pursued with the upcoming 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue road rehabilitation project. This could include such modifications as a RI/RO island at the driveway or a median on 36th Street. Renee Klemetsen Comment: The potential and likely smell of the anaerobic digester. Until there is a guarantee that this will not smell now can this move forward? I haven’t seen a proven success story for a digester and yet many disaster stories have been brought to light. I grew up in a small town with a smelly paper mill and that is what we were known for. I do not want this to happen and depreciate the value of my home. Everything issued on how this will work seems to be hypothetical, untested, and recently I believe a patent was recently rejected, I have yet to find out why but it offers even more concern. Response: See the anaerobic digester supplemental information on page 48. The City of St. Louis Park regulations for anaerobic digesters include performance standards for odor control, as well as nuisance regulations. The development must comply with these and any other regulations through the MPCA City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 52 PLACE St. Louis Park 45 April 2017 permitting. The building containing the operation will also be constructed in accordance with applicable building and fire codes. Comment: The light rail that it is dependent upon for success is years away, and not a “sure thing”. While we do have metro transit buses, as someone who often tries to use them because I do like the benefits of public transit, I frequently have to drive to a spot for a pickup or spend over an hour trying to get 5 miles, this is not an exaggeration, due to the Mpls hub-and-spoke routing of buses. Response: Thank you for your comment. The city and PLACE recognize public transit includes limitations regarding service and routes. LRT is expected to greatly improve transit to the area. The PLACE Mobility Plan includes a number of measures to help residents navigate the existing transit system, as well as alternatives to Metro Transit service that do not rely upon personal automobile ownership. Comment: More low income housing is frustrating considering the near $6k I pay in property taxes each year. I live behind a low income apartment and have trash thrown over my fence on a regular basis, cars without mufflers waking me up at all hours, consistent police activity due to crime. I apologize if this seems insensitive but at some point I have to express it. Let’s bring in more high end development ideas to increase our property values rather than have them decline. How about instead have a housing development using the sustainable development ideas considered in this project. Response: Thank you for your comment. Comment: The space being used for this large development is very small and at a busy area that is already congested. Response: The City has extensively studied the size and intensity of the PLACE development including traffic, parking, stormwater, water, sewer, and the other items studied in the EAW, which demonstrate capacity for the development. The development meets the City's required setbacks for all City owned right-of-way, and the height, size, and density of the development is similar to other mixed-use development located along West 36th Street. Comment: The cost; I understand that it’s non-profit but it is financed with what I believe is $150M, this is a LOT of money that I feel could be put to better use for our city and residents. Response: The private development cost of the project is estimated to be $123 million. The City has agreed to issue tax exempt bonds to finance a portion of the proposed 299 housing units in the project in the approximate principal amount of $27.1 million. These notes/bonds will not impact City debt capacity, do not constitute a general or moral obligation of the City, and will not be secured by the taxing powers of the City or any assets or property of the City. PLACE has requested $5.66 million in tax increment financing (TIF). The TIF assistance will be pay-as-you-go and reimbursed with tax revenue generated by the development when it is built. Douglas Mezera Comment: I live on 35th street across from the Park Spanish Immersion school. The PLACE project must not move forward. The entire project depends on the implementation of the SW light rail project. I find it hard to believe that the state government is willing to scuttle the project after expending so many resources in development. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 53 PLACE St. Louis Park 46 April 2017 However, the Republican controlled Minnesota state house and senate have clearly voiced their intentions to block the SW light rail project, even if it means losing federal funding. Without the light rail, the lack of parking for the hotel and the apartments will cause more problems, and overshadow any benefits that the project could ever hope to accomplish for the lower income residents of the city. The Wooddale Ave. bridge over Highway 7 already has high traffic levels, and the worst visibility in the city. Low income apartments will mean quite a few children will be moving into this apartment complex. 400 extra cars crowding the Wooddale intersections will be dangerous for all residents in the immediate area. I believe you should draft a new report assessing the environmental impact assuming the SW light rail will not be constructed. The city council needs accurate information. Response: Thank you for your comment. The development does not depend on LRT to succeed. The development will need to implement its Mobility Plan (travel demand management) and parking management plans. If Southwest Light Rail is delayed, additional traffic analysis will be completed to better understand the impacts associated with this development and to identify mitigation measures and what, if any, traffic improvements are needed. Widening of the Wooddale bridge is a City initiated project to improve visibility and accommodate wider sidewalks and bike lanes, and this improvement is not dependent on the SWLRT project moving forward and is programmed for 2018-2019. Pam Reierson Comment: I do want to contact you directly about my strong feelings opposing the propose Place development. The Place development sounded very exciting until I realized that the project requires far more space than is available at the Wooddale, Highway 7, 35th and 36th street area. My husband and I have lived in the St. Louis Park Fern Hill neighborhood for over 40 years. We raised two children there, and one of our daughters currently lives on Park Glen Road. The area around Wooddale and Highway 7 is an area through which I travel very frequently - even several times a day. For me and others as well, traffic and congestion (car, rail, bicycle and walking trail) are already overwhelming and therefore unsafe. Many St. Louis Park residents depend on or use the intersections on Wooddale, 36 Street, and Highway 7. We drive through there to get to and from Miracle Mile, Lunds and Byerlys, Target, the High School, PSI, the Library, Knollwood, the Super Target to teh West of Knollwood, and Walgreens on Blake Road just south of Knollwood. Former Mayor Jeff Jacobs used any number of colorful phrases when he spoke publicly. One, which alarmed me at the time and continues to do so in the present was "congestion is a good thing." While I support some of the concepts of the Place development (e.g. affordable housing) and except for the Urban Forest, I deeply oppose its proposed location. The available area for the proposed site is far too small. Response: Thank you for your comments. The traffic impact study indicates acceptable level of service in this area. The access locations studied in the traffic impact study provide satisfactory egress and safety for vehicles traveling to and from the development and 36th Street. The area will be analyzed in greater detail and additional geometric revisions could be pursued with the upcoming 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue road rehabilitation project. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 54 PLACE St. Louis Park 47 April 2017 Comment: There are times in the morning when southbound traffic on Ottawa crossing Highway 7 to continue south on Beltline Boulevard is backed up to Minnetonka Boulevard. Some of this is related to stoplights on Highway 7. But some of this is also related to Twin Cities and Western railroad traffic that blocks Beltline Boulevard. According to Minnesota Statute 219.383 Sub. 3, trains cannot block roadways for over 10 minutes. This applies to stopped trains only, and there are certain exceptions. There is nothing in the law about trains that are moving and blocking roadways as they move. There are times when both directions of Beltline Boulevard are blocked far longer than 10 minutes, either by trains that are stopped or moving. At time, northbound traffic on Beltline Boulevard is backed up past of Park Glen Road. Even as I support light rail, I shudder to think of the effect of adding light rail to this. The same conflict is even more intense at Wooddale and Highway 7. That traffic will worsen if/when light rail becomes a reality. The intersection of Wooddale and 36th Street is challenging because westbound drivers must turn left on Wooddale in response to posted signs that direct access to southbound Highway 100. Drivers must make the same turn to travel on Excelsior Boulevard in either direction. Truly workable solutions to the Highway 7/Wooddale area and the Wooddale/36th Street intersections are needed right now. Once these improvements are developed and effected, then perhaps minimal additional development in this area can be considered. But, please do not approve development of The Place at this time and in this area. Response: Thank you for your comments. The traffic impact study indicates acceptable level of service at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. The access locations studied in the traffic impact study provide satisfactory egress and safety for vehicles traveling to and from the development and 36th Street. The area will be analyzed in greater detail and additional geometric revisions could be pursued with the upcoming 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue road rehabilitation project. Comment: Aimbridge, the hotel operator, may well have “…experience with hotels on the LRT line and will encourages guests to come by transit.” However, I believe that too many of their ideas are completely unrealistic and extremely expensive as stated. A “transportation concierge” “…helping residents and the public to navigate the Twin Cities area using the many transit options available that do not require a personal vehicle.” There are very few such options available in the Twin Cities. Thus, the word “many,” though well intended, is completely misleading. A “shuttle” that provides transportation to key destinations for residents and hotel guests.” Given the size of the Urban area of Minneapolis and St. Paul and surrounding suburbs and the vast number of potential “key destinations,” I see this intent as unworkable. “A free hybrid shuttle to run regularly to high demand destinations for residents and hotel guests…”? “The destinations and scheduling will be determined through conversations with hotel management and residents.” Again, I see this as unworkable even if it is well intended. Therefore, I cannot agree that there will be “…minimal impact to the existing roadway network under 2020 traffic demand.” On the contrary, I believe there will be major impact on our “existing roadway network…” I have not examined the EAW carefully enough to determine which entity will be responsible for the proposed modifications to the Highway 7 entrance and exit ramps. I have not been able to find a timetable for their City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 55 PLACE St. Louis Park 48 April 2017 completion. I am certain the City of St. Louis Park will fund and make the appropriate changes to restripe Wooddale Avenue and to reworking city intersections. But, what realistic timetable is proposed for completing these projects? Lest you perceive me as completely negative, I do support many of the exciting and positive concepts of The Place Project. However, I see that the proposed area is far too small and that the Place Development deserves to be constructed in a far larger and more workable location and thus, a different location from the Wooddale/Highway 7/36th Street site. Response: Thank you for your comments. The traffic impact study indicates acceptable levels of service within the project area. The development will need to implement its Mobility (travel demand management) Plan. The area will be analyzed in greater detail and additional geometric revisions could be pursued with the upcoming 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue road rehabilitation project. Regarding your question about the timetable for improvements to the Wooddale bridge, the City has these changes programmed in the capital improvement plan for 2018-2019. Other transportation improvements are scheduled to occur over the next few years and are included as part of, or in coordination with, the construction of SWLRT (2017-2021) or the PLACE project itself. Anaerobic Digester: Supplemental Information System Description The project is using a pre-manufactured, self-contained anaerobic digester manufactured by SEaB Energy Ltd (http://seabenergy.com). The specified model is the FLEXIBUSTER Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Model FB72. The FLEXIBUSTER was first invented in 2009/2010 and went through several versions during 5 years of development. The current version (version 5) went to market in 2015. The system is designed to be installed outdoors and is fully contained in ISO Intermodal shipping containers that are either 10-feet or 20-feet in length, painted green. Although the system is designed to be installed outdoors in the elements, the anaerobic digesters on the PLACE project will be fully enclosed within the E-Gen building. The anaerobic digesters are partially manufactured by SEaB Energy's own production facility and also in collaboration with production partners in the United Kingdom and the United States. Global patents for the system have been obtained over the years. The PLACE St. Louis Park system is designed for 600 tons per year. The organic source separated food waste from apartments and the café is estimated as follows: • Café: 300 lbs/day • 300 apartments: 1,200 lbs/day An additional estimated 1,600 lbs/day of spent grain from a local brewery will be used at the E-Gen facility. The combination of these sources results in an organic waste stream of approximately 570 tons annually. The facility includes a drying unit to dry the digestate material, further reducing the amount of trucking to and from the facility. The end product will be in powder form or similar. It will be stored on pallets inside the E-Gen building and can be shipped using smaller cube vans rather than full sized semis. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 56 PLACE St. Louis Park 49 April 2017 Technology and FLEXIBUSTER Product History Anaerobic digestion technology has been used throughout the world for decades. Large scale facilities using food wastes to create energy exist throughout Europe to power cities. The smallest scale anaerobic digesters occur in Africa and use the manure from two cows to heat and power a home. In addition, in the United States, landfills use gas created from decomposing materials to generate heat and electricity. The PLACE St. Louis Park E-Gen facility uses this same general technology on a community scale. The FLEXIBUSTER is a standard, factory-built appliance. A version 5 FLEXIBUSTER unit has been running since May 2015 at a business park in Southampton, UK and since May 2016 at a large supermarket in Portugal (high density). A previous version has been running at the business park in Southampton since 2012 until it being replaced by version 5 in 2015. All systems have been running according to expectations and without any safety issues. The FLEXIBUSTER system was recently installed right next to the central hospital in Southampton, UK and is expected to be switched on for the first time within weeks. The first US systems are currently being finalized, with installation taking place soon. Impacts to Adjacent Uses The FLEXIBUSTER anaerobic digester system is unique and distinguishable from other anaerobic digestion systems because the system is fully contained within standard containers, which allows all air and gasses in and from the system to be fully controlled and filtered. The manufacturer has test certificates of the effectiveness of the odor control for the system at a business park in Southampton, UK. This testing shows no odorous particles being detected after the standard system filtering. The system is also micro-scale compared to other anaerobic digestion solutions, making the system manageable and aiding in the controllability as described above. A FLEXIBUSTER has been running successfully next to a large supermarket in the middle of Porto, Portugal without any odor issues. Installation, Operation, and Safety at PLACE St. Louis Park The facility will be designed to meet applicable local, state, and federal standards and regulations. The proposer will be responsible for the installation of the SEaB equipment in accordance with the manufacturer’s written instructions. The FLEXIBUSTER is a standard piece of equipment, for which the installation process follows carefully reviewed guidelines that include pressure testing and inert gas purging to prevent the risk of any explosive atmosphere arising during commissioning. Local operators will be trained by SEaB to ensure the anaerobic digester system is operated properly and safely. The FLEXIBUSTER has been designed for safe and easy operation and for that purpose is equipped with remote monitoring capabilities and automatic alarm messaging systems. It has been found by an independent safety consultant to comply with all regulations for dangerous substances and explosive atmospheres (DSEAR). The small scale of the FLEXIBUSTER means that concerns that may apply to conventional, large anaerobic digestion plants do not necessarily apply to the FLEXIBUSTER. For example, the maximum amount of biogas present inside the FLEXIBUSTER at any time is comparable in energy content to 2.64 to 3.17 gallons (10 to 12 liters) of diesel fuel. The system will be remotely monitored by SEaB as well as by on-site operators. The on-site operators will be trained by the equipment manufacturer SEaB. SEaB will also provide an operation and City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 57 PLACE St. Louis Park 50 April 2017 maintenance manual with complete instructions and safety procedures. Once trained the operators will be responsible for maintaining safety protocols. The FLEXIBUSTER system continuously monitors the quality (i.e., composition) of the biogas upstream of the combustion process. Wastewater from dewatering of the digested solids can be periodically sampled and tested by a certified lab for wastewater parameters. This wastewater will be discharged to the local sanitary sewer system. As previously stated, air within the digester container walls and within the building space will be monitored continuously and connected to an alarm system that will shut down the digester system if needed and alert operators. The fact that the system is fully containerized allows full control of the biogas content. The system is furthermore equipped with a number of safety measures that include monitoring of the air composition within the containerized units and automatic shutdown of the system if a gas leak is detected. The building space containing the digester will also have gas detectors that will alert operators through a control system. Methane is contained with the digester containers and the gasholder container then conveyed by closed pipe to the combined heat and power (CHP) generator. The CHP generator will be housed in a separate room from the digesters to reduce the risk of explosion should a gas leak occur. The control system will be equipped with a dialer system that will call operators in the event of an alarm. Safety and monitoring information will be available for review upon written request. Organic Waste Collection PLACE will communicate with and provide training to the residents for source separation of food waste and will monitor the food waste collection process and maintain the quality of the organic waste material. Mitigating odor is one of the E-Gen project’s highest priorities. Food waste will be centrally collected in typical 96-gallon recycling bins. This will be collected on site multiple times a week to reduce odors. The material from these 96-gallon bins will not be tipped into a larger truck, thus further reducing odors. The bins will be picked up and moved on-site with electrical utility vehicles directly inside the E-Gen building prior to unloading. These vehicles have zero emissions and are quiet due to the absence of an internal combustion engine. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 58 PLACE St. Louis Park 51 April 2017 Appendix B: Original Comment Letters City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 59 page 1 PLACE St. Louis Park ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Introduction This Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form is being used to record the environmental review for a mixed-use development in St. Louis Park, MN. This EAW form and guidelines are available at the Environmental Quality Board’s website at: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.1200 identifies required content for an EAW. The following document follows the format of the July 2013 Environmental Assessment Worksheet Form. All figures referenced in the document are included in Appendix A. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the document in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title: PLACE St. Louis Park 2. Proposer: PLACE E-Generation One, LLC 3. RGU: City of St. Louis Park Contact person: Chris Velasco Contact person: Sean Walther Title: Executive Director Title: Planning and Zoning Supervisor Address: 100 Portland Ave. S, Suite 100 Address: 5005 Minnetonka Blvd City, State, ZIP: Minneapolis, MN 55401 City, State, ZIP: St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Phone: 612-309-3889 Phone: 952.924.2574 Email: chris@welcometoplace.org Email: swalther@stlouispark.org 4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one) Required: Discretionary: EIS Scoping Citizen petition X Mandatory EAW RGU discretion Proposer initiated If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s): MN Rules 4410.4300, Subpart 32: Mixed residential and industrial-commercial projects 5. Project Location: County: Hennepin City/Township: St. Louis Park PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): Watershed (81 major watershed scale): GPS Coordinates: Tax Parcel Number: 1611721310002, 1611721340024, 1611721340041, 1611721340042, 1611721340069, 1611721310071, 1611721310076, 1611721310078, 1611721310079, plus vacated Zarthan Ave. Right of Way per City Ord. No. 2495-16 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 60 page 2 At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; See Figure 5-1 • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); See Figure 5-2 • Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Pre-construction site plan and post- construction site plan. See Figures 5-3 – 5-7 6. Project Description: a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words). PLACE is redeveloping nine brownfield parcels into a mixed-use, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented community. The project will include: 299 mixed-income living spaces, including live/work space for artists; a 110-room hotel; retail space; and neighborhood amenities like an urban forest. The project also includes an e-generation facility that will digest all compostable materials generated on-site. b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility. Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes, 3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures, and 4) timing and duration of construction activities. PLACE, a 501(c)(3), will develop the site into a mixed-income, mixed-use, multigenerational, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented development. The project is being developed on parcels north and south of the existing rail line, including: Northern Site: • 218 apartments (including affordable, market-rate, and live-work) • Commercial bike shop • E-Generation facility, which uses PLACE’s patent-pending portfolio of renewable energy systems to convert locally-sourced organic waste into energy for the project and a soil amendment byproduct that will be used in the on-site greenhouse. The E-generation facility will anaerobically digest food waste material generated from the residences, hotel, and commercial establishments on-site to produce methane that will power a 30 kilowatt generator. The heat and electrical power from the generator will be used in residences and the hotel on the project site. In addition, the E-generation facility will include two 1 Megawatt combined heat and electrical power generators running on natural gas. The heat and electrical power from these units will be used on the project site and not be fed into the electrical grid. • 0.88 acres of urban forest • Buildings, site and program designed to support a multigenerational community where households at all stages in life and income feel welcome • Mobility Plan with car/bike sharing, shuttle, and car-free living incentives • Green roofs for additional stormwater management and habitat City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 61 page 3 Southern Site: • 81 apartments (including affordable, market-rate, and live-work) • 110-room Fairfield by Marriott hotel • Commercial space for a café, coffee house, and five microbusinesses • Green roofs for additional stormwater management and habitat • Surface parking on the northern site as well as underground parking south of the rail, which leaves ground space for a “placemaking plaza” adjacent to the Wooddale LRT Station to provide pedestrian-oriented multiuse space At this time, redevelopment of the project site is estimated to be accomplished in 18 months beginning in July 2017. Redevelopment of the project site will result in the creation of new access drives, new or upgraded private utility connections to serve the project area, and limited improvements to infrastructure and roadways in the immediate vicinity of the project area. Any existing equipment will be removed from the site and disposed of according to all applicable city, state and federal regulations. Two existing structures will be demolished and replaced by new structures on the project site. These structures include the former McGarvey Coffee building on the northern site and the Nash Frame, Hennepin County Library Storage and Tree Trust structure on the southern site. See Question 12 for more details on these removals. Typical urban development methods will be used and all wastes from construction will be reused or disposed of according to all applicable city, state, and federal regulations. All construction wastes will be removed and disposed of off-site according to all applicable city, state and federal regulations. c. Project magnitude: Total Project Acreage 5.25 Linear project length N/A Number and type of residential units 299 residential units Commercial building area (in square feet) 80,008 (including 74,900 sf hotel) Industrial building area (in square feet) 9,200 Institutional building area (in square feet) 0 Other uses – specify (in square feet) N/A Structure height(s) E-Gen=25’, North=60’, South=75’ d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. PLACE, a 501(c)(3) is working closely with the City of St. Louis Park to develop a vacant industrial site and municipal parking lot adjacent to the future Wooddale Avenue Station into a landmark mixed-use, mixed-income community. The project includes 299 residential units, 200 of which will be restricted to households earning 60 percent or less of the area median incomes. Of the 299 units, 99 will be designated as live-work space for artists. The project will generate 100 full time equivalent, living wage jobs, be home to at least 90 car-free households, and be healthy for people and the planet with LEED certification across the site. In addition to LEED, the project team is maximizing the sustainability potential for design, cleanup, construction and operation to minimize the use of energy, water, materials and other resources, and to regenerate the environment. The program of mixed-income housing, live/work, local businesses, E-Generation, Mobility Plan, and LEED is based on PLACE’s experience developing healthy, mixed-income communities, and City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 62 page 4 its mission to link arts, community and environment. The program sizing and details reflect requests from city staff, City Council, and the community; site capacity; market studies; and financial resources. e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? Yes X No f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes X No 7. Cover types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: Before After Before After Wetlands 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 2.94 0.60 Deep water/streams 0 0 Impervious surface 3.53 3.77 Wooded/forest .25 .88 Stormwater Pond 0 0 Brush/Grassland .22 0 Other (describe) 0 0 Cropland 0 0 TOTAL 6.94 5.25 The current parcels, which total 6.94 acres, include the eastbound TH 7 on-ramp and the TH 7 Service Road. Through the platting of this project, public right of way will be dedicated to both of those transportation facilities, and additional land will be platted as outlots with the purpose of conveying it to the adjacent properties, including to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail corridor. Subtracting these right of way and outlot areas from the current parcel areas results in a final site area of 5.25 acres. Note: As described in Question 11a, a wetland that previously existed on the project site was filled during the recent construction of the Wooddale Avenue bridge, an action unrelated to the proposed project. The City of St. Louis Park and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District are discussing appropriate mitigation for this wetland. However, both have agreed that this is unrelated to the proposed project and outside the scope of this environmental review. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 63 page 5 8. Permits and approvals required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals, certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410.3100. Table 8-1 Required Permits Unit of Government Type of application Status Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater management permit Erosion control permit Application not submitted Application not submitted Three Rivers Park District Trail connection permit Application not submitted Metropolitan Council Comprehensive Plan Amendment administrative review Application not submitted City of St. Louis Park Preliminary Plat Final Plat Comprehensive Plan Amendment Preliminary and Final PUD Shading Variance Demolition permits Public right-of-way permit Sewer and Water Permit Building permits (including building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing) Sign permits Erosion control permit Fence permit Submitted 2.6.17 Submitted 2.6.17 Submitted 2.6.17 Submitted 2.6.17 Submitted 2.6.17 Permit applications not submitted MPCA Notification of intent to perform a demolition Construction site stormwater permit Sewer connection permit Air permit for E-Generation Review of E-Generation anaerobic digestion design Application not submitted Application not submitted Application not submitted Application not submitted Application not submitted MDH Notification of asbestos related work Water extension permit Application not submitted Application not submitted DNR Water appropriation permit Not needed based on existing municipal well capacity MnDOT Driveway access permits and utility permits Drainage permit Permit for use of or work on Highway 7 Application not submitted Application not submitted Application not submitted City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 64 page 6 Table 8-2 Direct Public Funding Sources Unit of Government Type of Application Status City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Land Purchase of Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority properties as well as DMD Properties, LLC property (all parcels to be purchased by PLACE at closing) Purchase of DMD Properties, LLC property (5725 Highway 7) completed in 2015 Purchase of HCRRA properties to be completed in 2017 City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Creation of Tax-Increment Financing District with 26-year duration with pay-as-you-go structure Applied in 2016, Pending in 2017 Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Transit - Oriented Development (LCA- TOD) Pre-Development Grant from the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) Awarded in 2014 Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Transit - Oriented Development (LCA- TOD) Development Grant from the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) Awarded in 2015 Hennepin County Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Program Awarded in 2016 Hennepin County Hennepin County U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Assessment Grant Funding Awarded in 2015 Hennepin County Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Awarded in 2017 Table 8-3 Indirect Public Funding Sources Unit of Government Type of Application Status Allocated by Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) via City of St. Louis Park as conduit. To be sold on the private market. Tax-Exempt Housing Bonds Allocated in 2017 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) 4% Low-Income Housing Tax Credits Pending in 2017, Awarded by right after meeting requirements Allocated by Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) via City of St. Louis Tax-Exempt Sustainability Bonds Pending in 2017, Awarded by right after meeting requirements City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 65 page 7 Park as conduit. To be sold on the private market. Through the Treasury Department, allocations are made by the Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) Fund to community development entities (CDEs). Sunrise Banks is the project conduit as a CDE. New Market Tax Credits Pending in 2017, NMTC allocation awarded to Sunrise Banks in 2016 Allocated by Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). Conduit to be determined. To be sold on the private market. 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Bonds Pending in 2017, Provided by right after meeting requirements Cumulative potential effects may be considered and addressed in response to individual EAW Item Nos. 9-18, or the RGU can address all cumulative potential effects in response to EAW Item No. 19. If addressing cumulative effect under individual items, make sure to include information requested in EAW Item No. 19 Cumulative potential effects are addressed under applicable EAW questions, not individually under Question 19. 9. Land use: a. Describe: i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks, trails, prime or unique farmlands. St. Louis Park is a fully-developed suburb and no prime or unique farmlands are adjacent to the project site. Portions of the site are currently vacant; other parcels contain the vacant McGarvey coffee factory and a municipal parking lot. The project site is divided into northern and southern parcels by the existing rail corridor and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail running parallel to the rail. Both northern and southern parcels on the project site are adjacent to the future Southwest LRT Wooddale Avenue Station. Land uses adjacent to the project site are transitioning from industrial and commercial uses to higher-density mixed uses consistent with the Wooddale Avenue Station Area Plan. Tower Light is a five-story senior living residential project across W. 36th Street from the PLACE project. Hoigaard Village is a mixed-use, multi-building development on W. 36th St. between Xenwood Ave. and Highway 100. The project includes four multi-family residential buildings including a total of 420 apartment and townhome units constructed between 2008 and 2013. The project also includes approximately 25,000 square feet of ground-floor retail in one of the apartment buildings and a regional stormwater pond. Cityscape Apartments is a five-story residential project immediately east of the PLACE project’s northern site. The property immediately adjacent to the southern site is a one-story commercial structure. See St. Louis Park 2008 Existing Land Use Map in Figure 8-1. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 66 page 8 Cumulative Potential Effects In addition to these existing structures, a development proposal for a six-story, mixed-use residential and commercial project will be reviewed by the City of St. Louis Park City Council in March 2017. The project, called The Elmwood, includes 85 residential units restricted to ages 55+ and 4,400 square feet of commercial space. The project has been recommended for approval by the City of St. Louis Park Planning Commission. Because this project is consistent with land uses anticipated in the Wooddale Avenue Station Area Plan and in the background traffic growth forecasted for the area analyzed in Question 18, no cumulative potential effects are anticipated in relation to the proposed project. ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any other applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional, state, or federal agency. The project’s northern site is currently guided Office on the western portion of the site and Business Park on the eastern portion in St. Louis Park’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The southern site is currently guided Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan. See Figure 8-2. The Wooddale Avenue Station Area Plan produced by Hennepin County identifies the parcels in the PLACE project as development opportunities for Multi-Family Residential, Mixed-Use Residential, and Retail and other Commercial. The City of St. Louis Park and Hennepin County produced the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study in 2003. The study recommends redeveloping the McGarvey Coffee site (northern parcel of proposed project site) to High Density Multiple Family Residential. The study contemplated low density office use or related professional services that would generate low vehicle trips on the west side of the northern site. It noted that building design and finish was important given the gateway nature of this site these parcels. iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc. The Proposer has submitted a PUD application to the City of St. Louis Park to rezone this property. Current zoning, depicted in Figure 8-3 includes: • I-G (north parcels) The purpose of the I-G general industrial district is to provide locations for large and small scale industrial enterprises engaged in such activities as manufacturing, processing, assembly, storage and warehousing. • C-2 (south parcels west of Yosemite) The purposes of the C-2 general commercial district are to: (1) Allow the concentration of general commercial development for convenience of the public and mutually beneficial relationship to each other in those areas located away from residential areas designated by the comprehensive plan; (2) Provide space for community facilities and institutions that appropriately may be located in commercial areas; (3) Provide adequate space to meet the needs of modem commercial development, including off-street parking and truck loading areas; (4) Minimize traffic congestion; and (5) Carefully regulate the intensity of commercial development as it refers to both internal site factors and external impacts. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 67 page 9 • I-P (south parcels east of Yosemite) The purpose of the I-P industrial park district is to provide locations for large and small scale industrial enterprises engaged in such activities as assembly, storage, warehousing and light manufacturing which are not typically associated with high levels of noise, soot, odors and other potential nuisance impacts upon adjoining properties in an industrial park setting. The requirements of this district include relatively low maximum floor area and impervious surface ratios. • No overlay district b. Discuss the project’s compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 9a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects. The project is compatible with nearby land uses and with land uses planned in anticipation of the 2021 opening of the Southwest LRT. As described in the Wooddale Avenue Station Area Plan, the area immediately surrounding the station is expected to transition to higher-density, mixed uses with more residential and commercial components than what has been historically present in this vicinity. The Proposer has applied for a PUD to the City of St. Louis Park and a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide the property as mixed use to reflect these trends. The northern parcel on the project’s site plan is compatible with its eastern neighbor, the CityScape Apartments. The proposed project’s primary residential structure is sited immediately adjacent to that use. The project’s E-Generation facility is located at the corner of TH 7 and Wooddale Ave and is not immediately adjacent to any commercial or residential buildings, minimizing impacts of this facility to surrounding properties. The E-Generation facility is compatible with uses identified in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study, as it provides architecturally unique features to the project, has minimal traffic impact, and will provide environmentally sustainable energy resources to the overall project. On the project site’s southern parcel, increased commercial activity is compatible with commercial uses immediately east of the site. Commercial components on the southern site include street-level commercial/retail space, including a shared workshop maker space, a shared office co-working space, a coffee house, a café, five small business storefronts and a 110-room select services hotel. These components will be owned by PLACE to guarantee public benefit consistent with PLACE’s 501(c)(3) mission; lessees will be selected for financial strength, compatibility with existing local businesses, and contributions to local benefit (for example, employers committing to priority hiring from the immediate area). The project will support transit ridership on the Southwest LRT via the adjacent Wooddale Avenue Station by increasing density around the station and transforming vacant parcels into active residential and commercial uses. c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential incompatibility as discussed in Item 9b above. The project incorporates several measures to minimize traffic impacts on adjacent properties and promote bicycle and transit ridership, described in Question 18. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 68 page 10 10. Geology, soils and topography/land forms: a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the project could have on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features. Depth to bedrock at the project site is estimated to vary between 75 feet and 125 feet, based on the Hennepin County Geologic Atlas and examination of nearby well records in the Minnesota Well Index. The first bedrock unit encountered is the Platteville Limestone, which is present at approximately 5 to 20 feet in thickness at or near the project site. The bedrock is overlain by a mixture of unconsolidated drift deposits containing sand, gravel, and clay. The water table is approximately 25 to35 feet in depth at the site, indicating that the bedrock layers are fully saturated at all times. While the uppermost bedrock is carbonate in nature, the likelihood for karst is fairly low. Karst conditions are more prevalent in areas where the depth to the carbonate bedrock is less than 50 feet and where the top of the water table fluctuates within the bedrock layer. Neither of these conditions are encountered at the project site. No geologic features have been identified that are likely to require any modifications to project designs or mitigation measures. b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and after project construction to address soil limitations including stabilization, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 11.b.ii. The Web Soil Survey classifies the entire project site as “urban land, Udipsamments” (classification code U4A). The February 2016 American Engineering Testing, Inc (AET) Preliminary Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review and the October 2016 AET Report of Geotechnical Exploration and Review references test borings in the project site indicating that the upper 1 to 19 feet from the land surface is comprised of fill material. The fill in the northern site consists of mostly clayey sand and silty sand with some fill containing non-soil material. A petroleum-type odor was observed at multiple test boring locations. The fill in the southern site consists of mostly silty sand, clayey sand, and sandy lean clay. Slab-on-grade building on the existing fill are not recommended without additional foundational support. Underlying fill for the northern and southern sites was predominately coarse alluvium. Gentle slopes in the project site result in a relatively low erosion potential during both construction and operational activities. The existing and newly installed catch basins in the project site will be protected with appropriate erosion and sediment control devices during construction to limit erosion and potential runoff to surface water bodies until permanent erosion control measures are established. The mitigation strategies in Question 11.b.ii discuss methods to limit erosion and runoff. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 69 page 11 Groundwater was encountered in four of the 25 test boring with depths ranging from approximately 23.5 to 37.5 feet below grade. The on-site coarse alluvial soils are predominately fast draining sands. A contaminated groundwater plume limits the ability to infiltrate stormwater in portions of the northern site and the entire southern site. The groundwater plume is discussed in greater detail in Question 12. The PLACE project will disturb approximately 6.35 acres of land between the northern and southern sites and will result in net 32,680 cubic yards of excavated, or cut material. This excess material will be used on other active construction sites in the area. Areas of existing fill on the site will require soil corrections for geotechnical purposes prior to constructing the buildings. It is anticipated that areas of existing fill will be reused on site outside of the building footprints. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. No geologic features have been identified that are likely to require any modifications to project designs or mitigation measures. Gentle slopes in the PLACE project area result in a relatively low erosion potential during both construction and operational activities. 11. Water resources: a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below. i. Surface water - lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial ditches. Include any special designations such as public waters, trout stream/lake, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lake, and outstanding resource value water. Include water quality impairments or special designations listed on the current MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List that are within 1 mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any. The project site does not contain any surface waters. No wetlands are indicated on National Wetland Inventory mapping, and no DNR Public Waters are identified. A wetland is indicated on the Hennepin County Wetland Inventory mapping. This wetland was previously filled during the construction of the Wooddale Avenue bridge that crosses TH 7. The project site drains to the east into Bass Lake, and it is within 1 mile of Minnehaha Creek which is identified as an impaired water with an EPA-approved TMDL on the MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List. ii. Groundwater – aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells, including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known on site or nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this. Depth to groundwater at the project site is approximately 25 to 35 feet, based on soil boring and nearby well logs. The project site is overlapped by the Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) for the Wellhead Protection Plans of the cities of St. Louis Park and Edina. The DWSMA for Edina is largely considered to be non-vulnerable across the project site, while the DWSMA for St. Louis Park is considered to be vulnerable. Differing methods to establish vulnerability may have been employed, while other factors (such as age dating testing of the water) may have resulted in different vulnerability levels for each community. The geologic sensitivity City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 70 page 12 map for the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer in the Hennepin County Atlas identifies the project site as ranging between “moderate” and “low” sensitivity. Proposed project activities and planned land uses are believed to pose relatively low threat to bedrock aquifers that supply the City’s drinking water wells. The depth to these aquifers is approximately 260 to 280 feet at the project site, with multiple bedrock layers and confining units between the land surface and these bedrock aquifers. The shallow water table aquifer is more susceptible in the project area, with depth to groundwater 25 to 35 feet below the land surface. While the water table aquifer is rarely used as a drinking water resource in this area, contaminated water could eventually infiltrate to deeper aquifers over time. To further reduce the threat to groundwater resources, mitigation measures will include storing fuels and fuel- containing equipment over impervious surface during site construction activities, with containment available to capture leaks and spills before they infiltrate into soils. Any observed leaks and spills will be reported immediately to the Minnesota Duty Officer, so any required investigation and cleanup activities can be conducted with State supervision. An examination of the Minnesota Well Index database identifies that two test and observation wells are located on the project site (with unique numbers 149711 and 216060). A third monitoring well (unique number 780548) is shown by the Minnesota Well Index to potentially be on the project site, although accurate coordinates for this well are not available. These wells are further discussed in Question 11.b.iii. b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below. i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. 1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal wastewater infrastructure. The E-generation facility will produce a maximum volume of 1000 gallons per day of wastewater from dewatering of the digested organic solids (the digested food waste coming out of the anaerobic digester system). Some of this wastewater will be used in the on-site greenhouse but the majority will be discharged to the publicly owned sanitary sewer system. This sewer system connects to the MCES interceptor system which discharges to the Metro Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) in St. Paul. The Metro WWTF treats about 250 million gallons per day, with the capacity to treat 300 million gallons per day. The wastewater is expected to contain less than 100 mg/l Total Suspended Solids and less than 100 mg/l Biochemical Oxygen Demand, tested over five days (BOD5). The wastewater is expected to contain very high concentrations of ammonia-nitrogen and phosphorus. However, due to the very low volume of wastewater, the total amount of ammonia and phosphorus discharged to the sanitary system will be minimal. No pretreatment of the wastewater is needed prior to discharge to the public sanitary sewer. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 71 page 13 2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS), describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site conditions for such a system. Not applicable. 3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater from wastewater discharges. Not applicable. ii. Stormwater - Describe the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at the site prior to and post construction. Include the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss any environmental effects from stormwater discharges. Describe stormwater pollution prevention plans including temporary and permanent runoff controls and potential BMP site locations to manage or treat stormwater runoff. Identify specific erosion control, sedimentation control or stabilization measures to address soil limitations during and after project construction. Stormwater runoff from the project site is directed north to the MnDOT trunk storm system via pipes and catch basins from the northern site, and to the W. 35th Street and the W. 36th Street storm systems from the southern site. The north site drains to an existing MnDOT pond to the east then is conveyed through storm sewer to Bass Lake. The south site drains to an existing city pond, then is conveyed through storm sewer to Bass Lake. Runoff from both the north and south sites will be treated on-site prior to discharging to downstream waters. The entire project site will be managed by gravity systems that will convey runoff to the east. Stormwater management on the project site is regulated by the City of St. Louis Park, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), and the State of Minnesota. The City requires that the post-redevelopment 100-year stormwater runoff peak rates be no more that the pre-redevelopment 10-year stormwater runoff peak rates. The MCWD permits no increase in stormwater rates over existing conditions for the 1-, 10-, and 100-year storm events, using rainfall depths and Type II distribution from National Weather Service Technical Paper No. 40 (TP-40). Both the City and MCWD require stormwater abstraction in the amount of 1.0-inch of runoff over the impervious surfaces. This can be achieved in aggregate over the north and south sites. The City requires no net increase over existing conditions for total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP). The MCWD requires that, in areas where it is infeasible to meet the MCWD volume control standard, that phosphorus control be provided in the amount equivalent to that which would be achieved through the abstraction of 1.0-inch of rainfall from the site’s impervious surfaces. The NPDES Stormwater Permit requires treatment of 1.0-inch of runoff from new impervious areas, if more than one acre of new impervious area is created. The NPDES Stormwater Permit also requires temporary erosion and sediment control measures be implemented. A hydrologic analysis was performed for the project site. The total drainage area is 6.10 acres and includes disturbed areas outside of the property boundaries. The total proposed City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 72 page 14 impervious area within the drainage area is 4.04 acres, or approximately 66 percent of the total area. The north site has a total area of 4.14 acres, and 2.58 of those acres are routed to Best Management Practices (BMP), including a tree trench, green roof, iron-enhanced sand filtration, and stormwater reuse. The south site has a total area of 1.96 acres, and approximately 1.15 acres are routed to BMPs including green roofs, permeable pavement, and inline storm sewer filtration. A hydrologic model of the proposed north site provides a 100-year runoff rate of 13.1 cfs. This is based on the TP-40 100-year, 24-hour rainfall of 6.0 inches. The City’s rate control requirement calls for maximum runoff rate of 17.7 cfs, which corresponds to the runoff rate of the 10-year rain event under existing conditions. The south site drains to an existing stormwater pond to the east, and rate control is assumed to be provided by this pond. The north site includes four proposed BMPs. The northwest area includes two proposed BMPs, iron enhanced filtration and stormwater reuse. Most of the proposed parking lot will be routed to an iron enhanced filtration basin, while the roof drainage from the proposed building will be routed to an aboveground cistern for reuse. The remaining northwest area will be routed directly to the storm sewer system. The northeast area includes two proposed BMPs, green roof and tree trench infiltration. The proposed building will include a green roof BMP. The roof drainage and the area south of the building will be routed to a large tree trench infiltration system. The tree trench will be a feature of the urban forest. The tree trench will include an elevated drain tile that will convey any outflows to the west to connect to the storm sewer system. The southern site includes four BMPs: two green roofs, permeable pavers, and an inline storm sewer filtration structure. The two proposed buildings will each include a green roof system. Each green roof will be routed to the permeable paver system for additional treatment. The permeable paver system will discharge to the existing W. 36th Street storm sewer system. The north portion of this area will be routed to the east to connect to the existing storm sewer system along W. 35th Street. Prior to discharging off-site, the storm sewer flows will be routed through a structural filtration system to provide additional water quality treatment. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures will also be provided during the site construction. Such measures will include storm drain inlet protection, construction entrance protection, silt fence, sediment basins, and designated concrete washout areas. iii. Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to be used as a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal water infrastructure. Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water resources available for appropriation. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects from the water appropriation. The project will generate an estimated annual water demand of 14.3 million gallons per year to serve residential and commercial needs. All water will be obtained from a connection to the City of St. Louis Park’s municipal water supply system. The City currently operates 10 municipal water supply wells, 9 of which are used for primary City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 73 page 15 water supply, with the remaining well used as an emergency backup well. The wells obtain their water from the Prairie du Chien, Jordan, and Mt. Simon aquifers. The system has a firm capacity of 12.24 MGD (million gallons per day). The City of St. Louis Park’s water supply system is currently permitted to pump 2.5 billion gallons per year. Current water usage for the past five years has ranged between 2.0-2.2 billion gallons per year. The City is currently in the process of updating its DNR Water Supply Plan to develop water use projections for the next ten years. This will determine if the overall demands over the next decade will require an increase in the water appropriations permit. Regardless, the City has sufficient capacity to meet current and projected demands with existing wells. No other wells are anticipated to be drilled in the future, unless one of the current wells exhibits a problem and would need to be replaced. The following table shows the addition usage that the project would add to the City’s water supply system: Table 11-1 Water Use Summary Total Firm System Capacity (MGD) 12.24 City Peak Usage (MGD), 2015-2016 average 8.50 Current Capacity Available (MGD) 3.74 Proposed Project Usage, Peak Day (MGD) 0.10 Projected Total City Usage, Peak Day (MGD) 8.60 Capacity Available (Post-Construction) (MGD) 3.64 Percent of Total System Utilized 70.26% As part of the City of St. Louis Park’s DNR water appropriation permit, the city is required to demonstrate that groundwater withdrawals are sustainable and do not have a negative impact on groundwater-dependent natural resources or other nearby well owners. When a new well is to be constructed or appropriations increased, the DNR will identify any potential concerns and outline any required testing or studies to demonstrate that any impacts are negligible. At present, it is believed that the depths of the City’s existing wells do not place them in direct connection with sensitive natural resources (wetlands, fens, trout streams, etc.) and therefore the risk of impacts is relatively low. However, cumulative groundwater withdrawals across the Twin Cities area are a source of concern for water appropriation permitting. Any amendments to the DNR water appropriation permit may take into account region-wide trends that call for greater water conservation measures. No active water supply wells are believed to be located on the project site. An examination of the Minnesota Well Index database identifies that two test and observation wells are located on the project site (with unique numbers 149711 and 216060). A third monitoring well (unique number 780548) is shown by the Minnesota Well Index to potentially be on the project site, although accurate coordinates for the well are not available. Other groundwater wells may potentially be on the project that are not in the State’s database, but may be encountered during project construction activities. It is assumed any unsealed wells will be sealed as part of the project development, unless they are still required for investigational purposes. In that case, the wells will either need to be retained (if possible) or re-drilled in a nearby location to provide comparable information. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 74 page 16 No dewatering is expected as part of the project activities. Groundwater depth is believed to be below the maximum depth of any planned excavations (20 feet). iv. Surface Waters a) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed. Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed, and identify those probable locations. One potential wetland has been identified in the project site through the Hennepin County Wetland Inventory mapping. This wetland was filled during the construction of the Wooddale Avenue bridge and is no longer on site. A replacement plan application was submitted and approved in 2009 that gave replacement responsibilities to the City. b) Other surface waters- Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels, county/judicial ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging, diking, stream diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and riparian alteration. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of water features. Identify measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to surface water features, including in-water Best Management Practices that are proposed to avoid or minimize turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the water features. Discuss how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on any water body, including current and projected watercraft usage. No surface water features have been identified on the project site. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. The project site does not contain any surface waters or wetlands. Proposed project activities and planned land uses are believed to pose relatively low threat to bedrock aquifers that supply the City’s drinking water wells. The depth to these aquifers is approximately 260 to 280 feet at the project site, with multiple bedrock layers and confining units between the land surface and these bedrock aquifers. supervision. No pretreatment of wastewater from the project’s E-generation facility is needed prior to discharge to the public sanitary sewer. Both the City and MCWD require stormwater abstraction in the amount of 1.0-inch of runoff over the impervious surfaces. This can be achieved in aggregate over the north and south sites. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 75 page 17 The City has sufficient capacity to meet current and projected demands with existing wells. No other wells are anticipated to be drilled in the future, unless one of the current wells exhibits a problem and would need to be replaced. At present, it is believed that the depths of the City’s existing wells do not place them in direct connection with sensitive natural resources (wetlands, fens, trout streams, etc.) and therefore the risk of impacts is relatively low. 12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes: a. Pre-project site conditions - Describe existing contamination or potential environmental hazards on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water contamination, abandoned dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks, and hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from pre- project site conditions that would be caused or exacerbated by project construction and operation. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental hazards. Include development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan. Phase I environmental site assessments (ESAs) were completed for the Northern Parcels (5925 Highway 7, 5815 Highway 7, 5725 Highway 7, and 3520 Yosemite Avenue) in July 2015 and the Southern Parcels (3548 Xenwood Avenue South, 3565 Wooddale Avenue, 3575 Wooddale Avenue, 5816 36th Street West, 5814 36th Street West, and Right-of-Way) in September 2016. Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) identified on the Northern Parcel include: St. Louis Park Solvent Plume; Abandoned Rail Ties; Documented Releases On Site; and Documented Soil Contamination. RECs identified on the Southern Parcel include: St. Louis Park Solvent Plume; Evidence of Undocumented Fill; Documented Soil Contamination; and Evidence of Buried Debris. In response to the identified RECs, Barr completed Phase II ESAs for the Northern and Southern Parcels in September 2016. Results of the Northern Parcel investigation indicated that arsenic soil concentrations at three locations and diesel range organics (DRO) concentrations at eight locations exceeded their respective MPCA criteria. Soil gas concentrations were compared to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA’s) 10 times residential intrusion screening values (10X ISVs). Analytical results indicate that soil gas concentrations at four locations exceeded the 10X ISVs for one or more of the following compounds: 1,3-butadiene, chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, ethyl benzene and xylenes. Results of the Southern Parcel investigation indicated exceedances of the screening Soil Leaching Values (SLVs) for arsenic, cadmium, silver at one location and tetrachloroethylene (PCE) in two locations. The results also indicate exceedances of the residential Soil Reference Values (SRVs) for arsenic, cadmium, and lead in soil samples collected from one location. Elevated DRO concentrations were also present beneath the building. Soil gas concentrations were compared to the MPCA’s 10X ISVs. Analytical results indicate that soil gas concentrations at four locations exceeded the 10X ISVs for one or more of the following compounds: 1,3-butadiene, benzene, trichloroethylene (TCE) and PCE. Based on the elevated soil gas concentrations detected across the project site and the impacted groundwater located beneath the project site, vapor mitigation for future buildings on the project site is necessary to minimize the potential release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) via the soil gas pathway to the indoor air. In response to the identified contamination, Barr prepared Response Action Plans (RAPs) for the Northern and Southern Parcels in September 2016. The RAP for the Northern Parcels will consist of excavating and disposing contaminated materials off the project site, including residual impacts that may be detected around the abandoned in-place underground storage tanks. The City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 76 page 18 excavation will be backfilled with clean soil to accommodate the development and a vapor mitigation system will be designed for the proposed building. The RAP for the Southern Parcels consists of excavating and disposing contaminated soils off- site, backfilling the excavations with clean soil to accommodate the development, and designing and installing a vapor mitigation system for the proposed building Existing buildings on the project site will be demolished. As the request of Barr, Environmental Health Testing Services (EHTS) conducted a pre-demolition asbestos and regulated building survey for the former McGarvey Coffee Plant, former Nash Frame Design, Hennepin County Library and Tree Trust buildings in September 2016. The surveys identified asbestos containing materials (ACMs) and regulated building materials. The identified ACMs and regulated building materials will be removed prior to building demolition in accordance to applicable state and federal laws. b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes - Describe solid wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of solid waste including source reduction and recycling. Solid waste is a common occurrence on construction projects. The waste generated during demolition will consist of wood, metal, brick, black, concrete, and other typical building materials. All hazardous and regulated materials will be removed before demolition commences. During demolition, materials will be segregated as best as possible into 3 categories; clean concrete/brick, scrap metal, construction/demolition debris. The clean concrete or brick will be crushed and re-used on site, or hauled to a recycling facility for use on other projects. The metal will be processed and delivered to a salvage yard for reuse. The construction/demolition debris will be hauled to a licensed landfill for disposal. Material will be reused as appropriate according to MPCA guidance. Excess or material not meeting MPCA solid waste beneficial uses will be disposed of in accordance with state and federal requirements. Rough quantities for demolition include: • Northern Parcels - 900 cy demo debris, 1700 cy concrete/block, 200 tons metal • Southern Parcels - 700 cy demo debris, 500 cy concrete/block, 30 tons metal Solid waste generated during operations may include paper, plastic, food, glass, tin and wood. Solid waste will be stored in appropriate containers and licensed commercial waste haulers will be contracted to properly dispose of the solid wastes that cannot be recycled. Recycling will be strongly encouraged during construction and operation phases, and implementation will be the responsibility of the developer and/or the construction contractor. Operation of the E-Generation facility will include temporary short term storage of food waste from on-site sources in 60 gallon containers designed for such wastes. The containers of food waste will be emptied into the digester system at an average rate of about 2 containers per hour. The digested food waste discharge from the anaerobic digester will be dewatered on site. The E- Generation facility will house storage space for dewatered digested food waste solids. The dewatered digested food waste will be sold or given to organic farmers for soil amendment. A small amount of these organic solids will be used on-site in the greenhouse. At system design capacity, the facility will produce 357 lbs/day of dewatered organic solids (35% total solids content). City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 77 page 19 c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials - Describe chemicals/hazardous materials used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including method of storage. Indicate the number, location and size of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum or other materials. Discuss potential environmental effects from accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including source reduction and recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan. Chemicals/hazardous materials anticipated to be present on-site during construction include petroleum products such as gasoline and other engine fluids for maintaining construction equipment, and materials used in construction including paints, adhesives and other building products. No above or underground ground storage tanks are anticipated for use during or after the construction project. Any hazardous materials used during construction will be stored in leak-proof containers and secured while not in use. The contractor will be responsible for ensuring safe handling of any chemicals/hazardous materials during the construction. The only hazardous wastes expected to be used during commercial/household operations are universal wastes and very small quantities of cleaning and maintenance products. All wastes will be disposed of according to applicable law(s). If a spill of chemical/hazardous materials should occur during or after the construction, the Minnesota Duty Officer will be notified as necessary. Any contaminated spills or leaks that occur during construction are the responsibility of the contractor and will be responded to according the MPCA containment and remedial action procedures. d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling. No hazardous waste is anticipated to be generated on the project site during or after construction. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 78 page 20 13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features): a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site. A detailed description of the land cover within the project site is provided in Question 7. Due to the lack of wetlands or surface waters present, the project site does not contain suitable habitat for aquatic species. The project site is primarily developed (i.e., impervious area). Isolated trees and unmaintained grass areas (.57 acre) within the project site, primarily found north of Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, provide limited habitat for urban wildlife species such as mice, rabbits, raccoons, squirrels, and song birds, among others. b. Describe rare features such as state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, native plant communities, Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement number (LA-____) and/or correspondence number (ERDB _____________) from which the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage letter from the DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Per a review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS’s) Endangered Species website 1, there are four federally listed species with a geographic range including Hennepin County: • Higgins eye pearlymussel (Lampsilis higginsii) – Endangered • Northern long-eared bat (NLEB; Myotis septentrionalis) – Threatened • Rusty patched bumble bee (RPBB; Bombus affinis) – Endangered • Snuffbox (Epioblasma triquetra) – Endangered Due to the lack of wetlands or surface waters present in the project site, no further investigation or an assessment of potential impacts to the Higgins eye pearlymussel or snuffbox was conducted. In the winter, NLEB hibernate in large caves and mines that have large passages and entrances, constant temperatures, and high humidity with no air currents. No caves or structures are present within the project site that would provide suitable winter habitat for this species. In the spring, summer and fall, NLEB use a wide variety of forested habitats for roosting, foraging and traveling, and may also utilize some adjacent and interspersed non-forested habitat such as emergent wetlands and edges of fields. This species has also been found roosting in structures like barns and sheds (particularly when suitable tree roosts are unavailable; USFWS 2016b). Roosting habitat includes forested areas with live trees and/or snags with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of at least three inches with exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices and/or other cavities. Trees are considered suitable roost trees if they meet those requirements and are located within 1,000 feet of another suitable roost tree, woodlot, or wooded fencerow (USFWS 2016b). Maternity habitat is defined as suitable summer habitat that is used by juveniles and reproductive females. After hibernation ends in late March or early April, most NLEB migrate to summer 1 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016a. County Distribution of Federally-Listed Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species. http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/lists/minnesot-cty.html. Website accessed February 14, 2017. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 79 page 21 roosts. The NLEB active season is the period between emergence and hibernation from April 1 – October 31 (USFWS 2016b). Woodland in and near the project site was assessed for bat summer habitat suitability (i.e., non-winter) using published literature on home range size (Owen et al. 2003 2, Carter and Feldhamer 2005 3, Lacki et al. 2009 4) and USFWS guidance on the NLEB (USFWS 2016b). Due to the small number (<15 acres) of trees within the project site or lack of connectivity (i.e., <1,000 feet) to foraging/roosting areas, the project site does not likely contain suitable summer habitat for the NLEB. However, little is known about the migration patterns of bats, specifically how they disperse across the landscape during migration. Therefore, it is not possible to accurately predict an individual bat’s route during migration. Based on this, NLEB have the potential to exist anywhere within the species’ geographic range, including the trees within the project site. Direct mortality from collision with construction equipment is unlikely given that construction activities will occur during daylight hours when bats would not be active. However, tree clearing within the project site may indirectly affect the NLEB. Per a review of the USFWS’s White-Nose Syndrome (WNS) Zone map dated August 31, 20165, Hennepin County, Minnesota is located within 150 miles of a location where WNS has been detected. Therefore, the project site falls within the WNS buffer zone per the Final 4(d) Rule under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For areas within the WNS buffer zone, the incidental take (e.g., the harm, harassment or killing of a bat as a side effect of otherwise lawful actions, like tree clearing) from tree removal activities is not prohibited unless 1) it results in removing a known occupied maternity roost tree, 2) if tree removal activities occur within 150 feet of a known occupied maternity roost tree from June 1 through July 31, or 3) tree removal activities occur within 0.25 mile of a hibernaculum at any time. Tree removal activities may then proceed without a permit and there is no need to contact the USFWS. Due diligence is generally required to determine if a maternity roost tree or a hibernaculum is on the property; however, per the Final 4(d) Rule, private landowners are not required to conduct surveys on their lands. In Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) maintains records of maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within its Natural Heritage Inventory System (NHIS) database. Based upon a guidance document issued by the MNDNR and the USFWS on April 1, 2016 6, there is one known NLEB record within Hennepin County: a hibernaculum located more than six miles east of the project site. As there are no records of NLEB maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within the project site or a 0.25-mile buffer, incidental take of NLEB as a result of tree removal activities is not prohibited under the Final 4(d) Rule under the ESA. 2 Owen, S.F., M.A. Menzel, W.M. Ford, B.R Chapman, K.V. Miller, J.W. Edwards, and P.B. Wood. 2003. Home-range size and habitat used by the Northern Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis). American Midland Naturalist. 150: 352-359. 3 Carter, T.C., and G.A. Feldhamer. 2005. Roost tree use by maternity colonies of Indiana bats and northern long-eared bats in southern Illinois. Forest Ecology and Management 219:259-268. 4 Lacki, M.J., D.R. Cox, and M.B. Dickinson. 2009. Meta-analysis of summer roosting characteristics of two species of Myotis bats. American Midland Naturalist 162:318-326. 5 USFWS. 2016b. White-Nose Syndrome Zone Around WNS/Pd Positive Counties/Districts. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf, August 31, 2016. 6 MNDNR and USFWS. 2016. Townships Containing Northern Long-eared Bat Roost Trees and/or Hibernacula. http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/ereview/minnesota_nleb_township_list_and_map.pdf. April 1, 2016. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 80 page 22 The RPBB is known to inhabit prairies, grasslands, wetlands, woodlands, agricultural areas, and residential parks and gardens 7. It is active from April to September, and needs a constant source of floral resources throughout that time period. Although woodland and maintained grassland is present, due to the lack of prairies, wetlands, residential parks and gardens, it is unlikely the project site contains suitable habitat for the RPBB. Migratory Birds Construction activities and development within the project site have the potential to impact birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA makes it illegal for anyone to take (i.e., to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct) any migratory bird, or the parts, nests, or eggs of such a bird except under the terms of a valid permit issued pursuant to Federal regulations. Under the MBTA, construction activities in grassland, roadsides, wetland, riparian (stream), shrubland, or woodland habitats that would otherwise result in the taking of migratory birds, eggs, young and/or active nests should be avoided. Although the provisions of the MBTA are applicable throughout the entire year, most migratory bird nesting activity in Minnesota occurs approximately from mid-March to August 15, per the MNDNR 8. According to the USFWS Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Database 9, there are 22 migratory birds of concern with the potential to be present within the project site. State-Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Based upon a review of the MNDNR NHIS database under license agreement LA-760, there are no known records of state-listed species within the project site or a 1-mile buffer. In addition, an analysis of Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) data, there are no mapped high quality plant communities or MNDNR-mapped Sites of Biodiversity Significance within the Project site or the immediate vicinity. A desktop review of the MNDNR’s Regionally Significant Ecological Areas map (2003) indicates that no portions of the project site have been mapped as areas of ecological biodiversity. No protected species surveys within the project site were completed due to the prominence of developed land and lack of high quality plant communities. c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be affected by the project. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species. 7 USFWS. 2016c. Fact Sheet: Rusty Patched Bumble Bee. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/factsheetrpbb.html. Website accessed February 14, 2017. 8 MNDNR. 2014. Best Practices for Meeting DNR GP 2004-0001 (version 4, October 2014). http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/pwpermits/gp_2004_0001_chapter1.pdf. 9 USFWS. 2016d. Information for Planning and Conservation Database. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/VVSUSHDPSRH3VEFQEIW25OV7L4/resources. Website accessed March 21, 2016. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 81 page 23 Potential Impacts This project site analysis determined that proposed activities will not have a significant adverse effect on federally or state-listed threatened and endangered species within the project site. In addition, the project will not result in impacts to aquatic species. A small number of trees are present within the project site, which may be utilized by NLEB. Under the Final 4(d) Rule of the ESA, tree clearing is not prohibited as there are no records of NLEB maternity roost trees or a hibernaculum within the project site or a 0.25-mile buffer. The RPBB may occur in the woodland present at the project site, and more of this species may be drawn to the project site following the development of residential parks and gardens. To minimize impacts to the RPBB, native plants which are beneficial to pollinators will be used for landscaping, including areas such as the urban forest, entrances, boulevards, property borders, parking islands, and infiltration zones. In addition, the use of herbicides within the project site will be minimized or eliminated during construction and future maintenance activities, where possible. Urban wildlife may be impacted by the removal of trees throughout the project site and disturbance to unmaintained grasses adjacent to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and the railroad corridor; however, these habitat generalist species are typically adaptive to development activities and would likely relocate to undeveloped areas in the vicinity or continue to live in the converted green spaces and newly planted trees within the project site. Construction activities in grassland, roadsides, shrubland, or tree habitats within the project site may result in the taking of migratory birds, eggs, young and/or active nests, if present. Although the provisions of the MBTA are applicable throughout the entire year, most migratory bird nesting activity in Minnesota occurs approximately from mid-March to August 15. Construction activities that involve soil disturbance can result in the introduction and spread of invasive species. Minnesota statutes (Chapter 18) regulate management of noxious weeds and invasive species. In addition, St. Louis Park Chapter 34 Articles III and IV regulate noxious weeds and vegetation maintenance for properties within the city. d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources. Mitigation Strategies • Prior to tree clearing within the project site, the MNDNR/USFWS-issued list of NLEB records for Minnesota10 must be consulted to ensure activities will not 1) result in removing a known occupied maternity roost tree, 2) occur within 150 feet of a known occupied maternity roost tree from June 1 through July 31, or 3) occur within 0.25 mile of a hibernaculum at any time. The MNDNR anticipates updating this list twice annually on April 1 and October 1. • If possible, tree clearing will occur outside of the NLEB pup season (June 1 – July 31) to minimize impacts on the NLEB, if present. If a known occupied maternity roost tree or 10 MNDNR and USFWS. 2015. Townships Containing Northern Long-eared Bat Roost Trees and/or Hibernacula. http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/ereview/minnesota_nleb_township_list_and_map_20150604.pdf. June 6, 2015. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 82 page 24 hibernaculum is identified near the project site, additional steps, including but not limited to field surveys, must be completed. Refer to the detailed analysis above. • When possible, removal of vegetation will occur outside of the bird nesting window to minimize potential take of migratory birds, if present. If vegetation clearing cannot be avoided during the peak breeding season for migratory birds (approximately mid-March to August 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey within the project site to determine the absence or presence of breeding birds and their nests. Pre-construction breeding bird surveys will meet the following criteria: o Pre-construction surveys will occur no more than two weeks before tree and shrub clearing activities commence. The area surveyed will include the areas where potential suitable habitat has been identified and tree or shrub clearing has not been completed. o If an occupied nest is observed during the survey, tree and shrub clearing activities will not be permitted within a 0.12-mile buffer of the nest site during the breeding season or until the fledglings have left the area. The Proposer will consult with the USFWS to avoid take of the species. o Upon completion, the survey results will be submitted to the USFWS, as appropriate. If breeding birds are not present, construction can proceed with no restrictions. If breeding birds or active nests are present, additional consultation will be performed. • If project activities will receive general obligation bond funding from the State of Minnesota, building and other construction designs must adhere to the Minnesota B3 Guidelines, which include strategies for developing bird-safe buildings and meet other sustainability goals. These guidelines can also be used on a voluntary basis on any project. • BMPs and Erosion and Sediment Control Devices will be used during construction activities to prevent sediment-laden stormwater runoff from the project site onto adjacent properties or public ways. • Native plants will be used for landscaping within the project site to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive plants and noxious weeds. In addition, seeds beneficial to pollinators will be included to the restoration seed mix, to minimize impacts on the RPBB. • The use of herbicides within the project site will be minimized or eliminated during construction and future maintenance activities, where possible. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 83 page 25 14. Historic properties: Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and 3) architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and operation. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties. On February 14, 2017, the Minnesota State Historical Society (MSHS) conducted a review of the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) records for the area within one mile of the project site, including portions of Sections 6 and 7, Township 28 North, Range 24 West; Section 31, Township 29 North, Range 24 West; and Sections 8, 9, 16, 17, 20 and 21, Township 117 North, Range 21 West in St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Mr. Cinadr’s review of the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory and Historic Structures Databases (SHPO Databases) identified 558 architectural resources and two archaeological resources. Of these 558 architectural resources, one resource; the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Depot (approximately 0.06-miles from the Project Site), the Peavey-Haglin Concrete Grain Elevator (approximately 0.4-miles from the Project site) are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). No additional architectural resources within the approximate 1.0-mile buffer utilized for review were listed on the NRHP or the Minnesota State Register of Historic Places. According to the current database search, however, no previously recorded architectural resources were located within the project site, however, the buildings on the parcels, according to tax assessment records, were constructed in 1947. Neither mid-twentieth century resource has been previously surveyed. The building located on the northern parcel of the project site is north of the existing railroad tracks and is a large, one-story brick clad building supported by a concrete block foundation. Several loading dock bays are located on the northwest side of the building. The loading dock bays on the southeast side of the building, likely accessed at one time by a railroad spur, have been in-filled. Small vinyl sliding windows have been added to each bay and have replaced a majority of the windows throughout the building as well. See Figures 14-1 – 14-4. The former Nash Frame building, located to south of the railroad tracks at 3565 Wooddale Avenue, is also a one-story building. The building is constructed of concrete block with brick veneer on the front façade. The building has been heavily altered on the exterior with the addition of a frame, vinyl clad second story on the southwest end of the building and the replacement of the original windows with modern sliding and fixed vinyl or metal windows. See Figures 14-5 – 14-8. According to the database search, no known archaeological resources are located within the Project site. The site is located within an area previously disturbed by construction activities during the installation of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, TH 7, and other mid-twentieth century commercial and industrial development. Due to the disturbed nature of the soils, it is unlikely that intact, if any, archaeological resources are present within the Project site. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to affect any unlisted or unknown archaeological resources. A 0.5-mile Area of Potential Effect (APE) for indirect effects, for the purposes of the current project, was chosen due to the density of the built environment surrounding the project site. In addition, the areas in the vicinity of the two NRHP-listed resources consist of modern commercial and residential development and substantial highway infrastructure. The two NRHP-listed resources located within the 0.5-mile APE include the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Depot (approximately 0.06- miles from the Project Site), now the home of the St. Louis Park Historical Society, and the Peavey- City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 84 page 26 Haglin Concrete Grain Elevator (approximately 0.4-miles from the Project site). The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Depot, located near the corner of W. 37th Street and Brunswick Avenue South, is surrounded by several large trees, which may shield the resource from any visual effects. In addition, a one-story modern commercial building is located immediately to the northeast of the resource. The Peavey-Haglin Grain Elevator is located to the northeast of the proposed project site and is surrounded by asphalt parking areas. The building, aside from the adjacent water tower, is the tallest structure in the immediate area. Since several of the proposed buildings to be located at the project site will be approximately six stories in height, the NRHP-listed the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Depot and the Peavey-Haglin Concrete Grain Elevator may view the proposed buildings. To determine potential visual effects, it is understood that field verification may be requested by the SHPO to determine the level of potential visual impact the proposed development may have on the NRHP-listed resources. If the proposed project is determined by the SHPO to have an adverse visual effect on the railroad depot, trees may be planted to shield the resource from the new buildings as potential mitigation to lessen or eliminate any adverse indirect impacts to the resource. Vegetative plantings for the grain elevator, due to the height of the resource, may not be a viable option if it is determined that the proposed project has an adverse effect on the NRHP-listed resource. Instead it is proposed that a global mitigation project be offered (to be determined and in coordination with the SHPO) for mitigation of effects if the resource is determined adversely visually impacted by the current project. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 15. Visual: Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects. The E-Generation facility will include one 30 kiloWatt generator fueled by methane and two 1 Megawatt generators fueled by natural gas. The generators will emit a vapor plume that may sometimes be visible during cold weather when the moisture in the exhaust will condensate. The methane used to fuel the 30 kW generator will undergo treatment to minimize the moisture content, however some moisture will remain in the methane and in the exhaust. The exhaust air flow from the 30 kW generator will be equivalent to a furnace exhaust for a large (4,000 sf) home. The natural gas will be used directly from the utility provider to power the 1 megawatt generators. Once the generator engines and exhaust system is warmed up, no visible vapor/exhaust plume is expected even during cold temperatures. These engines and generators are expected to be operating 95 percent of the time and will not be starting and stopping except for annual maintenance. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 85 page 27 16. Air: a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air pollutants, criteria pollutants, and any greenhouse gases. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the project’s effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary source emissions. No stationary source emissions are anticipated as a result of the project’s commercial, retail or hotel uses. The project’s E-Generation facility will include a 30 kW combined heat and power generator that will burn methane produced from the anaerobic digestion of food waste from the on-site residences, hotel and commercial establishments. Exhaust from the methane burning generator will contain maximum emissions of: 200g/hr CO, 80 g/hr NOx, 40 g/hr VOC. The two 1 Megawatt natural gas burning co-generators will produce emissions containing a maximum of: 7,340 g/hr CO, 3,230 g/hr NOx, 880 g/hr Non-Methane Hydrocarbons (NMHC). b. Vehicle emissions - Describe the effect of the project’s traffic generation on air emissions. Discuss the project’s vehicle-related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures (e.g. traffic operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to minimize or mitigate vehicle-related emissions. The Minnesota Department of Transportation has developed a screening method designed to identify intersections that may cause a CO impact above State standards. This method requires an intersection to be heavily congested (Level of Service F) and have a traffic volume of greater than 140,000 vehicles per day in order to be considered to have the potential for causing CO air pollution problems. None of the intersections in the study area exceed the criteria that would lead to a violation of the air quality standards. All intersection levels of service are expected to be LOS D or better, meaning the corridor is moderately congested and the per vehicle delay is acceptable. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of dust and odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may be discussed under item 16a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the project including nearby sensitive receptors and quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors. The project’s E-Generation facility will include ventilation and odor control equipment to capture and mitigate odors from the food waste and from the anaerobic digestion facility. Intensity of odors from food waste is expected to be low as containers will have lids. Ventilation and odor control equipment will also capture and mitigate odors from the dewatered organics. Intensity of odors from digested organics is expected to be low as organics have been stabilized. Odor generation can occur throughout the day and therefore ventilation and odor control equipment will operate continuously. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 86 page 28 17. Noise Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including 1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise. Nearby Sensitive Receivers The operation of the development site will have minimal noise impacts to the surrounding area. Traffic generated by the site is one potential noise source. Typically, traffic volumes would need to double for a change of noise level that would be considered barely perceptible. Traffic generated by the development will be a small fraction of the existing traffic that exists in the area, resulting in noise level changes that would typically be associated with changes that are barely perceptible. Surrounding receptors include an apartment building immediately to the east and southeast of the proposed project. South of the project are predominantly commercial businesses, with the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, proposed LRT line, and an existing freight rail line dividing the development site. North of TH 7 is a residential neighborhood, with the nearest residences (apartment building), being approximately 250 feet away and across TH 7. The E-generation facility is a component of the development site will generate noise. The manufacturer has provided noise emission levels for the site, rated at 70 decibels at ten meters. Since point source noises decay at a rate of approximately 6 decibels per distance doubling, noise levels would be roughly 64 decibels at the site boundary (approximately 20 meters from the noise source) of the E-generation facility. As demonstrated in the next section, 64 decibels is lower than the noise associated with noise from traffic on TH 7. Noise from the site would continue to decrease at greater distances, and will not cause increased noise levels at adjacent sensitive receptors. Local Ordinance Requirements The St. Louis Park noise ordinance identifies the same noise metrics and noise levels as Minnesota Administrative Rule 7030.0040 Noise Standards, and specifically exempts trains, and traffic from state and county roads. Existing Noise Levels The State of Minnesota’s noise standards are defined in Minnesota Administrative Rule 7030.0040 Noise Standards. The standards for L10 and L50 noise levels, which are the noise levels exceeded ten percent and 50 percent of a period, typically one hour. Since ten percent of an hour is six minutes, and fifty percent of an hour is 30 minutes, noise from trains typically would not cause exceedances of the state’s standards, since the trains will not be present for 6 minutes or 30 minutes out of an hour. The train frequency typically will not be greater than one train per hour. TH 7 is immediately adjacent to the site. Existing traffic on TH 7 is approximately 31,000 vehicles per day. The FHWA’s STAMINA 2.0 was used to evaluate the worst-case noise level on the project site. The results show that the project site currently exceeds both daytime and nighttime state standards. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 87 page 29 Table 17-1 Noise Analysis Results Summary Metric Daytime Daytime Standard Nighttime Nighttime Standard L10 69.5 65 66.8 55 L50 64.4 60 60.5 50 The exceedance of the state standards is not from noise caused by the project, but from noise generated by TH 7. The City’s ordinance exempts noise sources such as state highways, including the noise from TH 7, and therefore the existing noise is not a violation of the City’s ordinance. However, the proposed development would occur in an area where state noise standards are already higher than the standard, and would therefore be exposed to that noise. Potential mitigation could include the use of windows that do not open, arranging the property such that residential units face away from the highway, and/or a noise wall. These mitigation measures are not considered reasonable because they would have limited effectiveness at high cost, and because noise exceedances are not a result of the proposed development. No further action is required. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. 18. Transportation Describe traffic-related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes. a. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system. The development is in two parts. The north side will be accessed via the existing frontage road, while the south side will use existing driveways onto W. 36th Street. 1) Proposed parking includes 447 parking spaces: 216 on the north, and 31 on the south. 2) Estimated total average traffic generated is 3134: 1236 on the north side, 1898 on the south. 3) Peak hour traffic generated is 260 vehicles: 116 on the north side, 144 on the south. This occurs in the afternoon peak hour. 4) Source of trip generation rates is as follows: Trip generation estimates were developed using the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Some of the proposed commercial/retail space within the development would fall into the “Specialty Retail Center” category within the trip generation manual, however, since there is limited sample data within the manual, a blend of different retail generation rates was used. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 88 page 30 Table 18-1 It should be noted that the vehicle trips used in the traffic impact study (TIS) were more conservative than those shown in Table 18-1, above. At the time, the sizes and numbers of units were less precise and have since been revised. The TIS used the following numbers in their analysis, compared to the revised PLACE development: Table 18-2 ITE Code/ Land Use Development Daily Total AM Trips PM Peak TIS Current Units TIS Current +/- TIS Current +/- TIS Current +/- 220 Apartment 198 218 Units 1053 1160 +107 81 89 +8 98 108 +10 826 Commercial/Retail 8.5 5,108 K Sq ft 258 161 -97 6 3 -3 21 13 -8 E Generation Site 5 5 Empl. 10 10 - 2 2 - 2 2 - North Site Totals 1321 1331 +10 89 94 +5 121 123 +2 220 Apartment 102 81 Units 543 431 -112 42 33 -9 51 40 -11 110 Hotel 110 110 Room 809 809 - 52 52 - 59 59 - 931 Restaurant/Café 3 4.6 K Sq ft 202 313 +111 2 3 +1 17 26 +9 936 Coffeehouse 1.5 1.2 K Sq ft 256 205 -51 89 70 -19 34 26 -8 5) Trip reductions were taken based on land use type and facilities in the area for transit, cycling/walking, pass-by traffic, and internal capture. The site is served by Metro Transit bus routes 615 and 17. Route 17 picks up passengers on W. 36th Street and provides regular route service to downtown Minneapolis. Route 615 also stops on W. 36th Street and provides hourly service between Minnetonka, Hopkins and St. Louis Park. The project site will be served by the Green Line Extension via the adjacent Wooddale Avenue Station when it opens in 2021. The project site has access to the regional bicycle system via the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail, which bisects the site. Achievement of these trip reductions will require the site to employ travel demand management strategies such as secure bicycle parking and transit incentives. ITE Code/ Land Use Development Trip Reduction Daily Total AM Peak PM Peak Num. Units Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Northern Development Site 220 Apartment 218 Units 20% 1160 17 72 89 70 38 108 826 Commercial/Retail 5,108 Sq ft 30% 161 2 1 3 6 7 13 E Generation Site 5 Empl. 0% 10 2 0 2 0 2 2 North Site Totals 1331 21 73 94 76 47 123 Southern Development Site 220 Apartment 81 Units 20% 431 20 13 33 26 14 40 110 Hotel 110 Room 10% 809 31 21 52 30 29 59 931 Restaurant/Café 4,644 Sq ft 25% 313 2 1 3 17 9 26 936 Coffeehouse 1,173 Sq ft 45% 205 36 34 70 13 13 26 826 Commercial/Retail 3,986 Sq ft 20% 142 2 2 4 6 6 12 South Site Totals 1900 91 71 162 92 71 163 PLACE Development Totals 3231 112 144 256 168 118 286 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 89 page 31 b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system. A traffic impact study has been completed for this development. The report is attached. Traffic analysis was performed for baseline conditions and various development and traffic volume scenarios at the 2020 and the 2040 horizons. The future congestion and queuing issues at existing intersections are largely addressed by adding a connection from the south site to W. 35th Street. The results of these analyses are as follows: Table 18-3 Intersection 2020 Alternatives Delay (s/veh) / LOS 2040 Alternatives Delay (s/veh) / LOS Base PLACE Development PLACE Dev’t & 35th St. Connection Base PLACE Development PLACE Dev’t & 35th St. Connection Wooddale Avenue @ WB TH 7 Ramp 12.2/B 12.4/B 14.6/B 14.6/B 14.7/B 17.5/B Wooddale Avenue @ EB TH 7 Ramp 11.8/B 12.3/B 15.2/B 28.3/C 27.8/C 50.9/D Wooddale Avenue @ Frontage Road 4.4/A 5.8/A 6.7/A 7.6/A 8.1/A 10.3/B Wooddale Avenue @ 36th Street 17.5/B 18.1/B 18.5/B 23.2/C 21.7/C 22.7/C 36th Street @ Xenwood Avenue 7.2/A 8.7/A 12.2/B 8.7/A 31.7/C 45.5/D Increased trips resulting from development of the project site, all of which are served with the W. 35th Street connection option in place, do have an impact on the roadway network. However, the overall intersection operations are still at a LOS D or better. There is queueing between intersections due to capacity constraints and the close spacing of the four intersections along Wooddale Avenue. c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects. The driveway connection to W. 35th Street will be constructed as part of the redevelopment of the proposed project in order to serve the proposed development demands without causing an undue burden to W. 36th Street. This connection to W. 35th Street provides access to the traffic signal at W. 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue and provides development traffic with controlled access and greater route choices. In addition to this connection to W. 35th Street, the below-listed improvements are recommended with the proposed development project in order to maintain levels of service noted in Table 18-2 for 2020 and 2040. Many of these projects are currently budgeted for in St. Louis Park’s Capital Improvement Plan and others are anticipated to be developed in conjunction with the construction of the proposed PLACE project or the Southwest LRT. Others will be constructed as future City City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 90 page 32 projects as capital budgets permit or right of way becomes available through subsequent redevelopment. Overall, the proposed development scenario with the below-listed improvements shows minimal impact to the existing roadway network under 2020 traffic demand. • All SWLRT Base Improvements as follows: − Traffic signals at the TH 7 ramp terminal intersections on Wooddale Avenue − Restripe Wooddale Avenue to a 4-lane section − New signal system and gates for the freight and LRT crossings − New grade-separated trail crossing for the Cedar Lake Regional Trail at Wooddale Avenue • Construct a left-turn lane on southbound Wooddale Avenue to the Frontage Road.Widening of the Wooddale Avenue Bridge and reconfiguration of bridge corners to improve sight distance. • Construct RI/RO access to the south site at W. 36th Street • Construct eastbound left turn lane at Xenwood Avenue/W. 36th Street (150-feet). Maintain existing northbound, southbound and westbound geometry. Review the intersection geometry as part of any specific redevelopment plan and/or street improvement. • Add flashing yellow arrow signal heads for eastbound W. 36th Street at Xenwood Avenue • Identify travel demand management strategies for the site including but not limited to reducing the number of parking spaces allowed from current code requirements and providing secure bicycle storage for residents and visitors. By 2040, the increase in background traffic demand as currently forecasted, combined with the proposed PLACE development, would reach the capacity of both the Wooddale Avenue and W. 36th Street corridors under the proposed street network and interchange configuration at Wooddale Avenue and TH 7. It is recommended that updated traffic counts be obtained as other sites in the area are redeveloped and following the opening of Southwest LRT and the TH 100 project, such that the existing condition may be established. Forecasts and/or trip generation for other developments in the area should be added to the newly obtained existing volumes and the operation of the street network should be evaluated to determine future transportation needs. Travel Demand Management Strategies The Proposer has initiated numerous travel demand management strategies to promote use of the regional trail, bus stops, and future LRT station. The development will offer car sharing, bike sharing, and a Car-Free Perks program. The Proposer will provide a car-free perks package to 90 households on a first-come, first-served basis. For car-free households, PLACE will pay annual memberships in car-sharing and bike- sharing programs, pay a monthly cash stipend, and provide Go-To passes with a modest monthly starting balance. A mobility concierge will help connect people with transit options to make smooth connections and to help overcome technological unfamiliarity. Households will register their vehicles by license number with the management company. Those who choose to be car-free and receive the benefits must agree as part of their lease that they will remain car-free. Residential parking entry, likely controlled by swipe card or fob, will be programmed by apartment accordingly. Car share cars will have their own swipe cars, so that car-free residents may still use parking when in a car share vehicle. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 91 page 33 The hotel operator, Aimbridge, has experience with hotels on the LRT line and will encourage guests to come by transit. A transportation concierge will help residents and the public navigate the Twin Cities area using the many mobility options available that do not require a personal vehicle. Before the LRT comes online, a shuttle will provide transportation to key destinations for residents and hotel guests. A free hybrid shuttle will run regularly to high demand destinations for residents and hotel guests, with a higher level of service before the Wooddale Avenue Station becomes operational. Destinations and scheduling will be determined through conversations with hotel management and residents. The Proposer has planned two part-time jobs for shuttling people by bicycle “pedicab” at no charge among the North and South buildings and the station during reasonable weather. The Proposer has begun conversations about transit passes with Metro Transit. The current main option for companies and organizations is the Metropass for $76/month per rider. PLACE has targeted the amount of a monthly car-free stipend to cover a discounted, unlimited transit pass if that is what the household chooses as a priority. The hotel management company, Aimbridge, has experience providing transit stipends for employees who serve hotels near major transit, and anticipates a robust employee transit program. Cumulative Potential Effects Cumulative potential effects are not anticipated. Overall, the proposed development scenario with identified transportation improvements shows minimal impact to the existing roadway network under 2020 traffic demand. The Proposer has initiated numerous travel demand management strategies to promote use of the regional trail, bus stops, and future LRT station. The development will offer car sharing, bike sharing, and a Car-Free Perks program. 19. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are addressed under the applicable EAW Items) a. Describe the geographic scales and timeframes of the project related environmental effects that could combine with other environmental effects resulting in cumulative potential effects. b. Describe any reasonably foreseeable future projects (for which a basis of expectation has been laid) that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed project within the geographic scales and timeframes identified above. c. Discuss the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects. Cumulative potential effects are addressed under applicable EAW questions. 20. Other potential environmental effects: If the project may cause any additional environmental effects not addressed by items 1 to 19, describe the effects here, discuss the how the environment will be affected, and identify measures that will be taken to minimize and mitigate these effects. No additional environmental effects have been identified. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 92 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 93 page 35 APPENDIX A Figures City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 94 F F #×%$ #ß%$ ] F #¢%$ #¼%$ J #Þ%$ J #¼%$ #Þ%$ F R I H ] ] H H J #¼%$ #%$ #%$ ^ #Â%$ #Í%$ #Ä%$ #¶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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 95 'ST]VMKLX 2EXMSREP+ISKVETLMG7SGMIX]MGYFIH *IIX 9 @ @+-7@4VSNIGXW@97+78STSKVETLMG0SGEXMSRQ\H *IFVYEV] 40%') 97+78STSKVETLMG0SGEXMSR QMPIJVSQ7MXI 7MXI&SYRHEV] )LJXUH City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 96 W 36th St W 34th St Oxford St Wo o d D a l e A v e S Hamilton St MNTH10035th St ZarthanAveSW 37th St Alabama AveBrunswickAveSW 35th 1/2 StYosemiteAveS Xenwood Ave S W 35th St Webster Ave MN TH 7AlabamaAve Brunswick Ave SYosemiteAveSXenwoodAve S μ 0 300 600 Feet U:\193803195\GIS\Projects\Site Location.mxd February 6, 2017 PLACE: Site Location Site Boundary Parcel Lines )LJXUH3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 97 > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFM>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>139.8302.140.160.056.448.519.645.214.814.65.04.43 7 .4 6 6 .0 1 6 .0 1 6 .0 1 5 .7 5 .9 7 6 .2 1 1 5 .1 7 2 .9 2 .18.48.4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll ll lllllllllllllllllllllll>>>>>>>>>SSSSSSSSSS> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>E-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BE-BC-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BG -B O H P O H P FO-BE-BF O -B F O -B FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BE-B E -B O H PFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BF O -B 64.42 0 .5 251.148.84 4 .0 6 5 .3OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHPOHPOHP600.00S64°21'45"W132.21S55°39'42"W280.46S64°21'45"WS 2 5 °3 8 '1 5 "E 1 9 7 .4 0 N64°10'52"E853.87N55°44'40"E212.27101.52N41°31'41"W 95.65N01°19'57"W PARCEL2PARCEL 4PARCEL5PARCEL 3PARCEL 11 0 0 1 0 0 8 0 8 0 2 9 .0 0 2 9 .0 0 600.00SouthwesterlycornerofAUDITOR'SSUBDIVISIONNUMBER249(50.00feetnorthwesterlyfromcenterlineofsouthboundmaintrack,nowabandoned)S o u th w e ste rly b o u n d a ry lin e o fA U D IT O R 'S S U B D IV IS IO N N U M B E R 2 4 9 EXISTINGBUILDINGLinedescribedperDoc.No.23844285 fo o ts a n ita ry e a s e m e n tp e rD oc .N o .1 0 1 7 2 9 3 SanitarysewereasementperDoc.No.s1017293&1012920801 5 1 5 5 fo o ts a n ita ry e a se m e n tp e rD o c .N o.1 0 1 2 9 2 013.5footsanitarysewereasementperDoc.No.10129201 3 .5 1 3 .5 5footcommunicationeasementperDoc.No.57217635footcommunicationeasementperDoc.No.5721763DOC. NO. 1163477361.97S65°52'51"WN01°03'00"E54.70N64°21'45"E366.5865.34S01°00'38"WN64°21'45"E185.2752.75S01°03'00"W162.71S65°52'15"W18.23N88°58'35"W 37.71S65°21'14"W4.17N00°57'33"ES00°57'33"W 286.67 256.56N88°58'35"W175.77N39°00'57"WN64°17'59"E451.5079.0086.47PARCEL 6APARCEL 6BPARCEL 7B2PARCEL 7APARCEL 7A26.029.0PARCEL 8APARCEL 8BSoutherlyrightofwayoftheCanadianPacificRailroad,successortotheChicago,MilwaukeeRailwayasshownonthePlatofREARRANGEMENTOFSTLOUISPARKEast line of Lot 7, Block 25,REARRANGEMENT OF STLOUIS PARKOWNER: STANDAL PROPERTIES INCOWNER: MICHAEL HURLEY PROPS LLCOWNER: AVLT S LLCOWNER:HENNEPINCOUNTYREGIONALRAILROADAUTHORITYOWNER:SOOLINERAILROADO W N E R :B E L M P L S H O L D IN G S L L C R E I G D IR O F A S S E T M NG T SURVEY BY :APPROVED BY :DESIGNED BY :DRAWN BY :DATE :PAGE NUMBERPROJECT NUMBERREVISIONDATECHECKED BY :Plot Date: 02/03/2017 - 11:39amDrawing name: U:\193803195\CAD\Dwg\193803195V302.dwgXrefs:, 193803195V302_XSXT DJRSt. Paul Office2335 West Highway 36Saint Paul, MN 55113Phone: 651-636-4600Fax: 651-636-1311Website:www.stantec.com193803195PLACEPLACE - ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTAFebruary 3, 2017193803195V302V3.02ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYVICINITY MAPSITEHIGHWAY7HIGHWAY100WEST36THSTREETW O O DD A LEAV E.SS00°14'49"W315.51West quarter corner of Sec. 6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24West line of the SouthwestQuarterofSec.6,Twp.28North, Rng. 24Southwest corner of Sec. 6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24526.90S65°52'15"W80.00S00°14'49"W2062.14N00°14'49"ESOOLINERAILROADPLUG INSCRIBED WITH 43133IRON MONUMENT SET WITH PLASTICDENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCHDENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND50 1000Horizontal Scale In Feet>>LEGEND OF SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS>GATE VALVEMHMHPOWER BOXTELEPHONE BOXCONIFEROUS TREESHRUBROAD SIGNMAILBOXLIGHT POLEDECIDUOUS TREEAERIAL UTILITIESEX. CURB & GUTTEREX. SANITARY SEWERBURIED TELEPHONEBURIED ELECTRICBURIED GAS MAINCBHYDCOEX. WATER MAINEX. STORM SEWERBOLLARDLOT LINERIGHT-OF-WAYCHAIN LINK FENCECONCRETECURB STOPllC-BG-BE-BOHPCOHAND HOLEHMAILECSSSPARKING METERSIGNPYLON SIGNSHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS492.57S00°14'49"W526.90S65°52'15"WBEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OF THESOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP28, RANGE 24 WHICH IS ASSUMED TO HAVE ABEARING OF SOUTH 00 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 49SECONDS WEST.To PLACE E-Generation One, LLC. and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company:This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made inaccordance with the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS LandTitle Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9, 11, and 13 of Table A thereof. The field work was completedon April 20, 2015.STANTEC___________________________________Daniel J. Roeber, Professional Land SurveyorMinnesota License Number 43133February 3, 2017CERTIFICATIONFigure 5-4City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 98 PLACEST. LOUIS PARK, MNFebruary 8, 2017Project # 1938031950FT100FT50FTNRESIDENTIALURBAN FORESTGREENHOUSEE-GENRESIDENTIALWORKHUBLOBBYLIVE/WORKLIVE/WORKPARKINGRAMP PLACEMAKINGPLAZAHOTELCAFECOFFEESHOPLRTDROPOFFMAKER SPACEBIKESHOPWIND TURBINEMONUMENT SIGNMONUMENT SIGNWOODDALE AVE SSOLAR CANOPY W 36TH STW 35TH STYOSEMITE AVE SCEDAR LAKE TRAILWOODDALE AVENUE LRT STATIONMN 7 SERVICE RDMN HWY 7Figure 5-5 Site PlanCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 99 PLACEST. LOUIS PARK, MNFebruary 8, 2017Project # 1938031950FT100FT50FTNWOODDALE AVE SGREEN ROOF, TYPICALSOLAR PANELS, TYPICALSOLAR CANOPY E-GENNORTHSOUTHW 36TH STW 35TH STYOSEMITE AVE SCEDAR LAKE TRAILWOODDALE AVENUE LRT STATIONMN 7 SERVICE RDMN HWY 7Figure 5-6 Site Plan roof detailCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 100 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.telDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.PROJECT PHASEDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.ISSUESignature:Print Names:Date:License No:DATEMARKDESCRIPTIONteltel2/3/2017 6:18:58 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtG001COVER SHEETPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612 309 38892017-02-06CheckerAuthorPUD SubmissionMD11015002335 Highway 36 West StreetSt. Paul, MN 55113-3819651 604 4861SHT NOSHEET NAMEGENERALG002LEGENDG003GENERAL NOTESCIVILC001EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALSC003TREE REMOVALS AND PRESERVATION PLANC101SITE PLAN-OVERALLC102SITE PLAN-NORTHWESTC103SITE PLAN-NORTHEASTC104SITE PLAN-SOUTHC201TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLANC301SITE PLAN-NORTHEASTC401SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAINC402STORM SEWER PLANC801SITE DETAILSC802SITE DETAILSC901CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILSC902CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILSC903CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILSC1001MnDOT STANDARD PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP DETAILSLANDSCAPEL101PLANTING PLAN-OVERALLL102PLANTING PLAN-NORTHWESTL103PLANTING PLAN-NORTHEASTL104PLANTING PLAN-SOUTHL801PLANTING DETAILSELECTRICALE101ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN-OVERALLalV302ALTASurveyV301ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYSHT NOSHEET NAMEGENERALG001COVER SHEETS001SITE PLANARCHITECTURALA101NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSA102NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSA103NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSA104NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSA105NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSA106NORTH BLDG ELEVATIONSA107NORTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONSA201SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA202SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA203SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA204SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA205SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA206SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA207SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA208SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA209SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSA210SOUTH BLDG ELEVATIONSA211HOTEL ELEVATIONSA212SOUTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONSA301E-GEN FLOOR PLANSA302E-GEN FLOOR PLANSA303E-GEN ELEVATIONSA4013D VIEWA501ILLUSTRATIVE SECTIONSA502TECHNICAL SECTIONSPLACE, ST. LOUIS PARK, MNFigure 5-7: Site Plan VisualizationCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 101 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.telDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.PROJECT PHASEDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.ISSUESignature:Print Names:Date:License No:DATEMARKDESCRIPTIONteltel2/3/2017 6:16:34 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA107NORTH BUILDINGILLUSTRATIVEELEVATIONSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612 309 38892017-02-06CheckerAuthorPUD SubmissionMD11015002335 Highway 36 West StreetSt. Paul, MN 55113-3819651 604 4861N041681/16" = 1' - 0"GRAPHIC SCALESOUTH ELEVATION - SUMMER RENDER1A107 1/16" = 1' - 0"SOUTH ELEVATION - WINTER RENDER2A107 1/16" = 1' - 0"Figure 5-5: Site Plan VisualizationCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 102 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.telDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.PROJECT PHASEDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.ISSUESignature:Print Names:Date:License No:DATEMARKDESCRIPTIONteltel2/3/2017 6:16:47 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA212SOUTH BUILDINGILLUSTRATIVEELEVATIONSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612 309 38892017-02-06CheckerAuthorPUD SubmissionMD11015002335 Highway 36 West StreetSt. Paul, MN 55113-3819651 604 4861N041681/16" = 1' - 0"GRAPHIC SCALESOUTH ELEVATION - SUMMER RENDER1A212 1/16" = 1' - 0"SOUTH ELEVATION - WINTER RENDER2A212 1/16" = 1' - 0"City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 103 3/$&(67/28,63$5.'UDZLQJ&RS\ULJKW0H\HU6FKHUHU 5RFDVWOH/WG67 /28,63$5.01WHO3RUWODQG$YHQXH6RXWK6XLWH0LQQHDSROLV01 '5$:1%< &+(&.('%< 352-(&712352-(&73+$6(38'6XEPLVVLRQ0''UDZLQJ&RS\ULJKW0H\HU6FKHUHU 5RFNFDVWOH/WG,668(6LJQDWXUH 3ULQW1DPHV 'DWH /LFHQVH1R '$7(0$5.'(6&5,37,21WHO+LJKZD\:HVW6WUHHW6W3DXO01 $(*(1(/(9$7,2166287+(/(9$7,21 $327(17,$/62/$53$1(//2&$7,216327(17,$/:,1'785%,1( 6,*1$*(5$,1:$7(5&$7&+0(17&,67(51 7<3 1257+(/(9$7,21 $($67(/(9$7,21 $ *5$3+,&6&$/( ),567)/225 6(&21')/225 72*5((1+286( 72&2*(1)/8( &,67(51 327(17,$/9(17 7<3 :(67(/(9$7,21 $),567)/225 6(&21')/225 72*5((1+286( 72&2*(1)/8( &,67(51 (/(9$7,210$7(5,$/6/(*(1'$%&'City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 104 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.telDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.PROJECT PHASEDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.ISSUESignature:Print Names:Date:License No:DATEMARKDESCRIPTIONteltel2/3/2017 6:16:49 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA4013D VIEWPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612 309 38892017-02-06CheckerAuthorPUD SubmissionMD11015002335 Highway 36 West StreetSt. Paul, MN 55113-3819651 604 4861VIEW TO SOUTH BUILDINGS FROM 36TH STREET1A401City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 105 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 106 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 107 )LJXUH City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 108 Question 14: Historic Properties Figure 14-1. Northern Parcel: North Elevation. Figure 14-2. Northern Parcel: South Elevation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 109 Figure 14-3. Northern Parcel: West Elevation. Figure 14-4. Northern Parcel: East Elevation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 110 Figure 14-5. Southern Parcel: West Elevation. Figure 14-6. Southern Parcel: Southwest Elevation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 111 Figure14-7. Southern Parcel: South Elevation. Figure 14-8. Southern Parcel: North Elevation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 112 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 72 -DFN6XOOLYDQ3( &LW\RI6W/RXLV3DUN )520 *UDKDP-RKQVRQ3( +HDWKHU.LHQLW]3( '$7( -XQH 5( 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ 6(+1R67/28 7KLVWHFKQLFDOPHPRUDQGXPSURYLGHVILQGLQJVUHODWHGWRDWUDIILFLPSDFWDQDO\VLVSHUIRUPHGWRHYDOXDWHD SRWHQWLDOGHYHORSPHQWLQ6W/RXLV3DUNORFDWHGHDVWRI:RRGGDOH$YHQXH7KHGHYHORSPHQWZRXOG RFFXURQWZRVHSDUDWHSDUFHOV 7KHQRUWKHUQVLWHLVORFDWHGHDVWRI:RRGGDOH$YHQXHDQGVRXWKRIWKHHDVWERXQG7+HQWUDQFHUDPS ORFDWHGDORQJWKHHDVWOHJRIWKHIURQWDJHURDG7KLVVLWHZDVSUHYLRXVO\WKH6NLSS\0F*DUYH\SDUFHODQG LVFXUUHQWO\RZQHGE\WKH&LW\RI6W/RXLV3DUN(FRQRPLF'HYHORSPHQW$XWKRULW\ ('$ 7KHVRXWKHUQVLWHLVORFDWHGLQWKHQRUWKHDVWFRUQHURIWKHLQWHUVHFWLRQRI:RRGGDOH$YHQXHDQGWK 6WUHHW WKLVVLWHLVFXUUHQWO\RFFXSLHGE\1DVK)UDPH'HVLJQ7KLVVLWHLVFXUUHQWO\GLYLGHGDQGRZQHGE\ WZRSDUWLHVWKH+HQQHSLQ&RXQW\5HJLRQDO5DLOURDG$XWKRULW\ +&55$ DQGWKH&LW\RI6W/RXLV3DUN )LJXUHRQWKHIROORZLQJSDJHUHSUHVHQWVWKHLPPHGLDWHSURMHFWDUHDDQGKLJKOLJKWVWKHUHGHYHORSPHQW DUHDORFDWLRQVDVZHOODVWKHVWXG\LQWHUVHFWLRQV7KHILQGLQJVRIWKLVDQDO\VLVZLOOLGHQWLI\WKHWUDIILF LPSDFWVWKDWWKHGHYHORSPHQWZLOOKDYHDWWKHIROORZLQJLQWHUVHFWLRQV x:RRGGDOH$YHQXH :%7+5DPS7HUPLQDO x:RRGGDOH$YHQXH (%7+5DPS7HUPLQDO x:RRGGDOH$YHQXH )URQWDJH5RDG x:RRGGDOH$YHQXH WK6WUHHW xWK6WUHHWDW;HQZRRG$YHQXH 7KHLQWHUVHFWLRQDWWK6WUHHWDQG<RVHPLWH$YHQXH6RXWKZDVQRWHYDOXDWHGWRUHSUHVHQWWKHZRUVWFDVH VFHQDULRZLWKWKHQHZWULSVIURPWKHVRXWKHUQVLWHFRQFHQWUDWHGDWWKHVLJQDOL]HG;HQZRRG$YHQXH LQWHUVHFWLRQ$SSHQGL[)LJXUHVKRZVDGUDIWVLWHSODQIRUWKHVRXWKHUQVLWHRIWKHSURSRVHG3/$&( GHYHORSPHQW (QJLQHHUV_$UFKLWHFWV_3ODQQHUV_6FLHQWLVWV Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 5HG&LUFOH'ULYH6XLWH0LQQHWRQND01 6(+LVHPSOR\HHRZQHG_sehinc.com_ __ ID[ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 113 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Figure 1 Project Location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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 114 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH )LJXUHVKRZVWKHWUDIILFDQDO\VLVQHWZRUNZLWKH[LVWLQJ$0DQG30SHDNKRXUYROXPHV City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 115 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\-XQH3DJHFigure 2 Existing Traffic DemandsCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 116 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS 7KHUHDUHFXUUHQWO\WZRPDMRUSURMHFWVWKDWZLOOKDYHDQLPSDFWRQWUDYHOGHPDQGLQWKHUHJLRQ2QHLV FXUUHQWO\XQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQDQGWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOGRFXPHQWIRUWKHRWKHUKDVMXVWEHHQSXEOLVKHG MnDOT TH 100 7KHILUVWLPSURYHPHQWLVDODUJHVFDOHUHFRQVWUXFWLRQSURMHFWWKDWLVFXUUHQWO\XQGHUZD\DORQJ7+ 0Q'27EHJDQFRQVWUXFWLRQLQIDOORIDQGLWLVSODQQHGIRUFRPSOHWLRQE\ODWHIDOORI7KH SXUSRVHRIWKHSURMHFWLVWRDGGUHVVEDVLFLQIUDVWUXFWXUHGHILFLHQFLHVLPSURYHLQWHUFKDQJHVDIHW\DW7+ DQG0LQQHWRQND%RXOHYDUGDQGWRLPSURYHWKHWUDIILFRSHUDWLRQVRI+LJKZD\WKURXJKZLGHQLQJRI7+ WRLQFOXGHWKUHHODQHVLQHDFKGLUHFWLRQDQGLPSURYHPHQWVWRUDPSDFFHOHUDWLRQPHUJLQJVSDFLQJ LQFOXGLQJDX[LOLDU\ODQHVEHWZHHQWKHUDPSFRQQHFWLRQV7KHSURMHFWDOVRLQFOXGHV x 5HFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHEULGJHDQGUDPSVDWWKH0LQQHWRQND%RXOHYDUG &6$+ LQWHUFKDQJHWR SURYLGHDIXOOGLDPRQGLQWHUFKDQJHFRQILJXUDWLRQ7KLVUHSODFHVWKHSUHYLRXVFRQILJXUDWLRQRIWKH RIIVHWLQWHUVHFWLRQDW9HUQRQ$YHQXHIRUWKHVRXWKERXQGH[LWUDPSDQGWKHIROGHGGLDPRQGIRU QRUWKERXQGWUDIILF x 5HFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHEULGJHDQGUDPSVDWWKH7+LQWHUFKDQJHLQFOXGLQJDIROGHGGLDPRQGIRU ERWKGLUHFWLRQVRI7+KRZHYHUVRXWKERXQG7+ZLOOLQFOXGHGLUHFWLRQDOH[LWUDPSVWKDW ZLOOQRWWUDYHOWKURXJKWKHZHVWUDPSWHUPLQDOLQWHUVHFWLRQ7KLVUHSODFHVWKHSUHYLRXVGHVLJQRID IROGHGGLDPRQGIRUVRXWKERXQGWUDIILFDQGDVWDQGDUGGLDPRQGIRUQRUWKERXQGWUDIILF x 5HFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHIUHLJKWUDLOEULGJHRYHU7+ x 5HFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKHSHGHVWULDQWUDLOEULGJHRYHU7+ Southwest Light Rail Transit Project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x7UDIILFVLJQDOVDWWKH7+UDPSWHUPLQDOLQWHUVHFWLRQVRQ:RRGGDOH$YHQXH x5HVWULSH:RRGGDOH$YHQXHWRDODQHVHFWLRQ x5HVWULFWWKHIXOODFFHVV)URQWDJH5RDGLQWHUVHFWLRQWRULJKWLQULJKWRXW 5,52 DFFHVV 7KH&LW\KDVUHFHQWO\UHTXHVWHGWKDWWKLVDFFHVVEHPRGLILHGWRLQFOXGHDVRXWKERXQGOHIWWXUQ ODQHRQWRWKHHDVWOHJRIWKH)URQWDJH5RDGWKLVLVFXUUHQWO\XQGHUFRQVLGHUDWLRQE\632 x 1HZVLJQDOV\VWHPDQGJDWHVIRUWKHIUHLJKWDQG/57FURVVLQJV x 1HZJUDGHVHSDUDWHGWUDLOFURVVLQJIRUWKH&HGDU/DNH/577UDLODW:RRGGDOH$YHQXH XQGHUSDVV 7KH6:/57LPSURYHPHQWVOLVWHGDERYHDUHFRQVLGHUHGSDUWRIWKH³EDVH´IXWXUHFRQGLWLRQDQGLQFOXGHGLQ DOOIXWXUHPRGHOVXVHGWRHYDOXDWHWKH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWSURSRVDO City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 117 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH BASE TRAFFIC FORECASTS – BACKGROUND GROWTH $VSDUWRIWKH6:/573URMHFWWUDIILFIRUHFDVWVZHUHGHYHORSHGIRUWKH:RRGGDOH$YHQXHFRUULGRU 7KH632SURMHFWWHDPUHYLHZHGDKLVWRULFDOOLQHDUUHJUHVVLRQDQDO\VLVDQGWKH7ZLQ&LWLHV5HJLRQDO 7UDYHO'HPDQG0RGHO 7&57'0 DQGWKHQFRPSDUHGWKHUHVXOWV XOWLPDWHO\XVLQJJURZWKIDFWRUVWR FRQYHUWWKHWXUQLQJPRYHPHQWVWRWXUQLQJPRYHPHQWV %DVHGRQDUHYLHZRIWKHVRFLRHFRQRPLFGDWDLQSXWVLQWKHIRUHFDVWPRGHOXVHGE\632FHQVXV GDWDDQGWKH&LW\¶VODWHVWODQGXVHSODQWKHJURZWKIDFWRUVWKDW632DSSOLHGWRWKHLQWHUVHFWLRQWXUQLQJ PRYHPHQWVIURPH[LVWLQJWRZHUHGHWHUPLQHGWREHZLWKLQUHDVRQDEOHUDQJHVE\6(+VWDII7KLV UHIOHFWVEDFNJURXQGJURZWKGXULQJWKH30SHDNKRXUZLWKRXWWKH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWRIDSSUR[LPDWHO\ SHU\HDURQ:RRGGDOH$YHQXHDWWKHUDLOFURVVLQJ LQFUHDVHEHWZHHQDQG ZLWK FHUWDLQWXUQLQJPRYHPHQWVDFURVVWKHVWXG\DUHDLQFUHDVLQJDWGLIIHUHQWUDWHVWKDQRWKHUV 2040 Base Forecast )LJXUHVKRZVWKHWUDIILFDQDO\VLVQHWZRUNZLWK%DVH)RUHFDVW$0DQG30SHDNKRXUYROXPHV ZLWKRXWWKH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQW5DWKHUWKDQUHIHUULQJWRWKLVIRUHFDVWDVWKH1R%XLOG FRQGLWLRQDVLVW\SLFDOLQVXFKDQDO\VLVLWLVUHIHUUHGWRDVWKH³%DVH)RUHFDVW´WRDYRLGFRQIXVLRQ ZLWKWKHEXLOGVWDWXVRIWKH6:/57DQGUHODWHGLPSURYHPHQWV,QVXPPDU\WKH%DVH)RUHFDVW LQFOXGHV x $VVXPSWLRQRIWKHEDVH6:/57,PSURYHPHQWV x %DFNJURXQG*URZWKWR±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ase Forecast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³EDVH´WUDIILFGHPDQGVDQGLQFOXGHEDFNJURXQGJURZWKLQWKHSURMHFWDUHDZLWKRXWWKH3/$&( GHYHORSPHQW)LJXUHVKRZVWKHWUDIILFDQDO\VLVQHWZRUNZLWK%DVH)RUHFDVW$0DQG30SHDNKRXU YROXPHVZLWKRXWWKHDGGLWLRQDO3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWYROXPHV ,QVXPPDU\WKH%DVH)RUHFDVWLQFOXGHV x $VVXPSWLRQRIWKHEDVH6:/57,PSURYHPHQWV x%DFNJURXQG*URZWKWR±ZLWKRXWWKH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQW City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 118 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\-XQH3DJHFigure 3 2040 Base Forecast AM and PM peak hour (without PLACE)City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 119 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 119 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\-XQH3DJHFigure 4 2020 Base Forecast AM and PM peak hour (without PLACE) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 120 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 120 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH PROPOSED PLACE DEVELOPMENT - TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION 7KHKLJKOLJKWHGDUHDVLQ)LJXUHDUHWKHSURSRVHGUHGHYHORSPHQWVLWHORFDWLRQVIRUWKH3/$&( GHYHORSPHQW:KLOHWKHFXUUHQW3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWSODQLVVSOLWEHWZHHQWKHWZRVLWHVWKHIROORZLQJLVD VXPPDU\RIWKHWRWDOGHYHORSPHQWSODQIURPERWKORFDWLRQV xQHZDSDUWPHQWXQLWV xURRP+RWHO x VTXDUHIHHWRIFRPPHUFLDOUHWDLOVSDFH x (*HQHUDWLRQVLWH 7ULSJHQHUDWLRQHVWLPDWHVZHUHGHYHORSHGXVLQJWKH,QVWLWXWHRI7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ(QJLQHHU¶V7ULS *HQHUDWLRQ0DQXDO WK(GLWLRQ6RPHRIWKHSURSRVHGFRPPHUFLDOUHWDLOVSDFHZLWKLQWKHGHYHORSPHQW ZRXOGIDOOLQWRWKH³6SHFLDOW\5HWDLO&HQWHU´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¶VFRQVXOWDQW 7DEOHVXPPDUL]HVWKHWULSJHQHUDWLRQHVWLPDWHVIRUGDLO\$0SHDNKRXUDQG30SHDNKRXUGHPDQGVIRU WKHQRUWKDQGVRXWKVLWHVDVZHOODVWKHFRPELQHGWRWDOV WKHDWWDFKHG$SSHQGL[7DEOHVKRZVWKH FRPSOHWHWULSJHQHUDWLRQDVVXPSWLRQV Table 1 – PLACE Development Trip Generation ITE Code/Land Use Development Trip Daily AM Peak PM Peak Num. Units Reduction Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT SITE $SDUWPHQW 8QLWV &RPPHUFLDO5HWDLO 6TIW (*HQHUDWLRQ6LWH HPS 1RUWK6LWH7RWDOV SOUTHERN DEVELOPMENT SITE $SDUWPHQW 8QLWV +RWHO 5RRP 5HVWDXUDQW&DIH 6TIW &RIIHHKRXVH 6TIW &RPPHUFLDO5HWDLO 6TIW 6RXWK6LWH7RWDOV PLACE Development Totals 3,365 128 152 280 174 128 302 7ULSUHGXFWLRQVZHUHWDNHQEDVHGRQODQGXVHW\SHDQGIDFLOLWLHVLQWKHDUHDIRUWKHIROORZLQJ x7UDQVLW x%LF\FOH:DON x3DVVE\ x ,QWHUQDO&DSWXUH City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page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x:HVWRQ7+ x(DVWRQ7+ x1RUWKRQ:RRGGDOH$YHQXH x6RXWKRQ7+ x1RUWKRQ7+ x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ight-in/Right-out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th Street Connection 7KHVHFRQGRSWLRQIRUDFFHVVWRWKHVRXWKVLWHSURYLGHVDFRQQHFWLRQWRWK6WUHHWZKLFKZRXOGSURYLGH DFFHVVWRERWK<RVHPLWH$YHQXHDQG;HQZRRG$YHQXH7KHFRQQHFWLRQWR;HQZRRG$YHQXHZRXOG SURYLGHVLWHWUDIILFZLWKDIXOOVLJQDOFRQWUROOHGDFFHVVDWWKHLQWHUVHFWLRQRI;HQZRRG$YHQXHDQGWK 6WUHHWIRUWUDIILFWRHQWHUDQGH[LWWKHVLWHLQDQ\GLUHFWLRQ7KHLQWHUVHFWLRQDWWK6WUHHWDQG<RVHPLWH $YHQXH6RXWKZDVQRWLQFOXGHGLQWKHPRGHOLQJWRUHSUHVHQWWKHZRUVWFDVHVFHQDULRZLWKWKHQHZWULSV IURPWKHVRXWKHUQVLWHFRQFHQWUDWHGDWWKHVLJQDOL]HG;HQZRRG$YHQXHLQWHUVHFWLRQ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 122 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\-XQH3DJHFigure 5 PLACE Trip DistributionCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 123 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage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turn Analysis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turn Mitigation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x7UDIILFVLJQDOVDWWKH7+UDPSWHUPLQDOLQWHUVHFWLRQVRQ:RRGGDOH$YHQXH x5HVWULSHG:RRGGDOH$YHQXHWRDODQHVHFWLRQ x5HVWULFWWKHIXOODFFHVV)URQWDJH5RDGLQWHUVHFWLRQWRULJKWLQULJKWRXWDFFHVVZLWKDVRXWKERXQGOHIW WXUQODQH 7KH&LW\KDVUHFHQWO\UHTXHVWHGWKDWWKH632SURMHFWLQFOXGHWKLVVRXWKERXQGOHIWWXUQODQHDQGLW LVXQGHUFRQVLGHUDWLRQ x *UDGHVHSDUDWHGWUDLOFURVVLQJIRUWKH&HGDU/DNH/577UDLODW:RRGGDOH$YHQXH City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 124 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH 7KRXJKQRWGLUHFWO\WLHGWRWKHGHYHORSPHQWDQDO\VLVDIRUHFDVWVFHQDULRZDVDOVRLQFOXGHGWROHDUQ WKHSRWHQWLDOIXWXUHWUDIILFLPSDFWVRIWKHSURSRVHGVLWHDQGRWKHUSODQQHGGHYHORSPHQWLQWKHDUHD7KUHH VHSDUDWHVFHQDULRVZHUHDQDO\]HGIRUERWKDQG7KHIROORZLQJLVDGHVFULSWLRQRIHDFK x6FHQDULR$ %DVH)RUHFDVW 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWVQR3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF x6FHQDULR% %DVH)RUHFDVW 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWVQR3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF x6FHQDULR$ %DVH3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWV 1RUWKDQG6RXWKVLWH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF 6RXWKVLWHRQO\KDVGLUHFW5,52DFFHVVIURPWK6WUHHW x6FHQDULR% %DVH3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWV 1RUWKDQG6RXWKVLWH3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF 6RXWKVLWHRQO\KDVGLUHFW5,52DFFHVVIURPWK6WUHHW x6FHQDULR$ %DVH3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILFZLWKWK6WUHHWFRQQHFWLRQ 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWV 1RUWKDQG6RXWKVLWHGHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF 6RXWKVLWHKDVGLUHFW5,52DFFHVVIURP WK6WUHHWDQGDQHZFRQQHFWLRQWRWK6WUHHWSURYLGLQJ WKHVLWHDFFHVVWR;HQZRRG$YHQXH x6FHQDULR% %DVH3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILFZLWKWK6WUHHWFRQQHFWLRQ 6:/57EDVHLPSURYHPHQWV 1RUWKDQG6RXWKVLWHGHYHORSPHQWWUDIILF 6RXWKVLWHKDVGLUHFW5,52DFFHVVIURP WK6WUHHWDQGDQHZFRQQHFWLRQWRWK6WUHHWSURYLGLQJ WKHVLWHDFFHVVWR;HQZRRG$YHQXH Traffic Operations Model and Level of Service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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 125 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 2: Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections LOS Designation Signalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) $ %!±!± &!±!± '!±!± (!±!±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–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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 126 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 3: Scenario 1A – 2020 Base Forecast PM Peak ,QWHUVHFWLRQ $SSURDFK 303HDN+RXU 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 /HIW 7KUX 5LJKW $SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# :%7+5DPS 1% $$$ % 6% %$% :%82.46 /F $ $' :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# (%7+5DPS 1% $ $ $ % 6%% $$ (% '$& & :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# )URQWDJH5RDG 1% $ $ $ $ 6%& $$$ (%&& :% $ $ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# 5DLO&URVVLQJ 1% $ $6% $ $ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# WK6WUHHW 1% ' ' $ % % 6%%%$% (%&'$' :%&'$& WK6WUHHW# ;HQZRRG$YHQXH 1% & & $ & $ 6%& %$& (%$$$$ :% %$$$ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 127 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH SCENARIO 2A –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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 128 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 4: Scenario 2A – 2020 Base + PLACE Development Traffic, PM Peak ,QWHUVHFWLRQ $SSURDFK 303HDN+RXU 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 /HIW 7KUX 5LJKW $SSURDFK ,QWHUVHFWLRQ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# :%7+5DPS 1% $$$ % 6%&$ % :%80.03 /F $ $' :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# (%7+5DPS 1% $ $ $ % 6% % $$ (%'$ && :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# )URQWDJH5RDG 1% $ $ $ $ 6%'$$$ (%&& :%%% :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# 5DLO&URVVLQJ 1% $ $ 6% $ $ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# WK6WUHHW 1% ' ' $ % % 6%%%$% (%' '% ' :%& &%% WK6WUHHW# ;HQZRRG$YHQXH 1% & & $ & $ 6%&'$& (%%$$$ :%%$$$ WK6WUHHW# 3ODFH$FFHVV :% & & 6%76.32 /F 76.3 /F City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 129 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH SCENARIO 3A –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x6KDUHGWKURXJKOHIWWXUQODQH±IHHW x5LJKWWXUQODQH±IHHW $IXWXUHWUDIILFVWXG\RISRWHQWLDOUHGHYHORSPHQWDQGRUVWUHHWFRQQHFWLRQDOWHUQDWLYHVVRXWKRIWK6WUHHW ZRXOGEHQHFHVVDU\WRLGHQWLI\WKHQHHGWRSURYLGHGHGLFDWHGOHIWWXUQODQHVIRUWKHQRUWKERXQGDQG VRXWKERXQGDSSURDFKHVDQGWKHUHTXLUHGVWRUDJHRIWKRVHODQHVDVZHOODVWKHULJKWWXUQODQHV7KHQHHG IRUDGHGLFDWHGOHIWWXUQODQHZRXOGLPSDFWWKHDPRXQWRIRQVWUHHWSDUNLQJSURYLGHGDORQJ;HQZRRG $YHQXHZKLFKLVDSSUR[LPDWHO\IHHWZLGH 7DEOHEHORZVXPPDUL]HVWKHUHVXOWVIURPWKH9,66,0DQDO\VLV PRUHGHWDLOHGUHVXOWVDUHVKRZQLQ $SSHQGL[7DEOH City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 130 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 5: Scenario 3A – 2020 Base + PLACE Development Traffic with 35 th Street connection, PM Peak ,QWHUVHFWLRQ $SSURDFK 303HDN+RXU 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 /HIW 7KUX 5LJKW $SSURDFK 'HOD\/26 ,QWHUVHFWLRQ 'HOD\/26 :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# :%7+5DPS 1% $ $ $ % 6%&$& :%92.24 /F $ $( :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# (%7+5DPS 1% $ $ $ % 6% %$$ (% '$'' :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# )URQWDJH5RDG 1% $ $ $ $ 6%'$$ $ (% && :% %% :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# 5DLO&URVVLQJ 1% $ $ 6% $ $ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# WK6WUHHW 1% ' ( $ % % 6%%%$% (%''% ' :% & &%% WK6WUHHW# ;HQZRRG$YHQXH 1% & & $ & % 6%&& $& (%&$$$ :%%%%% WK6WUHHW# 3ODFH$FFHVV :% & & 6%43.25 /E 43.3 /E City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page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– 2040 BASE FORECAST 7KHWUDIILFGHPDQGVZLWKRXW3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWWUDIILFZHUHHYDOXDWHGZLWKWKHEDVH6:/57 LPSURYHPHQWVLQFOXGLQJDVRXWKERXQGOHIWWXUQODQHDWWKH)URQWDJH5RDGLQWHUVHFWLRQZLWK:RRGGDOH $YHQXH :LWKWKHURDGZD\LPSURYHPHQWVDQGWKH6:/57RSHUDWLQJWKHRYHUDOOLQWHUVHFWLRQRSHUDWLRQVDUHDWD /26&RUEHWWHU±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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 132 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 6: Scenario 1B – 2040 Base Forecast PM Peak ,QWHUVHFWLRQ $SSURDFK 303HDN+RXU 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 /HIW 7KUX 5LJKW $SSURDFK 'HOD\/26 ,QWHUVHFWLRQ 'HOD\/26 :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# :%7+5DPS 1% $$ $ % 6%&$& :%97.83 /F $% ' :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# (%7+5DPS 1% $ $ $ & 6%%$$ (%90.07 /F $94.86 /F 94 /F :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# )URQWDJH5RDG 1% $ $ $ $ 6% '$$ $ (%37.89 /E 37.9 /E :%%% :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# 5DLO&URVVLQJ 1% $ $ 6% % % :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# WK6WUHHW 1% '57.92 /E $ & & 6% %%$% (%'' % ' :%''$' WK6WUHHW# ;HQZRRG$YHQXH 1% & $ $ & $ 6%&%$& (%$ $ $ $ :%% $$$ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 133 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH SCENARIO 2A –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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 134 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 7: Scenario 2B – 2040 Base + PLACE Development Traffic PM Peak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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 135 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH SCENARIO 3B –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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 136 3/$&('HYHORSPHQW7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\ -XQH 3DJH Table 8: Scenario 3B – 2040 Base + PLACE Development Traffic with 35 th Street connection, PM Peak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ity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page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x $OO6:/57%DVH,PSURYHPHQWVDVIROORZV 7UDIILFVLJQDOVDWWKH7+UDPSWHUPLQDOLQWHUVHFWLRQVRQ:RRGGDOH$YHQXH 5HVWULSH:RRGGDOH$YHQXHWRDODQHVHFWLRQ 1HZVLJQDOV\VWHPDQGJDWHVIRUWKHIUHLJKWDQG/57FURVVLQJV 1HZJUDGHVHSDUDWHGWUDLOFURVVLQJIRUWKH&HGDU/DNH/577UDLODW:RRGGDOH$YHQXH x &RQVWUXFWVRXWKERXQGOHIWWXUQODQHDWWKH632SURSRVHG5,52)URQWDJH5RDGLQWHUVHFWLRQZLWK :RRGGDOH$YHQXH x :LGHQLQJRIWKH:RRGGDOH$YHQXH%ULGJHDQGUHFRQILJXUDWLRQRIEULGJHFRUQHUVWRLPSURYHVLJKW GLVWDQFHDVLGHQWLILHGLQWKH0DUFK6(+0HPR:RRGGDOH$OWHUQDWLYHV$QDO\VLV±6WUXFWXUDO 2SWLRQV x &RQVWUXFW5,52DFFHVVWRWKHVRXWKVLWHDWWK6WUHHW x &RQVWUXFWHDVWERXQGOHIWWXUQODQHDW;HQZRRG$YHQXHWK6WUHHW IHHW 0DLQWDLQH[LVWLQJ QRUWKERXQGVRXWKERXQGDQGZHVWERXQGJHRPHWU\5HYLHZWKHLQWHUVHFWLRQJHRPHWU\DVSDUWRIDQ\ VSHFLILFUHGHYHORSPHQWSODQDQGRUVWUHHWLPSURYHPHQW x $GGIODVKLQJ\HOORZDUURZVLJQDOKHDGVIRUHDVWERXQGWK6WUHHWDW;HQZRRG$YHQXH x ,GHQWLI\WUDYHOGHPDQGPDQDJHPHQWVWUDWHJLHVIRUWKHVLWHLQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWRUHGXFLQJWKH QXPEHURISDUNLQJVSDFHVDOORZHGIURPFXUUHQWFRGHUHTXLUHPHQWVDQGSURYLGLQJVHFXUHELF\FOH VWRUDJHIRUUHVLGHQWVDQGYLVLWRUV 2YHUDOOWKHSURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWVFHQDULRZLWKWKHDERYHOLVWHGLPSURYHPHQWVVKRZVPLQLPDOLPSDFWWR WKHH[LVWLQJURDGZD\QHWZRUNXQGHUWUDIILFGHPDQG %\WKHLQFUHDVHLQEDFNJURXQGWUDIILFGHPDQGDVFXUUHQWO\IRUHFDVWHGFRPELQHGZLWKWKHSURSRVHG 3/$&(GHYHORSPHQWZRXOGUHDFKWKHFDSDFLW\RIERWKWKH:RRGGDOH$YHQXHDQGWK6WUHHWFRUULGRUV City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page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±3/$&(6RXWK6LWH3ODQ $SSHQGL[7DEOH±7ULS*HQHUDWLRQ7DEOH $SSHQGL[7DEOH±$OWHUQDWLYH6XPPDU\9,66,002(7DEOH $SSHQGL[7DEOHVWKURXJK±9,66,002(7DEOHV V ?SW?V?VWORX??SODQQLQJ?WUDIILFVWXG\?PHPR?XSGDWH?SODFHGHYHORSPHQWWLVWHFKPHPRGRF[ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 139 W O ODDALEAVESFFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BO H PB E -BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BO-B>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll> > > >FMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFOFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BBE -B FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BBUILDING CHOTELGROUNDFLOOR OPEN36TH ST WYOSEMITE AVE S35TH ST WNSHEET NUMBERDATENOSURVEYAPPROVEDDESIGNEDDRAWNPROJ. NO.WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORTAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFPRINT NAME:SIGNATURE:DATE:LIC. NO.REVISIONCHECKEDPlot Date: 05/09/2016 - 11:45amDrawing name: U:\193803195\CAD\Dwg\193803195 C1.01.DWGXrefs:, 193803195XSXV, 193803195BRDR, 193803195XSXT, 193803195XSNA, 193803195XSNO, XE2-GM01, 193803195XSNO4, 193803195XSNO2, 193803195XSNO3, 193803195 WOODDALE_Site, CAD-parcels, WB_MSR_south planTHE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE THEDRAWING - ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED TO STANTEC WITHOUT DELAY.THE COPYRIGHTS TO ALL DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF STANTEC. REPRODUCTIONOR USE FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THAT AUTHORIZED BY STANTEC IS FORBIDDEN.PLACE6RXWK6LWH$SSHQGL[)LJXUHST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA193803195C1.01CITY / COUNTY PARCELSPRELIMINARY SITE PLAN########################.################City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 140 Exhibit A1Trip Generation AssumptionsAMDATA PROVIDED INITIALLY BY PLACETOTALBuildingDevelopmentNumberUnitsRate% Entering% ExitingNumber of Trips Entering Exiting TransitBike/ Walk Passby InternalNumber of Trips Entering ExitingNumber of Trips Entering ExitingAApartments (mixed income) 70Dwelling Units0.51 20% 80% 36 7 29 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 29 6 2330%25 5 20ACommercial/Retail (Maker space) 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 1.08 61% 39% 32 1 0% 5% 5% 15% 25% 21 140%21 1B Apartments (mixed income) 115Dwelling Units0.51 20% 80% 59 12 47 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 47 9 3830%41 8 33Live/Work Type I 13Dwelling Units0.51 20% 80% 71 6 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 51 430%51 4Other Commercial/Retail (Bike Shop) 5.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 1.08 61% 39% 64 2 0% 25% 5% 5% 35% 42 230%42 2NE-Generation Site5No. of Employees0.40 90% 10% 22 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 22 022 0113 28 850% 89 21 68 Subtotal North 79 19 60SHotel110Total Rooms0.53 59% 41% 58 34 24 5% 5% 0% 0% 10% 52 31 2115%50 30 20SRestaurant/Café3.0 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 0.81 60% 40% 21 1 0% 0% 15% 10% 25% 21 120%21 1Coffeehouse1.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 108.4 51% 49% 163 83 80 0% 5% 15% 25% 45% 89 45 4460%65 33 32Commercial/Retail (Co-work) 3.616 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 1.08 61% 39% 42 2 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 32 130%32 1C Live/Work Suites (both types) 102Dwelling Units0.51 61% 39% 52 32 20 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 42 26 1630%36 22 14C Live/Work Type II Commercial Space 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 1.08 61% 39% 32 1 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 32 130%21 1*ITE Trip Generation 9th Edition282 154 1280% 191 107 84 Subtotal South 158 89 69395 182 213280 128 152Total237 108 12940% 41% 39%29% 30% 29%PMDATA PROVIDED INITIALLY BY PLACETOTALBuildingDevelopmentNumberUnitsRate% Entering% ExitingNumber of Trips Entering Exiting TransitBike/ Walk Passby InternalNumber of Trips Entering ExitingNumber of Trips Entering ExitingAApartments (mixed income) 70Dwelling Units0.62 65% 35% 43 28 15 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 35 23 1230%30 20 10ACommercial/Retail (Maker space) 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 3.7 49% 51% 11 5 6 0% 5% 5% 15% 25% 84 440%73 4B Apartments (mixed income) 115Dwelling Units0.62 65% 35% 71 46 25 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 57 37 2030%50 33 17Live/Work Type I 13Dwelling Units0.62 65% 35% 85 3 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 64 230%64 2Other Commercial/Retail (Bike Shop) 5.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 3.7 49% 51% 20 10 10 0% 25% 5% 5% 35% 13 6 730%14 7 7NE-Generation Site5No. of Employees0.40 10% 90% 20 2 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 20 220 2155 94 610% 12174 47 Subtotal North 109 67 42SHotel110Total Rooms0.60 51% 49% 66 34 32 5% 5% 0% 0% 10% 59 30 2915%56 29 27SRestaurant/Café3.0 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 7.49 67% 33% 22 15 7 0% 0% 15% 10% 25% 17 11 620%18 12 6Coffeehouse1.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 40.75 50% 50% 61 31 30 0% 5% 15% 25% 45% 34 17 1760%24 12 12Commercial/Retail (Co-work) 3.616 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 3.7 49% 51% 13 6 7 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 11 5 630%94 5C Live/Work Suites (both types) 102Dwelling Units0.62 65% 35% 63 41 22 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 51 33 1830%44 29 15C Live/Work Type II Commercial Space 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 3.7 49% 51% 11 5 6 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 94 530%844*ITE Trip Generation 9th Edition236 132 1040% 181 100 81 Subtotal South 159 90 69391 226 165302 174 128Total268 157 11131% 31% 33%23% 23% 22%DAILYTOTALBuildingDevelopmentNumberUnitsRate% Entering% ExitingNumber of Trips Entering Exiting TransitBike/ Walk Passby InternalNumber of Trips Entering ExitingAApartments (mixed income) 70Dwelling Units6.65 50% 50% 466 233 233 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 372 186 186ACommercial/Retail (Maker space) 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 44.32 50% 50% 133 67 66 0% 5% 5% 15% 25% 100 50 50B Apartments (mixed income) 115Dwelling Units6.65 50% 50% 765 383 382 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 612 306 306Live/Work Type I 13Dwelling Units6.65 50% 50% 86 43 43 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 69 35 34Other Commercial/Retail (Bike Shop) 5.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 44.32 50% 50% 244 122 122 0% 25% 5% 5% 35% 158 79 79NE-Generation Site5No. of Employees2.00 50% 50% 10 5 5 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10 5 51704 853 8510% 1321 661 660SHotel110Total Rooms8.17 50% 50% 899 450 449 5% 5% 0% 0% 10% 809 405 404SRestaurant/Café3.01000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 89.95 50% 50% 270 135 135 0% 0% 15% 10% 25% 202 101 101Coffeehouse1.5 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 310.5 50% 50% 466 233 233 0% 5% 15% 25% 45% 256 128 128Commercial/Retail (Co-work) 3.616 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Leasable Area 44.32 50% 50% 160 80 80 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 128 64 64C Live/Work Suites (both types) 102Dwelling Units6.65 50% 50% 678 339 339 15% 5% 0% 0% 20% 543 272 271C Live/Work Type II Commercial Space 3 1000 Sq. Feet of Gross Floor Area 44.32 50% 50% 133 67 66 5% 5% 0% 10% 20% 106 53 53*ITE Trip Generation 9th Edition2606 1304 13020% 2044 1023 10214310 2157 21533365 1684 1681Check Values22% 22% 22%Apartment 300Retail/Commercial 19.6Hotel 110ITE Trip Generation Rate*Reduction % for Pass-by, internal capture, and modal cultureEstimated Trips (with Reductions)AM PeakAM PeakEstimated Trips (NO Reductions)AM PeakReductions SepartedEstimated Trips (with SEH Reductions)AM PeakITE Trip Generation Rate*DAILYEstimated Trips (NO Reductions)DAILYEstimated Trips (with SEH Reductions)DAILYReductions SepartedEstimated Trips (with Reductions)PM PeakPM PeakPM PeakPM PeakITE Trip Generation Rate* Estimated Trips (NO Reductions)Reductions SepartedEstimated Trips (with SEH Reductions)Reduction % for Pass-by, internal capture, and modal cultureCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 141 Appendix Table 2: 2020 and 2040 Intersection Peak Hour Delay and LOS Summary ,QWHUVHFWLRQ $OWHUQDWLYHV 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 $OWHUQDWLYHV 'HOD\>VHFYHK@/26 %DVH3/$&( 'HYHORSPHQW 3/$&('HY WK6W&RQQHFWLRQ%DVH3/$&( 'HYHORSPHQW 3/$&('HY WK6W&RQQHFWLRQ :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# :%7+5DPS % % % % % % :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# (%7+5DPS % % % & & ' :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# )URQWDJH5RDG $ $ $ $ $ % :RRGGDOH$YHQXH# WK6WUHHW % % % & & & WK6WUHHW# ;HQZRRG$YHQXH $ $ % $ & ' City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 142 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 1A2020 Base ForecastPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only/ 7 5 7RWDO / /26 7 /26 5 /26'HOD\ 69HK /26'HOD\ 69HK /26 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[/LQN/HQJWK$YJ 0D[ 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 173 1766%:RRGGDOH $ % $ % % :%2II5DPS ) $ $ ' 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 179 1576%:RRGGDOH % $ $ $ % 157 157(%2II5DPS ' $ & & 3971%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 154 1446%:RRGGDOH & $ $ $ $ 141 138(%)URQWDJH $ $ & & :%)URQWDJH $ $ $ $ 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 2476%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 1851%:RRGGDOH ' ' $ % 91 6%:RRGGDOH % % $ % % 223 223 211(%WK & ' $ ' 172 224:%WK & ' % % 6671%;HQZRRG & & $ & 6%;HQZRRG & % $ & $ (%WK $ $ $ $ :%WK % $ $ $ /(*(1' ###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHRIWKHDYDLODEOHVWRUDJH###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHDYDLODEOH6WRUDJHWKDW;HQZRRGIntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U :RRGGDOHDW1RUWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW6RXWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW)URQWDJH:RRGGDOHDW5DLO&URVVLQJ:RRGGDOHDWWK'HOD\ 69HK /26%\$SSURDFK/26%\,QWHUVHFWLRQ4XHXH IHHW /HIW7XUQ 7KURXJK 5LJKW7XUQCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 143 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 2A2020 Base + PLACE Development TrafficPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only/ 7 5 7RWDO / /26 7 /26 5 /26'HOD\ 69HK /26'HOD\ 69HK /26 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[/LQN/HQJWK$YJ 0D[ 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 175 1786%:RRGGDOH $ & $ % % :%2II5DPS ) $ $ ' 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 183 1606%:RRGGDOH % $ $ $ % 133 133(%2II5DPS ' $ & & 4721%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 169 1586%:RRGGDOH ' $ $ $ $ 93 146 154(%)URQWDJH $ $ & & :%)URQWDJH $ $ % % 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 2546%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 1841%:RRGGDOH ' ' $ % 6%:RRGGDOH % % $ % % 216 216 205(%WK ' ' % ' 212 220:%WK & & % % 731 731 8631%;HQZRRG & & $ & 6%;HQZRRG & ' $ & $ (%WK % $ $ $ 10 240 :%WK % $ $ $ :%WK $ $ & &6%$FFHVV $ $ ))/(*(1' ###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHRIWKHDYDLODEOHVWRUDJH###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHDYDLODEOH6WRUDJHIntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U 4XHXH IHHW /HIW7XUQ 7KURXJK 5LJKW7XUQWKDW;HQZRRG:RRGGDOHDW1RUWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW6RXWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW)URQWDJH:RRGGDOHDW5DLO&URVVLQJ:RRGGDOHDWWKWKDW3ODFH$FFHVV'HOD\ 69HK /26%\$SSURDFK/26%\,QWHUVHFWLRQCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 144 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 3A2020 Base + PLACE Development Traffic with 35th Street connectionPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only/ 7 5 7RWDO / /26 7 /26 5 /26'HOD\ 69HK /26'HOD\ 69HK /26 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[/LQN/HQJWK$YJ 0D[ 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 174 1776%:RRGGDOH $ & $ & % :%2II5DPS ) $ $ ( 3371%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 190 1676%:RRGGDOH % $ $ $ % 167 167(%2II5DPS ' $ ' ' 5691%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 172 1626%:RRGGDOH ' $ $ $ $ 107 162 160(%)URQWDJH $ $ & & :%)URQWDJH $ $ % % 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 2526%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 1911%:RRGGDOH ' ( $ % 6%:RRGGDOH % % $ % % 223 223 212(%WK ' ' % ' 214 208:%WK & & % % 717 717152 8431%;HQZRRG & & $ & 6%;HQZRRG & & $ & % (%WK & $ $ $ 21 265 :%WK % % % % :%WK $ $ & &6%$FFHVV $ $ ( (/(*(1' ###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHRIWKHDYDLODEOHVWRUDJH###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHDYDLODEOH6WRUDJHIntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U 'HOD\ 69HK /26%\$SSURDFK/26%\,QWHUVHFWLRQ4XHXH IHHW /HIW7XUQ 7KURXJK 5LJKW7XUQWKDW3ODFH$FFHVV:RRGGDOHDW1RUWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW6RXWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW)URQWDJH:RRGGDOHDW5DLO&URVVLQJ:RRGGDOHDWWKWKDW;HQZRRGCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 145 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 1B2040 Base ForecastPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only/ 7 5 7RWDO / /26 7 /26 5 /26'HOD\ 69HK /26'HOD\ 69HK /26 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[/LQN/HQJWK$YJ 0D[ 6WRUDJH $YJ 0D[1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 178 1816%:RRGGDOH $ & $ & % :%2II5DPS ) $ % ' 3271%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 186 1626%:RRGGDOH % $ $ $ & 170 170(%2II5DPS ) $ ) ) 1456407 14751%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 169 1596%:RRGGDOH ' $ $ $ $ 153 167 165(%)URQWDJH $ $ ( ( :%)URQWDJH $ $ % % 1%:RRGGDOH $ $ $ $ 2506%:RRGGDOH $ % $ % 1891%:RRGGDOH ' ( $ & 6%:RRGGDOH % % $ % & 225 225 213(%WK ' ' % ' 226 260:%WK ' ' $ ' 1%;HQZRRG & $ $ & 6%;HQZRRG & % $ & $ (%WK $ $ $ $ :%WK % $ $ $ /(*(1' ###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHRIWKHDYDLODEOHVWRUDJH###4XHXHOHQJWKDWRUDERYHDYDLODEOH6WRUDJH'HOD\ 69HK /26%\$SSURDFK/26%\,QWHUVHFWLRQ4XHXH IHHW /HIW7XUQ 7KURXJK 5LJKW7XUQWKDW;HQZRRGIntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U :RRGGDOHDW1RUWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW6RXWK5DPS:RRGGDOHDW)URQWDJH:RRGGDOHDW5DLO&URVVLQJ:RRGGDOHDWWKCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 146 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 2B2040 Base + PLACE Development TrafficPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only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ntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 147 $SSHQGL[7DEOHScenario 3B2040 Base + PLACE Development Traffic with 35th Street connectionPM Peak Hour (VISSIM)LRT Only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ntersection Approach'HPDQG9ROXPHV 9HK+U City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of DecisionPage 148 Revised PLACE Development 02.17.17 Number Units Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 220 Apartments 218 Units 20% 1,160 17 72 89 70 38 108 826 Commercial/Retail 5.1 K sq ft 30% 161 2 1 3 6 7 13 E. Generation Site 5employees0% 10202022 1,331 21 73 94 76 47 123 220 Apartments 81 units 20% 431 20 13 33 26 14 40 110 Hotel 110 total rooms 10% 809 31 21 52 30 29 59 931 Restaurant/Café 4.6 K sq ft 25% 313 2 1 3 17 9 26 936 Coffeehouse 1.2 K sq ft 45% 200 36 34 70 13 13 26 826 Commercial/Retail 3.986 K sq ft 20% 142 2 2 4 6 6 12 1,895 91 71 162 92 71 163 3,226 112 144 256 168 118 286 Dwellings 299 Commercial/Retail KSF 14.9 PLACE Development 06.14.17 Number Units Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 220 Apartments 198 Units 20% 1053 16 65 81 64 34 98 826 Commercial/Retail 8.5 K sq ft 30% 258 3 3 6 10 11 21 E. Generation Site 5employees0% 10202022 1321 21 68 89 74 47 121 220 Apartments 102 units 20% 543 26 16 42 33 18 51 110 Hotel 110 total rooms 10% 809 31 21 52 30 29 59 931 Restaurant/Café 3 K sq ft 25% 202 1 1 2 11 6 17 936 Coffeehouse 1.5 K sq ft 45% 256 45 44 89 17 17 34 826 Commercial/Retail 6.616 K sq ft 20% 234 4 2 6 9 11 20 2,044 107 84 191 100 81 181 3,365 128 152 280 174 128 302 Dwellings 300 Commercial/Retail KSF 19.6 AM Peak PM Peak North Site Totals South Site Totals Place Development Totals South Site Totals Place Development Totals Daily Total ITE Code Development Trip Reductions Daily Total ITE Code Development AM Peak PM PeakTrip Reductions North Site Totals City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Title: PLACE St. Louis Park EAW Finding of Fact and Record of Decision Page 149 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD RECOMMENDED ACTION: • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 9 to the Zoning Code and amend the Zoning Map from IG-General Industrial and MX-Mixed Use to PUD 9 for the property located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication (requires 4 affirmative votes). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD to allow for the PLACE redevelopment? SUMMARY: PLACE (Projects Linking Art, Community & Environment), a Minneapolis 501(c)(3) nonprofit developer, proposes to construct a landmark mixed-use, mixed income, transit oriented, and environmentally sustainable development. Project components include: two apartment buildings with a total of 299 residential units (200 affordable and 99 market rate), a 110- room hotel, a 10,000 SF e-generation/greenhouse facility, approximately 15,400 SF of ground floor commercial/retail space, parking structures, and an “urban forest”. The Plat is needed to combine nine properties, create three development parcels, and dedicate right-of-way and easements, and the PUD is needed to rezone the property from I-G General Industrial and MX Mixed Use to allow for a mixed-use development. On April 17, 2017, the City Council amended the Comprehensive Plan to reguide the property to mixed-use and voted 6-1 to approve the First Reading of the PUD Ordinance. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: There are extraordinary costs associated with the proposed redevelopment site that prevent the project from being financially feasible. Consequently, the developer submitted an application for tax increment financing to defray a portion of these expenses. The developer will purchase the City/EDA owned parcels for $6,245,000. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion, Aerial Photo, Resolution, PUD Ordinance & Summary, Planning Commission Minutes, Development Plans, Sustainability Proposals, Parking Analysis, Mobility Plan, Solar Study, Zoning Compliance Table Available Upon Request: Traffic Study Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD DISCUSSION DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY: PLACE E-generation One, LLC (PLACE), a 501(c)(3), proposes to redevelop property north and south of the future SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station into a mixed-income, mixed-use, multigenerational, environmentally sustainable, transit-oriented development with live/work units for creatives. The development includes: • 299 apartments (200 affordable, 99 market-rate), including 99 mixed-income live/work • 110-room Fairfield by Marriott hotel • Café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses • PLACE’s E-Generation facility on the northern site, which uses PLACE’s patent-pending portfolio of renewable energy systems to convert locally-sourced organic waste into energy for the project and a soil amendment byproduct that will be used in the onsite greenhouse. • 0.88 acres of urban forest, for public access to nature, stormwater management, and habitat • 29,500 square feet of green roof for additional stormwater management and habitat • Buildings, site and program designed to support a multigenerational community. • Mobility Plan with car/bike sharing, shuttle, and car-free living incentives • Surface and underground parking on the northern site as well as underground parking south of the rail, which leaves ground space for a “woonerf/place-making plaza” adjacent to the LRT station to provide pedestrian-oriented multiuse space The development will generate 100 full time equivalent, living wage jobs, be home to at least 90 car-free households, and will be LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, certified buildings across the site. In addition to LEED, the project team is maximizing the sustainability potential for design, cleanup, construction and operation to minimize the use of energy, water, materials and other resources. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD The program of mixed-income housing, live/work, local businesses, E-Generation, Mobility Plan, and LEED is based on PLACE’s experience developing healthy, mixed-income communities, and its mission to link arts, community and environment. The proposed buildings range in height from one-story for the e-generation building to a five-story mixed-use building on the northeast site, and two six-story buildings on the south site. REQUEST: The applicant requests that the city: 1. Approve a preliminary and final plat to combine parcels for development. 2. Amend the zoning map and zoning ordinance to rezone the subject properties from I-G General Industrial and C-2 General Commercial to Planned Unit Development. SITE INFORMATION: The proposed redevelopment site is located in the Elmwood neighborhood at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. The site is divided by the CP Bass Lake Spur railroad tracks and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail. It is adjacent to the future SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station, and it is currently served by Metro Transit Bus Routes 615 and 17F along West 36th Street. The proposed redevelopment is near to Central Community Center, Park Spanish Immersion School and St. Louis Park High School. Nearby parks include Jorvig Park to the west, Center Park to the south, and Wolfe Park and Lilac Park to the east. Site Area: 5.2 acres Current Uses: Vacant land and vacant buildings Comprehensive Plan: MX-Mixed Use Current Zoning: I-G General Industrial, C-2 General Commercial Proposed Zoning: PUD-Planned Unit Development Surrounding Land Uses: North: Highway 7 East: Small scale commercial and Cityscape Apartments West: Wooddale Avenue South: West 36th Street / TowerLight City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Site Location Map. Site Conditions: Topographically both sides of the development property are relatively flat. The proposed redevelopment site requires the assemblage of nine parcels. The north side of the proposed redevelopment includes the following four properties. • 5925 Highway 7 is a vacant 1.16 AC remnant site. • 5815 Highway 7 is a vacant 0.18 AC remnant site. • 5725 Highway 7 is the former McGarvey Coffee manufacturing property. • 3520 Yosemite is a vacant 0.4 AC remnant rail site. The south side of the proposed redevelopment includes the following five properties. • 3565 Wooddale is a 0.065 AC parcel occupied by a 16,739 SF commercial building that was leased to Nash Frame. • 3548 Xenwood Ave is a vacant 0.8 AC remnant rail site. • 3575 Wooddale is an approximate 0.37 AC parcel. • 5816 36th Street is an approximate 0.36 AC parcel which is part of a municipal parking lot constructed in 1976 for commercial parking purposes. • 5814 36th Street is an approximate 0.25 AC parcel which is part of a municipal parking lot constructed in 1976 for commercial parking purposes. BACKGROUND: This area has been planned for redevelopment for over two decades. The Economic Development Authority and Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority have purchased properties in anticipation of redevelopment and transportation improvements, including the Highway 7 and Wooddale interchange and light rail transit SWLRT/Green Line Extension. There have been several land use, transportation, redevelopment, zoning, and transit corridor studies over that time. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Public Input: PLACE hosted numerous well attended public meetings from August 2015 until February 2017. The original program was located north of the rail corridor and was 12 to 14 stories tall. However due to traffic and height concerns, PLACE sought out an alternate program using both sides of the rail/trail corridor. The height of all buildings was reduced to be six stories or less. The applicant has sought the advice of the community in the overall design of the buildings, the site amenities, access into and out of the site, and the programming of the development. In addition to neighborhood meetings and meetings with the City Council and the Planning Commission, PLACE has also met with numerous agencies in the area including: Perspectives, St. Louis Park Historical Society, Friends of the Arts, STEP, SEEDS, St. Louis Park School Superintendent, St. Louis Park Health in the Park, Mu Performing Arts, Springboard for the Arts, experts from the University of Minnesota to discuss car-free living, Integrated Project Delivery, and winter greenhouses, and Partnership Resources. The 8th neighborhood meeting was held at Fire Station 1 on February 23, 2017. Approximately 60 people attended the meeting to review the development proposal. There were some attendees who supported the development, and others with concerns. Concerns generally related to: an increase in traffic, intersection congestion, congestion and sight lines over the Wooddale/Hwy 25 Bridge, amount of parking, the impact a hotel might have in the area, the inclusion of affordable housing, and the uncertainty of the SWLRT project. Comments of support generally included liking: the overall building design, the pedestrian and bicycle amenities, the inclusion of affordable dwelling units located close to reliable and frequent transit, the urban forest and proximity to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail, and the density of the development. Public Process for PLACE: • November 25, 2013: City Council Study Session – Introduction to PLACE • January 13, 2014: City Council Study Session – Project Update • September 22, 2014: City Council – Project Update • November 3, 2014: City Council Study Session – Project Update & McGarvey Site • May 18, 2015: City Council – Preliminary Development Agreement • August 8, 2015: 1st Neighborhood Meeting – Fire Station 1 • September 30, 2015: 2nd Neighborhood Meeting – Fire Station 1 • November 17, 2015: 3rd Neighborhood Meeting – St. Louis Park High School • January 28, 2016: 4th Neighborhood Meeting – St. Louis Park High School • February 8, 2016: City Council Preliminary Development Agreement Amendment • May 9, 2016: City Council Study Session – Project Update • June 6, 2016: City Council Study Session – Project Update • June 20, 2016: City Council Preliminary Development Agreement Amendment • June 23, 2016: 5th Neighborhood Meeting – Fire Station 1 • July 13, 2016: 6th Neighborhood Meeting – Perspectives Family Center • July 28, 2016: 7th Neighborhood Meeting regarding Traffic – Council Chambers • October 10, 2016: City Council Study Session – Project Update • January 18, 2017: Planning Commission Study Session – Overall Development • February 1, 2017: Planning Commission Study Session – Traffic and Parking • February 13, 2017: City Council Study Session – Project Update • February 21, 2017: City Council Preliminary Development Agreement Amendment • February 23, 2017: 8th Public Meeting – Fire Station 1 • March 6, 2017: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) distributed • March 15, 2017: Planning Commission Public Hearing City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD • April 19, 2017: EAW comment period closes • April 17, 2017: City Council – Comp Plan Amendment/First Reading of PUD • May 1, 2017: City Council – Prelim/Final Plat/Second Reading of PUD Environmental Analysis: State rules, administered by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB), requires an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be completed for the PLACE development due to the number of residential units and gross square feet of commercial space. An EAW is designed to disclose information about the potential negative environmental effects a proposed development may have and methods to avoid or minimize any negative impacts before the project is permitted and built. An EAW analyzes the effects of a project on land use, zoning, geology and soils, water resources, stormwater, contamination, sensitive or endangered species, historic properties, noise, and traffic. The EAW for the PLACE development was completed by the consulting firm Stantec and was reviewed by the City of St. Louis Park and the city’s consultant Kimley Horn. It was approved for distribution by the City Manager on February 27, 2017. Notice of its availability was published in the EQB Monitor on March 6, 2017. The complete document is available for review on the city website, at city hall and the St. Louis Park Library. The comment period on the EAW ended on April 19, 2017. The City of St. Louis Park reviewed and responded to the submitted comments. No significant environmental impacts were identified and the City Council will be asked under a separate action to make findings of fact, record of decision, and negative declaration regarding additional environmental review on May 1, 2017 prior to taking final action on the Plat and PUD. STAFF ANALYSIS: Preliminary and Final Plat Analysis: PLACE is seeking approval to combine nine properties located in the northeast quadrant of the Wooddale Avenue and West 36th Street intersection to develop an energy generating, mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development. The proposed development includes 299 residential dwelling units (including 99 live/work units), 110 room hotel, a café, a coffee shop, a bike shop, a co-working space, a makers space, and an anaerobic digester. The plat meets the requirements of the city’s subdivision ordinance, and will be named PLACE. Lots: The subdivision proposal will create three lots and three outlots. Lot 1, Block 1, PLACE will have a lot area of 1.1018 acres. This lot will be the location of the proposed E-generation and greenhouse building, 56 parking spaces, and a solar canopy. No residential development is proposed on this site. The proposed floor area ratio is 0.2. Lot 1, Block 2 PLACE will have a lot area of 2.2816 acres. The north residential building will be constructed on this lot. It will have 218 dwelling units, a 2,570 square foot bike shop and a 2,624 square foot Maker Space. The proposed residential density for this site is 95.56 units/acre. The proposed floor area ratio of the commercial space is 0.052, and 2.3 including the north residential building. Lot 1, Block 3 PLACE will be 1.7761 acres in size and will be the location of the 110 room hotel and the south residential building. The south residential building has 81 dwelling units. The proposed residential density for this site is 45.6 units/acre. The proposed floor area ratio of the hotel and commercial space is 0.91, and 3.2 including the south residential building. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD The overall density of the development is 57 unit/acre and the floor area ratio for the total development is 2.11. The plat will also create three outlots: Outlot A, Outlot B, and Outlot C. Outlot A is 0.1198 acres and is located between the Hwy 7 Frontage Rd and the Cedar Lake Regional Trail. Outlot B and Outlot C are 0.2349 acres and 0.2165 acres, respectively. They are located east of Yosemite Avenue and north of 35th Street, and will be owned by the City of St. Louis Park for future development opportunities. Easements: Lot 1, Block 1, PLACE is providing a 5 foot to 10 foot drainage and utility easement along the south property line, adjacent to the Hwy 7 Frontage Rd, and a 10 foot drainage and utility easement along Wooddale Avenue. Lot 1, Block 2, PLACE is providing a 10 foot drainage and utility easement along all property lines. The applicant is granting a 10 foot easement between Lot 1, Block 2 and Cityscape Apartments to construct a pathway connection to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail. PLACE has worked with the city and Three Rivers Park District to identify this future connection. Lot 1, Block 3 PLACE is providing 10 foot drainage and utility easements along West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue, and a 5 foot easement along the north property line adjacent to the SWLRT line. PLACE has collaborated with the Southwest Project Office, Hennepin County, and the city to determine easement width to accommodate easements needed for the future Southwest LRT line. A 5 foot drainage and utility easement on the east side of the property is also provided. Right-of-Way Dedication: The City of St. Louis Park hired SRF in 2006 to analyze the street design of 36th Street to accommodate vehicular traffic while providing a welcoming streetscape for pedestrians and bicyclists. The enhancement design calls for a bike lane, and increased landscape materials in this area. PLACE is dedicating 26 feet (6,908 square feet) of right of way along 36th Street, and 10.5 feet (1,569 square feet) of right-of-way along on Wooddale Avenue to accommodate the city’s plans for these streets. In 2009 St. Louis Park obtained right-of-way along the south side of Hwy 7 to construct the Wooddale Avenue overpass and to reconstruct the Hwy 7 Frontage Rd. The city never platted this land and the current frontage road is not constructed in official right-of-way. The city is selling the surrounding land to PLACE for redevelopment, and PLACE is dedicating 41,328 square feet of right-of-way to the city. PLACE is also dedicating 22,332 square feet of right-of-way on the north side of Lot 1, Block, 1 to the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Hwy 7 entrance ramp. Total right-of-way dedications equal 1.66 acres of land. Park Dedication: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission reviewed park and trail dedications for the proposed development on March 15, 2017. PRAC recommends cash-in-lieu of park land dedication. For mixed-use developments, the city collects dedication fees for each project component: residential portion based on dwelling unit, and the commercial/industrial portion based on 5% of the assessed value of land for the ground floor area of the commercial/industrial buildings. According to Hennepin County records, 5 parcels have been platted and four parcels are unplatted. It is assumed commercial/industrial dedication fees have already been paid for the platted parcels. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Residential dedication fees for all parcels will need to be collected and commercial/industrial dedication fees for the unplatted parcels will need to be collected. The 2017 fee schedule sets the residential Park Dedication Fee at $1,500 per dwelling unit and the residential Trail Dedication Fee at $225 per dwelling unit. PRAC recommends PLACE dedicate $448,500 in park fees and $67,275 in trail fees for the residential portion of the development, and $16,963 for the commercial portion of the development located on unplatted parcels. The total cash-in-lieu dedication recommended by PRAC is $532,838. PUD Analysis: Description: The developer requests approval of a preliminary and final Planned Unit Development (PUD). A PUD is a rezoning and zoning text amendment that establishes the regulations for a specific property. The site is currently zoned I-P Industrial Park and C-2 General Commercial. The 5.2-acre site meets the minimum 2 acre requirement to request a Planned Unit Development. The use of a PUD zoning for this property is recommended as it allows for conditions and requirements that fit the context and character of the individual site and the proposed development at the SWLRT Wooddale station. Comprehensive Plan: On April 17, 2017 the City Council voted to amend the city’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to reguide the parcels at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue to mixed use. Therefore, the Comprehensive Plan designates the entire site for mixed use. This category allows for multifamily uses, provided commercial uses are also City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD included. The proposed PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses and dimensional standards that are unique to this site and the proposed site and building plans. Staff finds that this site is suitable for the proposed mixed use development which generally follows the height, density, and floor area ratios of the other mixed-use developments in the area. The proposed plans achieve several of the city’s long term goals and the city’s vision for a mixed- use transit-oriented development at the Wooddale SWLRT Station as specified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include: Livable Communities Goal #1: Provide attractive public streets and spaces that contribute to creating connections and a sense of community. Policy 1-C: Incorporate “complete streets” design principles into future improvements of the community’s streets to accommodate all transportation modes where feasible. Policy 1-D: Provide pedestrian and bicycle pathways that connect key departure points and destinations throughout the City and require installation of identified connections during the redevelopment process. Policy 1-F: Promote high quality design of public and private open spaces that will benefit anticipated users with proper consideration given to use, design, maintenance, appearance, location, and accessibility of the space. Policy 1-G: Encourage placement of works of art, sculpture, or fountains throughout the City to help increase civic prominence and a unique sense of place where appropriate. Policy 1-K: Work with internal and external partners to ensure that all roadway and pedestrian facilities, including bridges, located in the City are functionally and aesthetically appealing and contribute to the use, overall design scheme (if appropriate), and enjoyment of the City. Residential Land Use Goals Goal #1: Create a mix of residential land uses and housing types to increase neighborhood housing choices and the viability of greater neighborhood services through redevelopment or infill development. Policy 1-A: Consider opportunities for allowing a broader range of housing types and densities within or adjacent to existing low density residential neighborhoods that are complementary and compatible with the existing neighborhood character. Policy 1-B: Promote and support the development of medium and high density residential land uses near commercial centers and nodes. Policy 1-C: Ensure that new and redeveloped medium and high density residential land uses are located within walking distance of transit services. Mixed-Use Goals Goal #2: Pursue redevelopment of future transitway station areas as transit- oriented mixed-use centers. Policy 2-A: Promote and support the Wooddale Station Area as a transit-oriented mixed- use neighborhood. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Mixed-Use Goals Goal #3: Expand the development of mixed-use areas within St. Louis Park to create a more livable and connected community. Policy 3-A: Encourage and support mixed-use infill and redevelopment where the design of the project enables compatibility with existing surrounding land uses. Approving the Planned Unit Development will allow for additional housing units, including affordable units, in an area that is well served by transit, and along a vibrant commercial corridor. The general area of the development proposal consists of a mix of smaller scale commercial buildings and several mixed-use projects including Towerlight, a development for aging residents, and Hoigaard Village. To the southwest is Village in the Park, a community comprised of condos and townhome residential units. The Comprehensive Plan calls for an increase in the availability of neighborhood housing choices, mixed-use redevelopment and transit-oriented development. The proposed PLACE development would provide higher density apartment housing, including affordable units, in a building that enhances the street frontage along 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue and demonstrates principles of pedestrian- and transit-oriented development. The development also achieves the city’s vision for this area that was established in the 2003 Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study. The Elmwood study identified the parcels north of the rail line as high density residential with some lower density office/commercial space, and the parcels south of the rail line as a transit-oriented, mixed-use development. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 11 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD The Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study Proposed Land Use Map Building and Site Design Analysis: PLACE meets the PUD ordinance goals for building and site design. The ordinance requires the City to find that the quality of building and site design proposed will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the following criteria shall be satisfied: (1) The design shall consider the project as a whole, and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. Staff finds the plan meets this requirement. (2) The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. Staff finds this criteria will be met. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 12 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD (3) A PUD shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy. This is a condition of approval. The architect is working with Xcel Energy, Centerpoint Energy, and the City of St. Louis Park to comply. The buildings are also being designed to LEED standards. (4) The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged. The development includes approximately 29,500 square feet of green roof. PLACE is also producing approximately 90% of all energy consumed by the development onsite through renewable energy sources including wind, solar, and bio-gas. Zoning: The following table provides the development metrics. The property will be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requirements for this property if approved. Uses: PLACE proposes to develop a mixed-use, mixed-income community for creatives. The proposal includes: • 299 apartments (200 affordable, 99 market-rate), including 99 mixed-income live/work • 110-room Fairfield hotel by Marriott • Café, coffee house, bike shop, and five microbusinesses • Maker’s space and Co-working space • PLACE’s E-Generation facility on the northern site, which uses PLACE’s patent-pending portfolio of renewable energy systems to convert locally-sourced organic waste into energy for the project and a soil amendment byproduct that will be used in the onsite greenhouse. • 0.88 acres of urban forest, for public access to nature, stormwater management, and habitat • 29,500 square feet of greenroof for additional stormwater management and habitat • Solar panels on roofs and vertically integrated into the building facades • Surface and underground parking on the northern site as well as underground parking south of the rail, which leaves ground space for a “woonerf/placemaking plaza” adjacent to the LRT station to provide pedestrian-oriented multiuse space The 299 dwelling units are comprised of a mix of studios, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom, and 4 bedroom units. 200 dwelling units (66.8%) will be designated as affordable at 60% area median income. The community will be marketed toward creative entrepreneurs and 99 of the 299 dwelling units will be designed as live/work units. PLACE proposes two styles of live/work units: live/work Type I and live/work Type II. There are 94 live/work Type I units that will include a large working space within the dwelling unit, but no physical storefront. 18 live/work Type I units are located on the north site and 76 units on the south site. Live/work Type II includes a large work space within the dwelling units and storefronts. There are no live/work Type II dwelling units on the north site, and five on the south site. Three units are located along West 36th Street and two are located near the woonerf/place-making plaza. There is also a small store front on the east side of the south residential building that acts as a rotating gallery/storefront for residents living in live/work Type I. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 13 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD UNIT SUMMARY NORTH RESIDENTIAL TYPE LEVEL 1 live/work LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 TOTALS DWELLING STUDIO 12 4 17 17 17 17 84 1 BEDROOM 0 6 17 17 17 17 74 2 BEDROOM 3 0 8 8 8 8 35 3 BEDROOM 3 4 4 4 4 4 23 4 BEDROOM 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 18 16 46 46 46 46 218 UNIT SUMMARY SOUTH RESIDENTIAL TYPE LEVEL 1 & 2 live/work 2 LEVEL 3 live/work LEVEL 4 live/work LEVEL 5 live/work LEVEL 6 live/work TOTALS STUDIO 0 12 12 12 12 48 1 BEDROOM 0 4 4 4 4 16 2 BEDROOM 5 2 2 2 2 13 3 BEDROOM 0 1 1 1 1 4 4 BEDROOM 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 19 19 19 19 81 The development includes a 110-room Fairfield hotel by Marriott. There are 27 double rooms, 58 king rooms, 24 extended stay suites, and one presidential suite. The hotel includes a lobby, a pool, a fitness center, a small business center, and a bar. There are no large conference spaces provided in the hotel. Located on the ground floor of the hotel is a 1,173 square foot coffee house located near the Wooddale LRT Station platform, and a 4,644 square foot restaurant/café. The café’s main entrance is located along West 36th Street between the hotel and south residential building. Outdoor seating is proposed along West 36th Street. A 7,675 square foot leasing office and a 1,571 square foot co-working space are located on the ground floor of the south residential building. There is also 2,415 square feet of co-working space located on the second floor of the building. The co-working space is designed to provide for a shared office and large artistic workspace for artists. People who live outside the development are able to lease portions of the co-working space. Linking the hotel and the south residential building is a fourth floor bridge. The bridge will connect the live/work and hotel buildings with a multipurpose space. This creates a pathway for hotel guests to explore live/work studios during specific visiting days when creatives open their doors to the public. Also located on the south site is a Woonerf or Placemaking Plaza. The placemaking plaza is located between the hotel and south residential building adjacent to the SWLRT Wooddale Station area platform. The placemaking plaza is primarily a pedestrian plaza that is open to cars and bicyclists. This space can be programmed to host outdoor events, and will be infused with native landscaping and artwork. A wide “mews” passage will connect 36th Street to the woonerf and LRT station, with potential for live/work and café activity to expand into the space. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 14 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD On the ground floor of the north residential building there is 2,484 square feet of retail space and 2,624 square feet of Maker Space PLACE proposes the retail space be a bike shop to serve the community and people utilizing the Cedar Lake Regional Trail. The Maker Space is a membership- driven studio that provides access to everything someone needs to make things; instruction, tools, software, and space. Maker Space is an open-access, DIY workshop and fabrication studio. Other site amenities for residential units include indoor bicycle storage, exercise rooms, sound proof rooms, storage, laundry facilities, play structures, and the urban forest. Located on the corner of Wooddale and Hwy 7 Frontage Rd is PLACE’s patent-pending E- Generation system, located in a 4,264 square foot building and a 4,723 square foot greenhouse. The E-generation system provides renewable energy and food generation. The system actively balances electricity generation from solar, wind, cogeneration, and anaerobic digestion. The completely enclosed anaerobic digestion element will convert locally-sourced food waste into methane for electricity. The soil amendment and excess heat byproducts from the anaerobic digestion process will support a greenhouse growing food year-round. Architectural Design: LEED: PLACE proposes to design the entire project to LEED standards. This would be the first LEED certified project in St. Louis Park. Materials: The applicant is requesting Nichiha, a large format high performance fiber cement rain screen cladding system, and Enduramax, an integrated insulation with brick veneer high performance rain screen cladding system be considered Class I Materials. These materials are proposed due to their sustainability features and long-term warranties on both materials and installation. PLACE also proposes installing vertically integrated photovolic panels (solar panels) as part of the building’s façade. This material would qualify as a Class I glass material under city code. Staff are supportive of the use of these products as Class I materials in this development. Design: The proposal is for a six-story mixed-use hotel at the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and West 36th Street, a six-story mixed-use building along West 36th Street, a one-story E-generation building in the southeast quadrant of Wooddale Avenue and Hwy 7, and a 5 story mixed-use residential building along the Hwy 7 Frontage Rd. The mixed-use hotel is designed to be pedestrian friendly along the right-of-way, with large transparent windows, but to but to deter LRT drop-offs from occurring on Wooddale and West 36th Street. The main entrances to the hotel and coffee shop are located on the east side of the building, facing the woonerf/place-making plaza and the LRT station. The primary entrance to the café is located along West 36th Street located close to the south residential building. The south residential building’s main pedestrian entrance is opposite the café, also on West 36th Street. There is also access from the south residential building to the woonerf. Live/work Type II storefronts comprise the remainder of the first floor West 36th Street frontage. The primary building materials are fibrous cement (Nichiha), brick veneer (Enduramax), glass and solar panels. The first floor of the two south buildings are Enduramax and floors two through six are two colors of Nichiha. Integrated near the top of the building are vertically integrated solar panels. The eastern façade of the parking garage is cladded in a metal screen that can be utilized as a green wall, and has metal City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 15 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD panels that will be used for public art. All facades of the hotel and residential building are comprised of more than 85% of Class I materials. The bridge linking the hotel and south residential build is located on the fourth floor and is constructed out of metal and glass. 76.5% of the north and south facades are comprised of Class I materials. The north residential building materials are similar to the buildings on the south site. The first floor is cladded in Enduramax, while floors two through five are a combination of Nichiha and vertically integrated solar panels. The building wraps around the 0.88 acre urban forest to the south, and is oriented to follow the frontage road to provide a welcoming pedestrian realm. The building is primarily 5 stories in height, except for the building’s west wing, which is one story in height with a rooftop amenity. The one story portion of the building is the location of the retail and Maker Space. All facades are comprised of at least 98% Class I materials. There is a 16’-4” helical wind turbine proposed on the roof of the north residential building. The wind turbine is 3’- 5” wide, and is located in the middle of the building at the location of a slight bend in the building structure. The E-generation building is a one to two story building. It is designed to be a prominent component of the community, highlighting the development’s dedication to sustainability and desire to produce energy on site. The primary façade materials include Nichiha, glass, and metal panels. The design is intended to showcase the industrial aspect of E-generation. All facades are comprised of at least 60% Class I materials. Height: The hotel is proposed to be 6 stories or 75 feet 9 inches in height. The south residential building is proposed to be 6 stories or 78 feet 8 inches in height. The north residential building is proposed to be 5 stories or 60 feet 2 inches in height. PLACE’s E-generation building is proposed to be 1 to 2 stories or 32 feet 10 inches in height. There is one ventilation tower at 39 feet 4 inches tall. The solar canopy over the off-street parking lot is 18 to 20 feet tall. Lighting: The current photometric plan meets the recommended level of 0.5-1 foot candle past the property line. The LED lighting features chosen are consistent with the aesthetic features of the building and are not anticipated to present a nuisance to neighboring properties. Access: Vehicular: Vehicular access to the north site is from the Hwy 7 Frontage Rd via Wooddale Avenue. The Wooddale Avenue intersection will be reconfigured to a right-in/right-out and a southbound left in. A left turn from the frontage road onto Wooddale Avenue will be prohibited. There will be two-way access to the E-Generation building to accommodate vehicles bringing organic material to the building, and for residential parking. The north residential building will be accessed via the Hwy 7 Frontage Road. A driveway on the south side of the frontage road will be used to access the underground parking garage. The hotel and south residential building will be accessed via a driveway off West 35th Street and Yosemite Avenue. Traffic will come from West 36th Street and Yosemite Avenue or West 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue. Xenwood Avenue is a signalized intersection, providing for controlled vehicular movements in all directions. It is likely all traffic entering or exiting the development wishing to make a left turn will utilize the signalized intersection at Xenwood City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 16 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Avenue. The hotel and south residential building can also be accessed through a right-in/right-out entrance through the community’s south parking garage. Emergency access will occur from the 35th Street/Yosemite Avenue driveway, however, the area between the hotel and south residential building is designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles including fire trucks. Cedar Lake Regional Trail: PLACE has worked with the Three Rivers Park District to facilitate two new trail connections from the public right-of-way. One of the access points is located between the PLACE north residential building and the Cityscape apartments. The second access point is located on the west side of the north residential building, and is designed to accommodate higher bicycle and pedestrian traffic that may want to utilize the bike shop located directly off the trail. PLACE is working with Three Rivers to design these access points to meet the Park District’s standards. Wooddale Station: PLACE has collaborated with the SWLRT Project Office to design the project with the LRT station in mind. A SWLRT kiss and ride is located near the 35th Street/Yosemite Avenue driveway, and PLACE has made every effort to include the SWLRT plans into the proposed development plans. PLACE has also worked with the city and the Project Office to design the development to discourage drop-offs along West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. Loading/Service Areas: The north residential building has trash, recycling, and organic material collection occurring on the first floor of the building, with direct service access to the Hwy 7 Frontage Road. The hotel service and trash areas are located on the first floor with direct access to the woonerf/place-making plaza. Trash, recycling, and organic material will be collected on the first floor of the south residential building. Organic material will be collected from the site and transported to the E-Generation building. A residential loading zone is provided near the entrance to the parking garage for the north residential building, and a residential loading area is provided in the wonder/place-making plaza for the south residential building. There are also areas for loading within the south parking garage. Mobility Plan: PLACE proposes to develop a community that encourages a lifestyle where residents can easily live car-free. To facilitate car-free living PLACE has developed a robust mobility and transportation demand management plan. PLACE will provide a car-free perks package to 90 household on a first-come, first-served basis. For car-free households, PLACE will pay annual memberships in car-sharing and bike-sharing programs, pay a monthly cash stipend, and provide Go-To passes with a modest monthly starting balance. A mobility concierge will help connect people with transit options to make smooth connections and to help overcome technological unfamiliarity. PLACE is not able to predict which apartments will be car-free. Given the size of the cash stipend PLACE is able to offer and greater bicycle and car-sharing experience among younger people, PLACE predicts early participation from the one- and two-bedroom households, especially in the live/work component. Households will register their vehicles by license number with the management company. Those who choose to be car-free and receive the benefits must agree as part of their lease that they will remain car- free. Residential parking entry, likely controlled by swipe card or fob, will be programmed by apartment accordingly. Car share cars will have their own swipe cars, so that car-free residents may still use parking when in a car share vehicle. Parking: Parking will total 447 stalls for the overall development. After extensive research of parking in transit-oriented developments, city staff feel that rational parking discounts are City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 17 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD warranted due to the development’s proximity to light rail and PLACE’s robust mobility plan and dedication to provide a car-free living environment. Discounts to parking are given based on Exhibit 62 of the Official Exhibits. A total of 216 parking spaces are located north of the rail line. PLACE is providing 61 on street parking stalls along the Highway 7 Frontage Rd, 56 parking spaces in an off-street parking lot located between E-Generation and the north residential building, and 99 spaces in an underground garage. 231 parking spaces are located south of the rail line. 227 parking spaces are provided in a four story parking garage, and four spaces are located within the woonerf, or place-making Plaza. There are no parking spaces located along West 36th Street or Wooddale Avenue. Staff commissioned Walker Parking Consultants to analyze PLACE’s parking proposal and mobility plan, city parking discounts, and to share their expertise in shared parking and parking requirements for transit-oriented development. Walker studied the city’s existing zoning ordinance, other cities’ zoning ordinances, and case studies in similar cities. Walker also applied their shared parking model to analyze PLACE’s proposed parking. The Walker Parking Consultant study found that there is some risk with the amount of parking PLACE is providing, but with all mitigations in place, the Walker Shared Parking Model suggests that the parking and development proposed by PLACE could supply sufficient parking. The Walker shared parking model examined peak parking hours for both week day and weekend use. The shared parking model found there to be sufficient spaces during the week, and a 1 vehicle deficit on the weekend when 443 parking spaces were proposed. PLACE is providing 447 parking spaces in the submitted plans. The programming of the parking spaces is still being determined, but it is likely that parking spaces on the north side of the property will be assigned to individual units, while parking on the south site will have more opportunities for shared use. On-street parking will be permitted to prevent LRT park and ride parking. There are designated LRT park and ride ramps located at the future Beltline LRT Station and Louisiana LRT Station, both within St. Louis Park, and park and ride activities are discouraged at the Wooddale Station. Electric Vehicle Parking: PLACE has provided 15 electrical vehicle charging stations throughout the development. 5 Electric car charging stations are located in the south parking garage, 5 in the north residential underground garage, and 5 located in the off-street parking lot near E-Generation. Bicycle Parking: Total bicycle parking provided for the project exceeds the required 344 spaces. The applicant has provided 494 bicycle parking stalls, 335 of which are located on the north site and 159 on the south site. There are 8 outdoor bicycle parking spaces at the E-Gen building, 24 outdoor bicycle parking spaces at the north residential building, and 24 spaces located on the south site; 12 spaces are located near the Wooddale Station area platform and 12 spaces are located on West 36th Street. There is one bicycle parking space located at each underground parking stall, except the stalls with electric charging stations, and a dedicated 2,650 square foot bicycle storage room in the north residential building. Transit Access: This property is located at the future Wooddale Southwest LRT station, and is served by Metro Transit Bus Route 17 and 615. Landscaping: The landscape plan indicates 245 deciduous trees, 12 coniferous trees, 8 ornamental trees and 422 shrubs. The project does not meet the city’s planting and tree replacement requirements, however, the plan includes provided a variety of alternative landscaping measures in order to meet the intent of the landscaping ordinance. These alternative measures include: City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 18 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD 29,500 square feet of greenroofs, a woonerf/place-making space, outdoor play structures, fireplaces, outdoor space located on the roof, and plentiful public art. The landscaping along West 36th Street exceeds the suggested landscaping plan completed by SEH in 2006 and the landscaping on Wooddale Avenue will enhance the pedestrian realm and will deter drop-offs along both street frontages. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The plan exceeds the City’s minimum 12% DORA requirements, and provides approximately 16.4% of DORA. The proposed development plans illustrate DORA through the inclusion of the 37,575 square feet of designed outdoor space. PLACE proposes 33,560 square feet of urban forest located adjacent to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail. The urban forest will provide active outdoor space for both residents of the development and the greater St. Louis Park community. Within the urban forest programmed space will include play equipment and residential amenities (fire pits, grills, outdoor seating) and informal walking paths. Public art installments will also be incorporated into the urban forest. In addition, the northern residential building includes 1,376 square feet of shared balcony space and 735 square feet of rooftop amenity space. The shared balcony space is located on the east side of the building, with views to downtown Minneapolis, while the rooftop space is located on the west side of the building near the bike shop and the entrance to the regional trail. The south site includes 728 square feet of rooftop space located above the bridge between the hotel and the residential building, and 424 square feet of performance space located in the Place-making Plaza. A 752 square foot dog run is located on the east side of the residential building. Public Art: As a community for creatives, PLACE proposes a vigorous public art plan throughout the development. Beyond live/work, art will be integrated throughout the site via art installations curated by the Museum of Outdoor Arts. Community-led art components will involve collaboration with local artists, schools, and organizations. 8 to 10 art installations will be interwoven into the urban forest, and additional pieces will be installed in the woonerf, and other publicly accessible pedestrian areas within the development, including areas on the buildings themselves. Multipurpose spaces will feature exhibits and presentations from creatives as well as host community gatherings. PLACE is also working with the city to maintain and reuse the existing public art that is located along W. 36th Street. Sustainability and Energy Efficiency: Every inhabitant of the development will benefit from low energy costs; the Project will produce approximately 90% of its own energy, achieve LEED certification, and meet Minnesota Green Communities criteria. PLACE’s patent-pending E-Generation system will bring additional benefits to the development and the broader community with renewable energy and food generation. The system actively balances electricity generation from solar, wind, and anaerobic digestion. The completely enclosed anaerobic digestion element will convert locally-sourced food waste into methane for electricity. The soil amendment and excess heat byproducts from the anaerobic digestion process will support a greenhouse growing food year-round. The E-Generation facility will hold the anaerobic digestion, energy storage, and greenhouse, and will be placed in a highly visible location on Wooddale to showcase the state-of-the-art energy generation equipment and greenhouse. Organization and school tours will offer a deeper dive into understanding the inner workings of E-Generation. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 19 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD The city adopted zoning regulations to allow for anaerobic digesters in April 2014. Those regulations allow for a system that processes up to 30,000 tons of material annually to be located in an I-G General Industrial zoned parcel, which is the current zoning for the E-Generation parcel. The ordinance established the conditions related to odor control, noise, operating procedures, storage, and permitting relating to anaerobic digestion. These regulations were adopted based upon research and expertise from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, planning staff in other cities, environmental specialists, Hennepin County organics/recycling staff, managers of other digesters, and professors at the University of Minnesota. City staff included Building Official, Fire Marshal, Planning, and Operations staff. E-Generation will be required to adhere to the city’s zoning regulations for anaerobic digesters. PLACE’s E-Generation system will process less than 1,000 tons of organic material annually, with a maximum capacity of 3,000 tons annually. This is one-tenth the material allowed under the existing zoning. The building and all internal systems will be built to all applicable building and fire codes, and in accordance with any other required permits. PLACE is using a pre-manufactured, self-contained anaerobic digester manufactured by SEaB Energy Ltd. The system is fully contained within an ISO Intermodal Shipping Container which will be fully enclosed within the E-Generation building. The organic material will be collected from within the PLACE development and possibly from a local brewery. Approximately one trip per day with 6 to 10 55-gallon plastic drums will be picked up from the brewery and will be brought to the E-Generation facility. The drop off will occur within the confines of the building. The organic waste material collected from within the PLACE development will occur on a daily basis with approximately two trips per building per day. The drop off happens within the confines of the building. A small electric cart will be used to deliver organic material to the facility. A total of 10 electric cart trips per day will supply all of the organic material needed to operate the E-Generation system. All materials will be transported to E-Generation in lidded containers and will be unloaded within the confines of the building. The system employs negative pressure and triple-redundant carbon filtering to eliminate any odors. The zoning ordinance and the language in the PLACE PUD prohibits any odors from being detectable outside of the building containing the digester system. The byproduct of E-Generation is organic feed that is dried to 80 percent. No odor can be detected and the finished feed material will go out on 40”x42” pallets. Up to 14 pallets of material will be picked up weekly. The pickup will be every other day to twice a week depending upon output. The door will open and material will be loaded to a cube truck. This will be done with an electric fork. Returned pallets will be stacked internally and will not be placed outside. As part of E-Generation, a greenhouse will produce enough organic food to fill subscriptions to 300 Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) shares for the PLACE community. There is a cold storage unit for storing produce within the E-Generation facility and food will be shuttled through the PLACE development using the electric vehicle. Loading will happen internally with a vestibule. Solar photovoltaic panels will be located throughout the site on building roofs, over the surface parking lot, and incorporated into building façades. A helical wind turbine will be located on the top of the north residential building. The wind turbine is 3’5” in width and 16’4” tall. It will be installed in the middle portion of the north residential building. The wind turbine’s fall zone is located completely on PLACE’s property and does not pose a risk to adjacent properties. The City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 20 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD applicant proposes illuminating the wind turbine, showcasing PLACE’s use of renewable energy sources. The city’s zoning ordinance allows wind turbines and the Planning Commission is supportive of the helical wind turbines location on the roof of a building verses ground-mounted wind energy. Signs: A sign plan was not submitted for review. Signs will require permits and shall comply with the MX Mixed Use District standards. Utilities: All small utilities will be placed underground. Utility service structures, such as a generator and transformer, will be screened completely from off-site with materials consistent with main building facade. Per the development agreement, buildings will provide the necessary infrastructure to take advantage of fiber-optic service lines in the vicinity of the development. Maintenance: The south hotel and residential buildings are located within Special Service District #6. The property owner pays a special service assessment annually, and the city provides landscaping and street maintenance for the 36th Street streetscape. The properties will remain in Special Service District #6. PLACE will be required to maintain all other streetscape maintenance responsibilities and any privately owned site amenities including public art, trails, and the urban forest. Maintenance details will be addressed in the Planning Development Contract. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 15, 2017 to gather comments on the PLACE development. Three people voiced concerns regarding the development and asked that the decision be delayed. Four people spoke in favor of the development. Concerns included increased traffic, concerns regarding lessened parking requirements, dislike of the six-story height, concerns about the uncertainty of LRT construction, and safety concerns with the development’s affordable component. Comments of support for the development included support for artistic communities, desire to live car-free, supportive of live-work opportunities, and supportive of opportunities to better the health of families through walkability and sustainability. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and voted 4 to 1 to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat and the preliminary and final Planned Unit Development with conditions recommended in the staff report. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. 2. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. 3. Prior to the City signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with Hennepin County: a. The developer shall pay to the city the park dedication fee of $448,500 and trail dedication fee of $67,275 for residential uses and $16,963 for commercial uses. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 21 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD b. A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted to the City to insure that a signed Mylar copy of the final plat is provided to the City. c. A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the City and Developer that addresses, at a minimum: i. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to: sidewalks, boulevards, and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. ii. A performance guarantee for 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public and site improvements including public sidewalks, landscaping and lighting, on-street parking, placement of iron monuments at property corners, and the private site landscaping and irrigation, artwork, and Outdoor Recreation Areas. d. The applicant shall reimburse City Attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. e. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the Planning Development Contract. 4. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City. b. Assent Form and Official Exhibits shall be signed by the applicant and property owner. c. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and City representatives. d. All necessary permits shall be obtained. e. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, street lights, landscaping, etc.) and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. Staff recommends approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. 2. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. 3. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. Assent Form and Official Exhibits shall be signed by the applicant and property owner. b. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and City representatives. c. All necessary permits shall be obtained. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met: a. The developer shall sign the City's Assent Form and the Official Exhibits. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 22 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD b. A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the Developer and City that addresses, at a minimum: i. The conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate. ii. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to: on-street parking, sidewalks and boulevard improvements and the execution of any necessary agreements related to the maintenance of such improvements including the inclusion of Special Service District #6. iii. The developer’s contribution of $67,003.80 to the City for regional stormwater pond improvements. iv. Developer agrees to provide art work on or near the site with city/public involvement in the selection of the location, artist, and art work. v. Easements related to electronic communication and fiber infrastructure. vi. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 1.25 times of the costs of all public improvements (sidewalks and boulevards), and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. vii. The developer shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final PUD approval. viii. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute said Planning Development Contract. c. Final construction plans for all public improvements and private stormwater system shall be signed by a registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. d. Building material samples and colors shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. 5. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Friday, and between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays. b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. d. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public street. e. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the City Engineer (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety. f. The developer shall install and maintain chain link security fencing that is at least six feet tall along the perimeter of the site. All gates and access points shall be locked during non-working hours. g. Temporary electric power connections shall not adversely impact surrounding neighborhood service. 6. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy permit the following shall be completed: a. Public improvements, private utilities, site landscaping and irrigation, and storm water management system shall be installed in accordance with the Official Exhibits. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 23 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD 7. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened. Rooftop equipment may be located as indicated in the Official Exhibits so as not to be visible from off-site. 8. The materials used in, and placement of, all signs shall be integrated with the building design and architecture. 9. Bicycle parking on site shall be located within fifty feet of the building’s front entrance. CITY COUNCIL: The City Council voted 6 to 1 to approve the First Reading on an ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 9 to the Zoning Code and amend the Zoning Map from IG-General Industrial and MX-Mixed Use to PUD 9 for the property located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 24 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Aerials City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 25 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF PLACE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. PLACE E-Generation One, LLC, subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as PLACE has submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto. Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary and final plat of PLACE is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk subject to the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. b. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. c. Prior to the City signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with Hennepin County: 1) The developer shall pay to the city the park dedication fee of $448,500 and trail dedication fee of $67,275 for residential uses and $16,963 for commercial uses. 2) A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted to the City to insure that a signed Mylar copy of the final plat is provided to the City. 3) A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the City and Developer that addresses, at a minimum: 4) The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to: sidewalks, boulevards, and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 26 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD 5) A performance guarantee for 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public and site improvements including public sidewalks, landscaping and lighting, on-street parking, placement of iron monuments at property corners, and the private site landscaping and irrigation, artwork, and Outdoor Recreation Areas. 6) The applicant shall reimburse City Attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. 7) The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the Planning Development Contract. 2. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City. b. Assent Form and Official Exhibits shall be signed by the applicant and property owner. c. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and City representatives. d. All necessary permits shall be obtained. e. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, street lights, landscaping, etc.) and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. Prior to issuance of a building permit or building demolition: 1. The developer and contractor shall follow the procedures and requirements for this development as required for Demolition and New Construction or Major Additions to single- family homes are required to do under City Code 6-71 Construction Management Plan. 2. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. 4. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled. 5. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 27 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 28 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS Parcel 1: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthan Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. Parcel 2: Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 29 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) Parcel 3: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 30 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Parcel 4: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. Parcel 5: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the original main track center line of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 31 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Parcel 6: Tract A: That part of the following described property: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 29, extended Northerly. Tract B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot 9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 32 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. Parcel 7: Tract A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 517068. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Tract B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 33 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Lot 6 and the East line of Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Together with that part of the East 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. Parcel 8: Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described: thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence N0°57'33"E 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence S65°21'14"W 183.14 feet; thence N24°38'46"W 20.57 feet; thence S65°21'14"W 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence N39°00'57"W 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence N64°17'59"E 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence N64°21'45"E 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence S0°14'49"E, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing S0°14'49"E along said west line 80.00 feet; thence S65°52'15"W 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 34 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD thence continuing S65°52'15"W 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence N01°03'00"E 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence N64°21'45"E 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 35 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD ORDINANCE NO.____-17 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 9 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF HIGHWAY 7 AND WOODDALE AVE AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 36TH STREET AND WOODDALE AVENUE THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 07-04-CP, 17-05-S, 17-06-PUD, 17-07-VAR) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use. Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from I-P Industrial Park to PUD 9: Lot 1, Block 1, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lot 1, Block 2, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 4. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 9: Lot 1, Block 3, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 5. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD 9. (a) Development Plan The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1. PUD Exhibit 2. G001 – Cover Sheet 3. G002 – Legend 4. G003 – General Notes 5. C001 – Existing Conditions and Removals 6. C003 – Tree Removals and Preservation Plan 7. C101 – Site Plan – Overall 8. C102 – Site Plan Northwest 9. C103 – Site Plan Northeast 10. C101 – Site Plan South City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 36 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD 11. C201 – Temporary Erosion Control Plan 12. C301 – Grading and Drainage Plan – Overall 13. C401 – Sanitary Sewer and Watermain 14. C402 – Storm Sewer Plan 15. C801 – Site Details 16. C802 – Site Details 17. C901 – City Std Utility Plates 18. C902 – City Std Utility Plates 19. C903 – City Std Utility Plates 20. C904 – City Std Erosion Control Plates 21. C1001 – MNDOT Std Ped Curb Ramp Details 22. C1002 – MNDOT Std Ped Curb Ramp Details 23. L101 – Planting Plan – Overall 24. L102 – Planting Plan – Northwest 25. L103 – Planting Plan – Northeast 26. L104 – Planting Plan – South 27. L801 – Planting Details 28. V101 – Preliminary Plat 29. V102 – Preliminary Plat 30. V103 – Preliminary Plat 31. E101 – Electrical Site Plan – Overall 32. S001 – Site Plan 33. A101 – North Building Floor Plans 34. A102 – North Building Floor Plans 35. A103 – North Building Floor Plans 36. A104 – North Building Floor Plans 37. A105 – North Building Floor Plans 38. A106 – North Building Elevations 39. A107 – North Building Illustrative Elevations 40. A201 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 41. A202 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 42. A203 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 43. A204 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 44. A205 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 45. A206 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 46. A207 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 47. A208 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 48. A209 – South Building Hotel & Residential Floor Plans 49. A210 – South Building Elevations 50. A211 – Hotel Elevations 51. A212 – South Building Illustrative Elevations 52. A301 – E-Generation Floor Plans 53. A302 – E-Generation Roof Plan 54. A303 – E-Generation Elevations 55. A401 – 3D View 56. A501 – Illustrative Sections 57. A502 – Sections 58. PLACE – Envelope Proposals 59. PLACE – Sustainability Proposals 60. PLACE – Proof of Parking City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 37 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD 61. PLACE – Lighting Proposals 62. PLACE – Parking Requirements 63. PLACE – Mobility Plan (Travel Demand Management Plan) The site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1) The property shall be divided into four zones, as indicated on PUD Exhibit of the Official Exhibits. The zones shall be established by dividing the site into a northwest site, a northeast site, a southwest site, and a southeast site. The northwest site shall be called “Site A – E-Gen”, the northeast site shall be called “Site B – North” the southwest site shall be called “Site C – Hotel” and the southeast site shall be called “Site D – South”. 2) Parking will be provided off-street in a surface lot, on-street, in structured parking, and within the public plaza. The property shall be developed with 299 residential units, including 99 live/work units, a 110 room hotel, a minimum of 35,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space, 0.88 acres of urban forest, an e-generation energy facility, and a greenhouse. Parking will be provided off-street in a surface lot, on-street parallel parking, and structured parking. A total of four-hundred-forty-seven (447) parking spaces will be provided: 251 spaces for residential units or 0.83 spaces per dwelling unit, 110 spaces for the hotel or 1.0 space per hotel room, 76 spaces for non-residential uses and 10 spaces for shared cars. An additional 55 spaces are required as a proof of parking as indicated on Sheet 60 of the Official Exhibits. Parking requirements are provided based on Sheet 62 of the Official Exhibits. 3) The maximum height for Site A – E-Gen shall not exceed 33 feet for the building, and 40 feet for the flute. The maximum building height for Site B – North shall not exceed 61 feet and five stories and 78 feet for the helical wind turbine. The maximum height for Site C – Hotel shall not exceed 76 feet and six stories and the maximum height for Site D – South shall not exceed 79 feet and six stories. 4) The development site shall include a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. 5) The development shall incorporate a Travel Demand Management (TDM) plan including: a. The development shall offer car-free incentives for a minimum of 90 dwelling units. b. The development shall provide 10 cars available as a car share. c. The development shall provide a local shuttle until opening day of the Southwest Light Rail Green Line Wooddale Station. d. A transportation concierge program shall be maintained. e. The development shall provide car-free perks for 90 households until the site conforms to the city’s off-street parking requirements. f. The TDM plan shall be reported to the city annually for a duration of three (3) years. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 38 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD (b) Site A – E-Gen 1) Permitted with Conditions a. Anaerobic digester. Anaerobic digesters shall be permitted only as part of a larger development which contains at least one other principal use, and where electricity and bio-gas produced by the digester is used primarily by the larger development. i. Organic material, as defined in the Zoning Code, is the only input allowed. ii. No more than 3,000 tons of organic material shall be processed per year. iii. The digester system, associated equipment and operations must occur completely within a negative-pressure building. iv. Organic material shall be deposited from the delivery vehicle directly into an enclosed container integrated with the digester system. v. Sorting of material must occur in an enclosed container integrated with the digester system. vi. Odor controlling devices shall be used to prevent odors from being detectable outside of the building containing the digester system. vii. Flaring of bio-gas is only allowed to burn excess gas and shall not be visible from off-site. viii. No outdoor storage is allowed. ix. Retail distribution of compressed natural gas is not allowed. x. All necessary permits relating to items such as: emissions, solid waste processing, energy production, industrial waste water, and storm water must be obtained from the appropriate agencies. xi. All necessary contracts or agreements with material providers and utility companies must be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) Accessory Uses a. Greenhouse. b. Parking lots. c. Outdoor seating, with the following conditions: i. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use. ii. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet of a residential use. d. Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. e. Solar panels i. Rooftop or building mounted systems 1. Roof or building mounted solar systems may exceed the maximum allowed height in the PUD zoning district by 3 feet. ii. Ground or accessory structure mounted solar systems 1. The height of a ground or accessory structure mounted solar system, measured when oriented at maximum design tilt, shall not exceed 20 feet. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 39 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD (c) Site B – North 1) Permitted with Conditions: a. Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space. b. Live-work Type I. i. All material or equipment shall be stored within an enclosed structure. ii. Operation of the home occupation is not apparent from the public right-of-way. iii. The activity does not involve warehousing, distribution or retail sales of merchandise produced off the site. iv. No person is employed at the residence who does not legally reside in the home. v. No light or vibration originating from the business operation is discernible at the property line. vi. Only equipment, machinery and materials which are normally found in the home are used in the conduct of the home occupation. vii. No more than one non-illuminated wall sign limited to two square feet in area is used to identify the home occupation. viii. Space within the dwelling devoted to the home occupation does not exceed one room or forty-five (45) percent of the floor area, whichever is greater. ix. No portion of the home occupation is permitted within any attached or detached accessory building. x. The structure housing the home occupation conforms to the building code; and in the case where the home occupation is day care or if there are any customers or students, the home occupation has received a certificate of occupancy. c. Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are limited to the following: coffee shops, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. i. All parking requirements must be met for each use per Sheet 62 of the Official Exhibits. ii. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. iii. Restaurants are prohibited. iv. In vehicle sales is prohibited. d. Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. 2) Accessory Uses: a. Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 40 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD b. Home occupations complying with all of the conditions in the R-C district i. Except family day care is prohibited. c. Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. d. Gardens. e. Parking lots. f. Outdoor seating, with the following conditions: i. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use. ii. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet of a residential use. g. No outdoor uses or storage allowed. h. Solar panels i. Roof or building mounted solar systems may exceed the maximum allowed height in the PUD zoning district by 3 feet. 3) Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS), with the following conditions: a. Wind turbines shall be of the helical-type. b. Helical wind turbines shall meet the following design requirements i. One WECS shall be allowed per lot. ii. The WECS unit shall not exceed 17 feet in height, and shall not exceed 79 feet overall, including the building height when attached to the roof of a building. iii. The fall zone shall be completely within the property lines of the lot within which the WECS is located. iv. Minimize visual impact. WECS design and location shall minimize visual impact. v. Color and finish. All WECS shall be white, grey, black or another non-obtrusive color. Blades may be black in order to facilitate deicing. Finishes shall be matt or non-reflective. vi. Tower lighting. WECS shall not be artificially lighted, except as specified herein and to the extent required by the FAA or other federal or state law or regulation that preempts local regulations. vii. Signs and displays. The use of any portion of a WECS for displaying flags and signs, other than warning or equipment information signs, is prohibited. viii. Associated equipment. Ground equipment associated with a WECS shall be housed in a structure. Structures housing equipment shall meet the architectural design standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Control wiring and power-lines shall be wireless or underground. ix. Braking system required. All WECS shall have an automatic braking, governing or feathering system to prevent uncontrolled rotation, over speeding and excessive pressure on the structure, rotor blades and turbine components. x. Design height. The applicant shall provide evidence that the proposed height of the WECS does not exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. xi. Interconnection agreement. The applicant shall provide a copy of the utility notification requirements for interconnection, unless the applicant intends, and so states on the application, that the system City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 41 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD will not be connected to the electricity grid. xii. Technology standards. WECS must meet the minimum standards of a WECS certification program recognized by the American Wind Energy Association, such as AWEA’s Small Wind Turbine Performance and Safety Standard, the Emerging Technologies program of the California Energy Commission, or other 3rd party standards acceptable to the City. xiii. Noise. Audible sound due to wind energy system operations shall comply with the standards governing noise contained in the City of St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances. xiv. If the WECS remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed abandoned and shall constitute a public nuisance. The owner shall remove the abandoned system at their expense after a demolition permit has been obtained. Removal includes the entire structure including foundations to below natural grade and transmission equipment. (d) Site C – Hotel 1) Permitted: a. Hotel. Uses associated with the hotel, including but not limited to hotel office, fitness facility, pool, parking, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space. 2) Permitted with Conditions: a. Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are limited to the following: restaurants, coffee shops, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. i. All parking requirements must be met for each use per Sheet 62 of the Official Exhibits. ii. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. iii. In vehicle sales is prohibited. b. Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. 3) Accessory Uses: a. Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. b. Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. c. Parking lots. d. Outdoor seating, with the following conditions: City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 42 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD i. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use. ii. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet of a residential use. e. No outdoor uses or storage allowed. f. Solar panels i. Roof or building mounted solar systems may exceed the maximum allowed height in the PUD zoning district by 3 feet. (e) Site D – South 1) Permitted with Conditions: a. Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space. b. Live-work Type I. i. All material or equipment shall be stored within an enclosed structure. ii. Operation of the home occupation is not apparent from the public right-of-way. iii. The activity does not involve warehousing, distribution or retail sales of merchandise produced off the site. iv. No person is employed at the residence who does not legally reside in the home except that a licensed family day care facility may have one outside employee. v. No light or vibration originating from the business operation is discernible at the property line. vi. Only equipment, machinery and materials which are normally found in the home are used in the conduct of the home occupation. vii. No more than one non-illuminated wall sign limited to two square feet in area is used to identify the home occupation. viii. Space within the dwelling devoted to the home occupation does not exceed one room or forty-five (45) percent of the floor area, whichever is greater. ix. No portion of the home occupation is permitted within any attached or detached accessory building. x. The structure housing the home occupation conforms to the building code; and in the case where the home occupation is day care or if there are any customers or students, the home occupation has received a certificate of occupancy. c. Live-work Type II. i. Live-work uses as defined by Sec. 36-142 of city code are permitted on the first floor. ii. A Registration of Land Use (RLU) shall be approved by the city when there is a change in tenant. d. Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first and second floors, and are limited to the following: coffee shops, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. i. All parking requirements must be met for each use per Sheet 62 of the Official Exhibits. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 43 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD ii. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. iii. Restaurants are prohibited. iv. In vehicle sales is prohibited. e. Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. 2) Accessory Uses: a. Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. b. Home occupations complying with all of the conditions in the R-C district. c. Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. d. Gardens. e. Parking lots. f. Outdoor seating, with the following conditions: i. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use. ii. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet of a residential use. g. No outdoor uses or storage allowed. h. Solar panels i. Roof or building mounted solar systems may exceed the maximum allowed height in the PUD zoning district by 3 feet. (d) Special Performance Standards (1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2) The site is exempt from the shadowing requirements specified in Section 36- 366(b)(1)g of the zoning ordinance. (3) Each commercial, civic or institutional tenant space on the ground floor facing West 36th Street shall have a direct and primary access to and from the 36th Street (south) building façade and the access shall remain open during business hours. (4) All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. (5) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the approved redevelopment plan or final PUD site plan and development agreement in accordance with the following conditions: a. Pylon signs are prohibited; City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 44 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD b. Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as the principal buildings and shall not interfere with pedestrian, bicycle or automobile circulation and visibility; c. Maximum allowable number, sizes, heights and yards for signs shall be regulated by section 36-362, MX requirements. d. Wall signs of non-residential uses shall only be placed on the ground floor and exterior walls of the occupied tenant lease space, and/or a monument sign. e. Wall signs shall not be included in calculating the aggregate sign area on the lot if they meet the following outlined conditions: 1. Non-residential wall signs permitted by this section that do not exceed seven percent of the exterior wall area of the ground floor tenant lease space. 2. The sign is located on the exterior wall of the ground floor tenant lease space from which the seven percent sign area was derived. 3. No individual wall sign shall exceed 100 square feet in area. (6) Façade. a. Fibrous cement, high performance brick veneer with rain screen cladding systems, and vertically integrated photovoltaic panels shall be considered Class I Materials. b. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor non-residential street-facing facades and all ground floor non- residential facades on the west façade of Site D South, including live/work type II units: 1. The minimum ground floor transparency shall be 60% at the pedestrian level. 2. No more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signs. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. 3. Active permitted uses, not including storage areas or utility closets, shall be maintained for a minimum depth of 15 feet. 4. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of ten feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. (7) Awnings. a. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. b. Backlit awnings are prohibited. Sec. 6. The contents of Planning Case File 07-04-CP, 17-05-S, 17-06-PUD, 17-07-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 45 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Sec. 7. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing March 15, 2017 First Reading April 17, 2017 Second Reading May 1, 2017 Date of Publication May 11, 2017 Date Ordinance takes effect May 26, 2017 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 46 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION ORDINANCE NO.____-17 AN ORDINANCE CREATING A NEW PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT SOUTHEAST QUADRANT HIGHWAY 7 AND WOODDALE AVE AND NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 36TH STREET AND WOODDALE AVE This ordinance states that the Zoning Map shall be amended from I-G General Industrial and C-2 General Industrial to PUD 9; and the Zoning Ordinance Code, Section-268 will be amended to add Section 36-268-PUD 9. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 11, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 47 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MARCH 15, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Person, Carl Robertson STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Jack Sullivan, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call Chair Peilen called the meeting to order. 2. Approval of Minutes of February 1, 2017 Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to approve the minutes of February 1, 2017. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 3. Public Hearings A. PLACE Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment; Preliminary and Final PUD; Preliminary and Final Plat Location: 5605 W. 36th Street Applicant: PLACE E-generation One, LLC Case No: 17-04-CP, 17-05-S, 17-06-PUD, 17-07-VAR Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. Ms. Monson provided the development summary and site information. She said for the last 20 years the city has anticipated the site to redevelop and has actively purchased properties around the site for that redevelopment. The expectation is that it would redevelop into a transit oriented mixed use development. Ms. Monson spoke about the land use and transportation studies in the area which identify the site as future transit oriented development. Ms. Monson provided background on PLACE’s proposal which began with discussions in November, 2013. She reviewed the public process for PLACE which has occurred since that time. The applicant requests a change to the future land use designation of the site to MX Mixed Use to create a pedestrian scale mixed use building with retail service or other commercial uses on the ground floor, and residential or office uses on upper floors. Ms. Monson stated that MX Mixed Use is intended to facilitate a diversity of uses in certain areas of the community. She reviewed the goals and vision of the Mixed Use designation in the City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 48 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Comprehensive Plan and the availability of infrastructure which staff uses to analyze requests. Ms. Monson spoke about the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) which has been completed. The comment period for the EAW ends on April 5, 2017. Ms. Monson discussed city improvements to be made to the transportation network related to SWLRT and the PLACE development. Ms. Monson provided staff analysis of the request for Preliminary and Final Plat which would combine nine properties in the northeast quadrant of Wooddale Ave. and W. 36th Street intersection. Ms. Monson discussed the PUD request, including the helical wind turbine to be located on the property. She discussed the robust mobility plan which includes a bike share and car share. She discussed parking, building materials, landscaping, sustainability and energy efficiency. Ms. Monson stated on Feb. 23, 2017 PLACE held its 8th neighborhood meeting with 60 people in attendance. Concerns included increased traffic, inadequate parking, density, hotel, number of affordable units and increase of neighborhood taxes. Support included the density near light rail, dedication to car-free living, building design, inclusion of affordable housing and the community offered by the project such as the woonerf and urban forest. Chris Velasco, applicant, PLACE E-generation One, stated that PLACE exists for the purpose of building healthy communities for all and specializes in creating communities that are for the arts and feature a high degree of sustainable design. He provided examples of live/work spaces in the project. Mr. Velasco spoke about Marriott’s interest in the proposed hotel. This would bundle housing and jobs together. He said three independent market studies completed for hotel at the site were positive. He spoke about PLACE and Marriott’s relationship with Park Nicollet Health Services. Patients and families could stay one-half mile from Park Nicollet clinics and the hospital. Mr. Velasco explained the sustainability features of the project. He discussed benefits of the development to the St. Louis Park community. Commissioner Carper asked how residents would commute until 2021 when SWLRT is projected to begin. Ms. Monson responded that the city is requiring the developer to offer a shuttle for the first three years or until SWLRT is complete. The hotel will also be providing a shuttle to and from the airport. Commissioner Carper and Ms. Monson discussed standards, height, pole, location, sound and code regarding the proposed helical turbine. Mr. Velasco provided dimensions for the proposed turbine. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 49 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, noted that code would allow a helical style turbine, however the ordinance contemplated a rotary style. The main modification being requested through PUD is to allow a rooftop mounted turbine rather than a ground mounted turbine. He said staff believes that would also reduce the overall height of the turbine that is required. Commissioner Rickert asked if apartments would be sound proofed for musicians. Mr. Velasco responded that is very difficult to do for apartment units. Four soundproof rooms will be built, however. Commissioner Rickert asked who would have access to the Urban Forest area. Mr. Velasco said anyone in the community would have access to the Urban Forest area, all year long. Commissioner Kanne asked what would happen if the hotel fails. Mr. Velasco responded he thinks the relationship PLACE has with Park Nicollet and Methodist Hospital would prevent that from happening. Their use of the hotel will assure high occupancy. He said the three feasibility studies done on a proposed hotel do not indicate failure. Commissioner Kanne spoke about the email sent by resident Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., which referenced the Schmidt Artist Lofts in St. Paul as a development community for artists. Commissioner Kanne said she understands one of the problems with that development is that artists are resisting rules and regulations. Mr. Velasco stated he has a great deal of experience in development for the arts and live/work units. He spoke about very specific rules called house privileges and commitments which are shared with applicants. Chair Peilen asked how traffic would proceed south on Wooddale Ave. Jack Sullivan, staff engineer reviewing PLACE, and staff liaison for SWLRT, said a small percentage of drivers will want to make a left turn. He said driver behavior and habits will transition over time for right turn movements at that location. Vehicle movements will use Hwy. 100 and Hwy. 7 access locations. He said he anticipates very little traffic heading to or from the Sorensen neighborhood. He added that the removal of the left turn out would have happened with or without the PLACE development. Chair Peilen said the number of required parking spots has been reduced but less car-use is an experiment. She asked if that doesn’t work is there a way to get more parking spaces. Ms. Monson said the developer has been required to provide a Proof of Parking document which shows they could provide another 55 parking spaces. There are also other opportunities where spaces could be leased in the neighborhood. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 50 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Chair Peilen said two-thirds of the units are affordable housing. She asked if PLACE would have the budget to maintain the building with those lower rents. Mr. Velasco said developers must contribute heavily to capitalized operating and replacement reserves upfront and those are deemed sufficient for maintenance and improvements. Chair Peilen commented that her biggest concern is that so much of the project is predicated on light rail occurring. Commissioner Johnston-Madison read from Walker Parking consultant conclusion on page eight. She said she is concerned about the lag time between light rail operation and the time people start moving into PLACE. She said she is concerned during those three years there will be parking and traffic in the neighborhood. She said she’s concerned that this is an experiment. She asked about the Level of Service summary. Mr. Sullivan stated that the Level of Service designation is per intersection. Level of Service D or better is what the Council and Engineering department have historically used as acceptable. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the city needs to have developments that don’t perpetuate Level of Service D throughout this entire quadrant. She said the City Council has heard from many people that they are unhappy with this and it doesn’t seem the issue is being listened to. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about incentives for not driving. Mr. Velasco said the car-free perks include a $70/month stipend to not have a car. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about poor bus service prior to light rail. Mr. Velasco spoke about discussions held with Metro Transit about improved levels of bus service prior to light rail operation. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about a January 2016 neighborhood meeting where PLACE spoke about additional organic waste to be shipped in for the generator. She asked why this has been dropped from plans. Mr. Velasco said PLACE had been discussing working with the City’s organic program for this but there was a mis-match in sorting. He said it seems the best thing to do was to scale down the E-generation facility. Spent grain will also be provided by Steel Toe Brewery to bolster PLACE’s local collection. Commissioner Carper asked about shading. Mr. Walther responded that there are exceptions to shading when the shadow occurs within the PUD. On this site the northwest corner of 36th & Yosemite would be impacted. The west wall of the existing one-story commercial building would be impacted. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 51 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Roger Onken, 3600 Wooddale Ave. S. #212, stated he loves the philosophy and design. He doesn’t like the height of the building. He said he thinks six stories for St. Louis Park is too high. Reducing the height would reduce the number of units and parking spaces. He doesn’t feel assured that enough people would choose to go car-free at the development, particularly with the delay of light rail. He said he doesn’t like the inadequate tree and shrub count. He said the employees and customers related to live/work units would require more parking. He said he is concerned about the impact of a hotel of that size on the neighborhood. He said he felt there is a lot of unknown with the proposal. He stated he is concerned about his building’s driveway exit to get on to Highway 7. There will be a better sense of the perfect scenario with light rail in 2021. He said he thought the turbine would be intrusive with the height of the building. He said he didn’t like the proposed setback on 36th and Wooddale. Sheila Asato, Monkey Bridge Arts, 6801 W. Lake St., said PLACE sounds ideal for studio space and light rail. She asked if units are rental or for sale. James McDonough, 2840 Cavell, a 42-year resident, said he is heavily involved in the arts in St. Louis Park. He said he is fully supportive of the project and understands creative visioning involves a risk. He said that is the way with all progress and development. Mr. McDonough said his hope is that PLACE’s rental apartment development will be his next destination. He said he encourages the Commission’s strong and full support for the project. Russell Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave S. #14, commented that as a creative he couldn’t be more excited about PLACE. He said it is exactly what St. Louis Park needs and it is the reason he was attracted to this community. He said he doesn’t think it is an experiment with the traffic. He said we live in a time where car-free desire is here, now. He stated members of his family would love to have living space which is car-free. Alonso Ramos, 3738 Dakota Ave. S., stated that he just bought his first house and is new in the neighborhood. He said he is concerned about decrease of property values related to affordable. He said the project minimizes winter and car concerns. He said he used to live in affordable housing in Minnesota. He spoke about problems and disrespect he experienced. He said he is concerned about security and safety with affordable housing with light rail. He said the Lake and Hiawatha rail station is scary. He spoke about a study which shows higher housing property crimes in areas with affordable housing. He said he isn’t opposed to the project but the location is the wrong location. Mr. Ramos distributed copies of his notes. Danielle Griesner, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #14, stated her background is public health and she works to better the health of families and communities to make the healthy choice the easy choice. She said is excited about walkability and sustainability which is why her family moved to St. Louis Park and she is in full support of the project. J.W. Starrett, 5825 Goodrich Ave. S., said his concern is traffic and parking. He said it is a very exciting project for the community. He said he feels like they’ve been backed into this. The expectations and innovation are good in the beginning. He said the expectations have all moved backwards to a point where an adequate level is met for right now. He said he is excited about the future but we aren’t ready for 2021. He said he doesn’t think the City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 52 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD traffic numbers are giving the right picture and he recommends that the Planning Commission conduct another traffic study. It will make a big difference as to why this works. Mr. Starrett said he has concerns about all the new rental units in the city which are at full occupancy which affects traffic and parking. He said Fair Housing will make sure everyone gets in and the management won’t be able to force everyone to be an artist or to follow the rules. He said the city needs to be realistic about the numbers and that we haven’t backed ourselves into a project. Chair Peilen acknowledged the receipt of an email dated March 14, 2017, from Janet Zastrow, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., #5, expressing concerns about the project. Also received is a letter dated March 13, 2017, from Joel A. Hilgendorf, attorney representing Standal Properties, objecting to the request for variance to the shading requirement. Chair Peilen closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak. Chair Peilen stated that the city has very stringent rental regulations and she is assured that PLACE will be required to do background checks on all rental applicants. She said there is a very strong inspections and complaint process in the city as well as very strong rental housing laws. Mr. Walther said the live/work spaces for employee parking was factored in to studies. Peak times are studied as largest demand in parking studies. Peak time for live/work spaces is daytime. Peak time for hotel is around 9 p.m. Parking is not public; it is for commercial uses, for residents and for hotel guests on the site. Mr. Walther spoke about hotel experience in the city. The city’s parking requirement for hotels is recognized by staff as being high and is routinely reviewed for reductions. Hotel market professionals say .8 or 1 space per room is the going demand for parking for most of the hotel chains. The city’s requirement is 1.5 spaces which covered other mixed uses on a site. He said PLACE’s hotel is a limited service hotel and restaurant parking is calculated separately. Mr. Walther said all units are rental apartments and there are no for sale units included. Mr. Walther said if the turbine is located on the E-generation building it would be closer to the range of 64-66 ft. tall which is not out of line with the height of the buildings which are proposed for the project. Ms. Monson said the 10 feet which was mentioned as setback is the amount of land that PLACE is dedicating to the city for right-of-way, it’s not the setback from the curb line. The setback on Wooddale is 15 feet and on 36th Street the setback is significantly more than 26 feet. Ms. Monson stated the way the PUD is written all live/work type 1 cannot have any outside employees working there. The maximum number of employees for live/work type 2 is two. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about car sharing. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 53 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Ms. Monson said PLACE is looking at using HourCar. If for some reason there isn’t a company offering those services the developer could purchase ten cars and those could serve as car shares for the development. Ten parking spaces have been included in the requirements. Mr. Walther reviewed the Environmental Action Worksheet (EAW) process and timeline. Commissioner Carper asked for heights of the area residential developments. Ms. Monson said the proposed Elmwood development on the east side of 36th Street is 77 feet tall (6 stories). Hoigaard Village to the north is approximately 67 ft tall (5 stories). Tower Light directly south is 5 stories tall. Buildings kitty corner to PLACE are approximately 3 ½ stories tall. Ms. Monson commented that the city did a streetscape plan in 2006 looking at landscaping and setbacks on 36th St. as well as building setbacks and how the road would function with the lane width. The dedication required on 36th St. is being required to meet that plan. Chair Peilen said the project is so bold and progressive but her biggest concern are challenges if light rail doesn’t happen. The success of project seems completely linked to light rail. Mr. Velasco replied that PLACE has been working closely with SWLRT and they have said they are moving forward and have given no indication PLACE has anything to worry about in that regard. He added that if something should go wrong and there is no light rail, a good transit oriented development can still be done. He said the nature of car ownership and mobility is changing dramatically and PLACE will be able to take advantage of new technologies coming. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she has always liked the project and thinks it’s a great experiment. But all the numbers that make the project work on paper are right up to the edge on everything. She said she likes the north side of the project. But there are too many questions about hotel and wind turbine. She said she doesn’t think the project is ready. She said we can’t afford as a city to approve a project when the viability relates to unanswered questions. She said she can’t recommend approval for the plat and PUD. Commissioner Carper said he was concerned prior to the meeting but his issues have been satisfactorily cleared up. Regarding concern of concentration of affordable housing, he said developers have been encouraged to provide affordable housing through TIF. He commented that affordable housing is scarce in the city. He said he is uncomfortable with a turbine so enormous in the area but there are other existing large structures within the city. Regarding light rail, he said PLACE could be delayed three years at great expense and three years of an innovative project will have been lost. He said all developments come with a risk. Commissioner Kanne said her biggest worry has always been about traffic. She lives in the Elmwood neighborhood and has children who ride bikes in the area. She said she has watched all the new development happen in Elmwood and said the intersection is a nightmare. She added that she is proud to live in a city that would bring such a project to the city and she is in total support of it. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 54 Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Commissioner Tatalovich made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from OFC –Office, BP – Business Park, RRR – Railroad, and Right-of-way to MX – Mixed Use. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Chair Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed). Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of The PLACE Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development subject to conditions. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed). Mr. Walther discussed the process and schedule for EAW comments and consideration by City Council. 4. Other Business: None 5. Communications Commissioner Carper asked if the turbine issue might come up for a zoning ordinance amendment. Mr. Walther said the PLACE PUD ordinance would create the rules for that site to allow that particular use. But it does open up a larger policy question for other sites in the community. He suggested that might be discussed in the upcoming revision of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Walther spoke about upcoming events including Town Hall for Vision 3.0, Facebook Live for Vision 3.0, and the State of the City. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 V101 PRELIMINARY PLAT V103 SEE SH E E T V102SEE SHEET02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 55 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 V102 PRELIMINARY PLAT 02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT V103 SEE SH E E TV101SEE SHEETCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 56 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 V103 PRELIMINARY PLAT 02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT V101 SEE SH E E T City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 57 That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. AND Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as PLACE and does hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public use the public ways and also dedicate the drainage and utility easements as created by this plat. In witness whereof said PLACE, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this _______ day of ___________________, 20____. PLACE, LLC, a MINNESOTA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Principal CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA This plat of PLACE was approved and accepted by the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, at a regular meeting thereof held this ________day of _______________________, 20______, and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2. Mayor Clerk I, Daniel J. Roeber, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this ________ day of _____________________, 20___. _________________________________ Daniel J. Roeber, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License Number 43133 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF _________________________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me on , by Daniel J. Roeber. __________________________________________________ (Notary Signature) ___________________________________________________(Notary Printed Name) NOTARY PUBLIC, _____________________ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES __________________________________ KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That PLACE, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property: Tract B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot 9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. AND Tract A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 517068. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Tract B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of Lot 6 and the East line of Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Together with that part of the East 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. Parcel 8: Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence North 00 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds East, 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 183.14 feet; thence North 24 degrees 38 minutes 46 seconds West, 20.57 feet; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence North 39 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds West, 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 17 minutes 59 seconds East, 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence North 01 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds East, 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property) AND Tract A: That part of the following described property: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 29, extended Northerly. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF _________________________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me on , by XXXXXXXXXX, principal of PLACE, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company. ____________________________________________________ (Notary Signature) ____________________________________________________ (Notary Printed Name) NOTARY PUBLIC, _____________________ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES __________________________________ RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20_____ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this ________day of _______________________, 20______. Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor by ______________________________________ Deputy SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to MN STAT. Sec. 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this ________day of _______________________, 20______. Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor by ______________________________________ RESISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of PLACE was filed in this office this ________day of _______________________, 20______ , at ____o'clock ____m. Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles by ______________________________________ Deputy COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of PLACE was filed in this office this ________day of _______________________, 20______ , at ____o'clock ____m. Martin McCormick, County Recorder by ______________________________________ Deputy PLACE SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS R.T. DOC. NO. _______________________ C.R. DOC. NO. _______________________ City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 58 6 6 8 .1 7 S64 °2 1 '4 5 "W 132.21S55°39'42"W 2 8 0 .4 6 S64 °2 1 '4 5 "W S25°38'15"E197.40N 6 4 °1 0 '5 2 "E 8 5 3 .8 7 1 0 1.5 2 N 4 1 ° 3 1'4 1" WN01°19'57"W95.651001008 08029.006 0 0 .0 0 S o u th w e s te rly c o rn e ro fA U D IT O R 'S S U B D IV IS IO N N U M B E R 2 4 9 (5 0 .0 0 fe e tn o rth w e ste rly fro m c e n te rlin e o fs o u th b o u n d m a in tra ck ,n o w a b a n d o n e d )Sout hwe s t erl y boun dar yli neofAUDITOR' S SUBDI VI SI ONNUMBER249N 6 4 °2 1 '4 5 "E 1 8 5 .2 7 N 6 4 °1 7'5 9 "E 4 5 1 .5 0 4 4 0 .7 135 3 6 .3 9 2 4 4 .0 7 112.67N 6 4 °2 5 '1 4 "E 3 7 6 .5 1 1 8 .1 0 S 4 1 °3 1 '4 1 "E 4 9.7 0 353 5 20 20 34.7059.83R=138.00Δ=24°50'33"1 2 9 .4 3 S 6 4 °2 8 '5 0 "W 233.82R=1262.00Δ=10°36'56"137.75S53°51'54"W 3 4 2 .9 9 1 5 .3 6 2 0 9 .9 3 92.96R=115.00Δ=46°18'52"156.84N18°06'21"E186.37N18°06'21"E19.54 3 6 0 .3 9 N 6 4 °2 5 '1 4 "E 5 5 .9 8 6 1 2 .1 9Δ=34°58'21"R=120.0073.25138.75N53°04'43"E2 8 4 .0 5 LOT 1, BLOCK 2 S 3 7 ° 1 5'4 9 " E 1 4 3.0 2 S49°04'16"E 173.94 6060M IN N E S O T A 7 S E R V IC E R O A D SERVICEROAD505050 50 MINNESOTA7D R A IN A G E &U T IL IT Y E A S E M E N T 51010 10 1 0 1 0 WO O D D A L E A V E. S.29.006 0 0 .0 0 30501 4 CenterlineofspurtrackC e n te rlin e o fC h ic a g o a n d N o rth W e ste rn T ra n sp o rta tio n C o m p a n y (fo rm a lly M in n e a p o lisa n d S tL o u is R a ilw a y C o m p a n y )sp u rtra c k IC C N o .2 5 3 N orth e asterly lin e of Wo o d D ale A v e n u e (for m ally k n o w n a s Ple asa nt A v e n u e)50 50166.50Westerly line of Lot 6,Block 23, ST LOUIS PARKEXCEPTIO N35.00194 .0 0 168.402 7 3 .4 4 131.79122.40R=120.00Δ=58°26'30"30.99218.40R=180.00Δ=69°31'00"N 55°44'40"E212.27LOT 1, BLOCK 1 O U T L O T A MATCH LINE MATCH LINE 5 141.49N01°03'00"EN 6 4 °2 1 '4 5 "E 3 6 6 .5 8 65.34S01°00'38"W1 6 7 .7 5 1 9 8 .8 3 S o u th e rly rig h to fw a y o fth e C a n a d ia n P a c ific R a ilro a d ,su c c e ss o rto t h e C h ic a g o ,M ilw a u k e e R a ilw a y a s s h o w n o n th e P la to fR E A R R A N G E M E N T O F S T L O U IS P A R K East line of Lot 7, Block 25, REARRANGEMENT OF ST 2 5 2 .7 3 S 6 5 °2 1 '1 4 "W5 23.682 5 1 .1 4 N 6 3 °3 9 '2 3 "E 9 2 .9 0 N 6 4 °2 4 '0 0 "E 4 .7 3 -S 2 4 °3 5 '3 2 "E 5 7 .3 5 S 2 4 °3 5 '3 2 "E 1 6 0 .1 2 N 6 4 °1 9 '0 5 "E 10D R A IN A G E &U T IL IT Y E A S E M E N T D R A IN A G E &U T IL IT Y E A S E M E N T 101010 10 1051 9 9 .0 0 PLUG INSCRIBED WITH 43133IRON MONUMENT SET WITH PLASTICDENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND 40 800 Horizontal Scale In Feet PLACE SEC. 16, TWP. 117, RNG. 16 (NOT TO SCALE) BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED1010 SHOWN THUS: DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS (NOT TO SCALE) SITE BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 24 WHICH IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF SOUTH 00 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 49 SECONDS WEST. R.T. DOC. NO. _______________________ C.R. DOC. NO. _______________________ SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETSWestquartercornerofSec.6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24West line of the SouthwestQuarter of Sec. 6, Twp. 28North, Rng. 24 SEC. 6, TWP. 028, RNG. 24 (NOT TO SCALE)Southwest corner of Sec. 6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24 5 2 6 .9 0 S 6 5 °5 2 '1 5 "W 80.00S00°14'49"W2062.14N00°14'49"E5 2 6 .9 0 S 6 5 °5 2 '1 5 "W S00°14'49"W315.51City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 59 6 6 8 .1 7 S64 °2 1 '4 5 "W 132.21S55°39'42"W 2 8 0 .4 6 S64 °2 1 '4 5 "W 1001008080S o u th w e ste rly co rn e ro fA U D IT O R 'S S U B D IV IS IO N N U M B E R 2 4 9 (5 0 .0 0 fe e tn o rth w e s te rly fro m c e n te rlin e o fs o u th b o u n d m a in tra c k ,n o w a b a n d o n e d )a r y li neDI VI SI ONN 6 4 °2 1 '4 5 "E 1 8 5 .2 7 52.75S01°03'00"W1 6 2 .7 1 S 6 5 °5 2 '1 5 "W 1 8 . 2 3 N 8 8 ° 5 8'3 5 "W37.71S65°21'14"W4 .1 7 N 0 0 ° 5 7'3 3 " E 286.67S00°57'33"W256.56 N88°58'35"W 1 7 5 . 7 7 N 3 9 ° 0 0'5 7 "WN 6 4 °1 7'5 9 "E 4 5 1 .5 0 79.00 8 6 .4 7 2 6.0 29.01 4 8.1 5 264.70 4 4 0 .7 1 26.00262610.510.5260.671 0.7 935 3 6 .3 9 2 4 4 .0 7 112.671 8 .1 0 S 4 1 °3 1 '4 1 "E 3 6 0 .3 9 N 6 4 °2 5 '1 4 "E 5 5 .9 8 6 1 2 .1 9 S 3 7 ° 1 5'4 9 " E 1 4 3.0 2 S49°04'16"E 173.94 6060M IN N E S O T A 7 S E R V IC E R O A D 36TH STREET WEST 1 0 WO O D D A L E A V E. S. 5 5 6 0 0 .0 0 30501 4 CenterlineofspurtrackC e n te rlin e o fC h ica g o a n d N o rth W e ste rn T ra n sp o rta tio n C o m p a n y (fo rm a lly M in n e a p o lisa n d S tL o u isR a ilw a y C o m p a n y )sp u rtra ck IC C N o .2 5 3 N orth e asterly lin e of Wo o d D ale A v e n u e (for m ally k n o w n a s Ple asa nt A v e n u e)5050218.40R=180.00Δ=69°31'00"O U T L O T A MATCH LINE MATCH LINE 5LOT 1, BLOCK 3 3 6 1 .9 7 S 6 5 °5 2 '5 1 "W N01°03'00"E54.70N 6 4 °2 1 '4 5 "E 3 6 6 .5 8 65.34S01°00'38"W6 5 ° 6 5 ° 6 ° 6 5 ° 1 6 5 .6 2 1 6 7 .7 5 1 9 8 .8 3 1 9 6 .3 5 60.46N01°00'38"EOUTLOT B OUTLOT C S o u th e rly rig h to fw a y o fth e C a n a d ia n P a cific R a ilro a d ,su c c e sso rto th e C h ic a g o ,M ilw a u k e e R a ilw a y a s sh o w n o n th e P la to fR E A R R A N G E M E N T O F S T L O U IS P A R K East line of Lot 7, Block 25, REARRANGEMENT OF ST LOUIS PARK S 6 5 °2 1 '1 4 "W 1 8 3 .1 4 20.57N24°38'46"W2 5 2 .7 3 S 6 5 °2 1 '1 4 "W 1 1 9 .7 5 S 6 4 °2 6 '2 1 "W 6.67 89.59533.43S84°18'46"E 23.682 5 1 .1 4 N 6 3 °3 9 '2 3 "E 4.64 N25°35'56"W 9 2 .9 0 N 6 4 °2 4 '0 0 "E 4 .7 3 -S 2 4 °3 5 '3 2 "E 5 7 .3 5 S 2 4 °3 5 '3 2 "E 1 6 0 .1 2 N 6 4 °1 9 '0 5 "E 10101010D R A IN A G E &U T IL IT Y E A S E M E N T D R A IN A G E &U T IL IT Y E A S E M E N T PLACE R.T. DOC. NO. _______________________ C.R. DOC. NO. _______________________ SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS 5 2 6 .9 0 S 6 5 °5 2 '1 5 "W West quarter corner of Sec. 6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24West line of the SouthwestQuarterofSec.6,Twp.28North, Rng. 242062.14N00°14'49"ESouthwest corner of Sec. 6,Twp. 28 North, Rng. 24492.57S00°14'49"W80.00S00°14'49"WSEC. 16, TWP. 117, RNG. 16 (NOT TO SCALE) SITE SEC. 6, TWP. 028, RNG. 24 (NOT TO SCALE) PLUG INSCRIBED WITH 43133IRON MONUMENT SET WITH PLASTICDENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND 40 800 Horizontal Scale In Feet BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED1010 SHOWN THUS: DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS (NOT TO SCALE) BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 24 WHICH IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF SOUTH 00 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 49 SECONDS WEST. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 60 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 3/7/2017 5:35:46 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-02_Site_danm.rvtG001 COVER SHEETPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 SHT NO SHEET NAME CIVIL C001 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS C003 TREE REMOVALS AND PRESERVATION PLAN C101 SITE PLAN-OVERALL C102 SITE PLAN-NORTHWEST C103 SITE PLAN-NORTHEAST C104 SITE PLAN-SOUTH C201 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN C301 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN - OVERALL C401 SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN C402 STORM SEWER PLAN C801 SITE DETAILS C802 SITE DETAILS C901 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILS C902 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILS C903 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK STANDARD DETAILS C1001 MnDOT STANDARD PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP DETAILS C1002 MnDOT STANDARD PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP DETAILS LANDSCAPE L101 PLANTING PLAN-OVERALL L102 PLANTING PLAN-NORTHWEST L103 PLANTING PLAN-NORTHEAST L104 PLANTING PLAN-SOUTH L801 PLANTING DETAILS ELECTRICAL E101 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN-OVERALL al V302 ALTA Survey V101 PRELIMINARY PLAT V102 PRELIMINARY PLAT V103 PRELIMINARY PLAT V301 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY SHT NO SHEET NAME GENERAL G001 COVER SHEET S001 SITE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL A101 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANS A102 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANS A103 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANS A104 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANS A105 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANS A106 NORTH BLDG ELEVATIONS A107 NORTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONS A201 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A202 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A203 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A204 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A205 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A206 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A207 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A208 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A209 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANS A210 SOUTH BLDG ELEVATIONS A211 HOTEL ELEVATIONS A212 SOUTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONS A301 E-GEN FLOOR PLANS A302 E-GEN FLOOR PLANS A303 E-GEN ELEVATIONS A401 3D VIEW A501 ILLUSTRATIVE SECTIONS A502 TECHNICAL SECTIONS GENERAL G002 LEGEND G003 GENERAL NOTES PLACE, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 61 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 62 1 A502 1 A502 A106 1 A106 2 A106 4 A106 6 A106 3 A106 5 EXERCISE 894 SF SOUND PROOF ROOM 606 SF STORAGE 6639 SF BIKE STORAGE 2650 SF 15 10 23 29 14 8 MECH 486 SF VAN ELEC CAR CHARGING STATION (TYP) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STORAGE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS BIKE STORAGE GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 3:04:17 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA101 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A101 1 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 63 SEE LANDSCAPE DWG’S FOR ALL EXTERIOR SPACES/AREAS PROPERTY LINE LAUNDRY 337 SF MAKER SPACE 2624 SF RETAIL 2484 SF LOBBY MAIL MECH 1401 SF MECH 1410 SF TRASH 660 SF 1 A502 1 A502 A106 1 A106 2 A106 4 A106 6 A106 3 A106 5 SETBACK LINE SEE LANDSCAPE DWG’S FOR ALL EXTERIOR SPACES/AREAS PROPERTY LINE LAUNDRY 337 SF MAKER SPACE 2624 SF RETAIL 2484 SF LOBBY MAIL MECH 1401 SF MECH 1410 SF TRASH 660 SF SETBACK LINE SHARED TOILETS HCRRA SETBACK LINE3' - 0" 2 ' - 0 " 2 ' - 0 "4' - 0"HCRRA SETBACK LINE LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STORAGE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS BIKE STORAGE GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 3/7/2017 2:01:42 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-02_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA102 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A102 1 GROUND/1ST FLOOR PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 64 MECH 338 SF LAUNDRY 198 SF MECH 408 SF 1 A502 1 A502 OUTDOOR PATIO A106 1 A106 2 A106 4 A106 6 A106 3 A106 5 MECH 338 SF LAUNDRY 198 SF MECH 408 SF ROOF DECK 735 SF OUTDOOR PATIO GREEN ROOF 1,767 SF 3' - 0" 2 ' - 0 "4' - 0"2 ' - 0 " ROOF DECK 735 SF GREEN ROOF 1,767 SF LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STORAGE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS BIKE STORAGE GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 3/7/2017 2:01:56 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-02_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA103 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A103 1 2ND FLOOR PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 65 LAUNDRY 198 SF MECH 408 SF 1 A502 1 A502 A106 1 A106 2 A106 4 A106 6 A106 3 A106 5 OUTDOOR PATIO MECH 338 SF MECH 408 SF LAUNDRY 198 SF 3' - 0"4' - 0" 2 ' - 0 " 2 ' - 0 " LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STORAGE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS BIKE STORAGE GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 3/7/2017 2:02:11 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-02_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA104 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A104 1 3RD - 5TH FLOOR PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 66 A108 1 A108 2 A108 4 A108 6 A108 3 A108 5 MECH SCREEN DOAS UNIT ROOF HATCH MECH SCREEN (SEE DETAIL 2 ON THIS SHEET) GREEN ROOF DIRECT OUTSIDE AIR SYSTEM (DOAS) STAIR ROOF HATCH ACCESS (TYP) SOLAR PANELS (TYP) ELEVATOR OVERRUN SERVICE WALKING SYSTEM 3’ – 0” WIDE MINIMUM 2 ' - 0 "4' - 0" 2 ' - 0 "3' - 0" WIND TURBINE LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STORAGE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS BIKE STORAGE GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD ART LIGHT AND DISPLAY SYSTEM LOCATION Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 4/7/2017 12:38:52 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Rev-03_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA107 NORTH BLDG FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017/04/05 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 04/05/2017 PUD REVISION 03 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A107 1 ROOF PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE TYP ROOF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREEN2 NOT TO SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 67 'A' SOUTH ELEVATION PLACE ST.LOUIS PARKDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN tel 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-04-05 DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE PUD Submission MD1101500 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 04/05/2017 PUD REVISION 03 A106 NORTH BLDG ELEVATIONS 1 1/16" = 1' - 0"A106 1ST 0' 2ND 13'-2" 3RD 23'-10" 4TH FLR 34'-6" 5TH FLR 45'-2" ROOF 56'-8" BSMNT. -11'-2" T.O. PARAPET 60'-2" EXIST GRADE VTAC GRILLE (TYP)GREEN WALL (TYP) PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP)FORESHORTENED ELEVATION ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) 4' WALL DEVIATION SOLAR PANELS WIND TURBINE DOAS UNIT SCREEN (T VTAC GRILLE (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP)ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) 2' WALL DEVIATION WIND TURBINE BIKE SHOP0000 0000 ENTRYEXIT NORTH PLACE GARAGE RAMP DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) VTAC GRILLE (TYP) PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) FORESHORTENED ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS (TYP) ELEVATION SOLAR PANELS WIND TURBINE BIKE SHOP 00000000 1ST FLR 0' 2ND FLR 13'-2" 3RD FLR 23'-10" 4TH FLR 34'-6" 5TH FLR 45'-2" RF. 56'-8" BSMNT. -11'-2" T.O. PRPT. 60'-2" BIKE SHOPBIKE SHOPBKESOP 0000000000000000000 SOLAR PANELS DOAS (DEDICATED OUTDOOR AIR SYSTEM) UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) VTAC GRILLE (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) FORESHORTENED ELEVATION 3' WALL DEVIATION 2' WALL DEVIATION EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS (TYP) WIND TURBINE 'B' WEST ELEVATION 1/16" = 1' - 0" 5 A106 'D' EAST ELEVATION3 1/16" = 1' - 0"A106 'C' NORTH ELEVATION6 1/16" = 1' - 0"A106 VTAC GRILLE (TYP) EXIST GRADE PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) 'F' URBAN FOREST WEST FACING ELEVATION4 1/16" = 1' - 0"A106 DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) EXIST GRADE VTAC GRILLE (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) FORE- SHORTENED ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) ELEVATION 'E' URBAN FOREST EAST FACING ELEVATION2 1/16" = 1' - 0"A106 8'16'32' 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0' ELEVATIONS LEGEND FIRST FLOOR 0' (T.O. PODIUM) SECOND FLOOR 13'-2" THIRD FLOOR 23'-10" FOURTH FLOOR 34'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 45'-2" BASEMENT -11'-2"11'-2"13'-2"10'-8"10'-8"10'-8"11'-6"ROOF 56'-8" T.O. PARAPET 60'-2"3'-6"FIRST FLOOR 0' (T.O. PODIUM) SECOND FLOOR 13'-2" THIRD FLOOR 23'-10" FOURTH FLOOR 34'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 45'-2" BASEMENT -11'-2"11'-2"13'-2"10'-8"10'-8"10'-8"11'-6"ROOF 56'-8" T.O. PARAPET 60'-2"3'-6"D C1 E F ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA BUILDING SIGNAGE AREA ART & BALCONY LIGHT EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT EXT ENTRY LIGHT LEGEND 1. SEE OTHER SUBMITTED SIGNAGE PACKAGE FOR ACTUAL HEIGHT AND AREA OF ALL BUILDING SIGNAGE. 2. SEE SUBMITTED DOCUMENT "POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVING ARTS IN PLACE COMMUNITIES", SPECIFICALLY THE "ARCHITECTURAL IMPLICATIONS" SHEET, FOR FURTHER DETAILS ON ARTWORK DISPLAY AREAS ON ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON THIS SHEET. NOTES FACES IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TRANSPARENT SURFACE ANALYSIS (SEE SHEET A211) A1 A2 A3 A4 B1 B2 B3 C2 C3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 68 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 1:18:06 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA107 NORTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE SOUTH ELEVATION - SUMMER VIEW1 A107 1/16" = 1' - 0" SOUTH ELEVATION - WINTER VIEW2 A107 1/16" = 1' - 0" City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 69 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 70 0 REF REF REF REF REFUP UP UP UP UP 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 COFFEE HOUSE 1,173 SF MECH & TRASH 531 SF BAR/KITCHEN CAFE 4,644 SF HOTEL LOBBY 2,811 SF HOTEL GROUND FLOOR GROSS 9,791 SF MECH & TRASH 531 SF CO-WORKING 1,571 SF RES. GROUND FLOOR GROSS 7,675 SF TRASH 263 SF MAIL LOBBY L/W TYPE II STOREFRONT 250 SF MECH 255 SF UP DN UP DN RETAIL 185 SF L/W TYPE II STOREFRONT 250 SF L/W TYPE II STOREFRONT 252 SF L/W TYPE II STOREFRONT 300 SF L/W TYPE II STOREFRONT 250 SF VAN ELEC CAR CHARGING STATION (TYP) 6 4 10 12 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL/PARKING LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 3/7/2017 2:02:14 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-02_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA202 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A202 1 GROUND/1ST FLOOR PLAN N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 71 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 UP DN UP 7 4 11 12 18 2 OPEN TO BELOW HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL/PARKING LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:52:57 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA203 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A203 1 PARTIAL PARKING PLAN/ LIVE/WORK MEZZANINE FLOOR PLANS NOTE: THIS DWG REPRESENTS THE PARKING LEVEL INTERSTITIAL SPACE BETWEEN BUILDING FLOORS 1 AND 2 N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 72 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 COMMONS 838 SF COMMONS 4,644 SF MECH 187 SF CO-WORKING 2,415 SF MECH 740 SF 7 4 11 15 18 3 2 OPEN TO BELOW DN UP HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL/PARKING LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:53:01 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA204 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A204 1 2ND FLOOR PLANS N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 73 MECHLAUNDRY 173 SF MECH 187 SF 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 MECH 187 SF MECHLAUNDRY 173 SF PARKING BELOW HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:53:03 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA205 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A205 1 3RD FLOOR PLANS N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 74 MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF MECH 187 SF 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL MEETING/PERFORMANCE /GALLERY SPACE 1,115 SF LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:53:06 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA206 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A206 1 4TH FLOOR PLANS N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 75 MECH 187 SF MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 MECH 187 SF MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF MECH 187 SF ROOF DECK MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:53:10 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA207 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A207 1 5TH FLOOR PLANS N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 76 MECH MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF 2 A502 2 A502 3 A502 3 A502 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 MECH MECH 321 SF LAUNDRY 173 SF HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 2:53:13 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA208 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 1/16" = 1'-0"A208 1 6TH FLOOR PLANS N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 77 LEGEND RESIDENTIAL STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - AFFORDABLE LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE II DWELLING UNITS - AFFORDABLE RETAIL MAKER/CO-WORKING STAIR/ELEV CORE CIRCULATION SPACE COMMONS MECH/TRASH CAFE DOUBLE ROOM KING ROOM EXTENDED STAY SUITE PRESIDENTIAL SUITE STORAGE STORAGE HOTEL LIVE/WORK UNITS TYPE I - MARKET DWELLING UNITS - MARKET BIKE STORAGE ADDITIONAL SPACE GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS GREEN/SOD ROOF BIKE PARKING HOR FLR MTD BIKE PARKING VERT WALL MTD ART LIGHT AND DISPLAY SYSTEM LOCATION GREEN ROOF/SOLAR PANELS A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A211 1 A211 2 A211 3 A2114 GREEN ROOF GREEN ROOF STAIR ROOF HATCH ACCESS (TYP) SOLAR PANELS (TYP) ELEVATOR OVERRUN SERVICE WALKING SYSTEM 3’ – 0” WIDE MINIMUM ROOF ACCESS HATCH MECH SCREEN DIRECT OUTSIDE AIR SYSTEM (DOAS) UNIT MECH SCREEN DOAS UNIT ROOF ACCESS HATCH ELEVATOR OVERRUN GARAGE BELOW HOTEL BRIDGE RESIDENTIAL Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 4/5/2017 2:57:50 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-03_Site_shqipe@msrdesign.com.rvtA209 SOUTH BLDG HOTEL & RESIDENTIAL FLOOR PLANSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017/04/05 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 04/05/2017 PUD REVISION 03 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 N 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 1/16" = 1'-0"A209 1 ROOF PLAN City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 78 'A' SOUTH BUILDING SOUTH ELEVATION PLACE ST.LOUIS PARKDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN tel 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE PUD Submission MD1101500 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 A210 SOUTH BLDG ELEVATIONS 1 1/16" = 1' - 0"A210 FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 17'-0" THIRD FLOOR 27'-0" (T.O. PODIUM) FOURTH FLOOR 38'-8" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-4" SIXTH FLOOR 62'-0" ROOF 73'-8"17'-0"10'-0"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"BASEMENT -15'-0"15'-0"CAFE NAME SOUTH PLACE 0000 L/W SIGNAGE 0000 L/W SIGNAGE 0000 L/W SIGNAGE 0000 0000 0000 T.O. PARAPET 78'-8"5'-0"DOAS (DEDICATED OUTDOOR AIR SYSTEM) UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) GREEN WALL (TYP)FORESHORTENED EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS (TYP)VTAC GRILLE (TYP)ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP)ELEVATION 'D' SOUTH BUILDING EAST ELEVATION4 1/16" = 1' - 0"A210 'C' SOUTH BUILDING NORTH ELEVATION3 1/16" = 1' - 0"A210 FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 17'-0" THIRD FLOOR 27'-0" (T.O. PODIUM) FOURTH FLOOR 38'-8" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-4" SIXTH FLOOR 62'-0" ROOF 73'-8"17'-0"10'-0"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"BASEMENT -15'-0"15'-0"T.O. PARAPET 78'-8"5'-0"ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP)METAL PARKING SCREEN (TYP)METAL ARTWORK DISPLAY PANEL (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 17'-0" THIRD FLOOR 27'-0" (T.O. PODIUM) FOURTH FLOOR 38'-8" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-4" SIXTH FLOOR 62'-0" ROOF 73'-8"17'-0"10'-0"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"BASEMENT -15'-0"15'-0"0000COWORKING HUBL/W SIGNAGE 0000 L/W SIGNAGE 0000 FUTURE LIGHT RAIL STATION ACCESS ROAD T.O. PARAPET 78'-8"5'-0"DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) VTAC GRILLE (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) FORESHORTENED ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS (TYP)ELEVATION FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 17'-0" THIRD FLOOR 27'-0" (T.O. PODIUM) FOURTH FLOOR 38'-8" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-4" SIXTH FLOOR 62'-0" ROOF 73'-8"17'-0"10'-0"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"BASEMENT -15'-0"15'-0"ENTRYEXIT T.O. PARAPET 78'-8"5'-0"ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP)METAL PARKING SCREEN (TYP)METAL ARTWORK DISPLAY PANEL (TYP) ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) NICHIHA GUNSMOKE RIBBED METALLIC PANEL (TYP) ARTWORK & BALCONY LIGHTING (TYP) ALUMINUM BALCONY COLOR TO MATCH WINDOW FRAMES (TYP) 'B' SOUTH BUILDING WEST ELEVATION2 1/16" = 1' - 0"A210 8'16'32' 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0' A B C1 D2 ELEVATIONS LEGEND ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA BUILDING SIGNAGE AREA ART & BALCONY LIGHT EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT EXT ENTRY LIGHT LEGEND 1. SEE OTHER SUBMITTED SIGNAGE PACKAGE FOR ACTUAL HEIGHT AND AREA OF ALL BUILDING SIGNAGE. 2. SEE SUBMITTED DOCUMENT "POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVING ARTS IN PLACE COMMUNITIES", SPECIFICALLY THE "ARCHITECTURAL IMPLICATIONS" SHEET, FOR FURTHER DETAILS ON ARTWORK DISPLAY AREAS ON ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON THIS SHEET. NOTES FACES IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TRANSPARENT SURFACE ANALYSIS (SEE SHEET A211) C2 D1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 79 'B' SOUTHWEST ELEVATION PLACE ST.LOUIS PARKDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN tel 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-03-07 DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE PUD Submission MD1101500 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 A211 HOTEL ELEVATIONS 1 1/16" = 1' - 0"A211 'D' NORTHEAST ELEVATION3 1/16" = 1' - 0"A211 'F' EAST ELEVATION4 1/16" = 1' - 0"A211 FAIRFIELD MARRIOT0000 ELEVATION FIRST FLOOR (UPR) 3' SECOND FLOOR 18' (T.O. PODIUM) THIRD FLOOR 28'-9" FOURTH FLOOR 39'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-3" SIXTH FLOOR 61'-0" FIRST FLOOR (LWR) 0'12'-0"BASEMENT -12'3'-0"15'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"11'-3"ROOF 72'-3" T.O. PARAPET 75'-9"3'-6"FORESHORTENED NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP)BUILDING NUMBERS DOAS (DEDICATED OUTDOOR AIR SYSTEM) UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS (TYP) EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) COFFEE SHOP 0000 FIRST FLOOR (UPR) 3' SECOND FLOOR 18' (T.O. PODIUM) THIRD FLOOR 28'-9" FOURTH FLOOR 39'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-3" SIXTH FLOOR 61'-0" FIRST FLOOR (LWR) 0'12'-0"BASEMENT -12'3'-0"15'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"11'-3"ROOF 72'-3" T.O. PARAPET 75'-9"3'-6"FORESHORTENED ELEVATION DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) FAIRFIELD SIGNAGE EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) COFFEE SHOP FAIRFIELD MARRIOT FIRST FLOOR (UPR) 3' SECOND FLOOR 18' (T.O. PODIUM) THIRD FLOOR 28'-9" FOURTH FLOOR 39'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-3" SIXTH FLOOR 61'-0" FIRST FLOOR (LWR) 0'12'-0"BASEMENT -12'3'-0"15'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"11'-3"ROOF 72'-3" T.O. PARAPET 75'-9"3'-6"R) FORESHORTENED ELEVATION DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) CAFE NAME ELEVATION FIRST FLOOR (UPR) 3' SECOND FLOOR 18' (T.O. PODIUM) THIRD FLOOR 28'-9" FOURTH FLOOR 39'-6" FIFTH FLOOR 50'-3" SIXTH FLOOR 61'-0" ROOF 72'-3" FIRST FLOOR (LWR) 0'12'-0"BASEMENT -12'3'-0"15'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"11'-3"T.O. PARAPET 75'-9"3'-6"ENDURAMAX BRICK (TYP) FORESHORTENED ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA (TYP) ARTWORK LIGHTING (TYP) EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT (TYP) DOAS UNIT METAL SCREEN (TYP) NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHT (TYP) 'C' NORTHWEST ELEVATION2 1/16" = 1' - 0"A211 8'16'32' 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0' A ELEVATIONS LEGEND B C D1 E F G ARTWORK DISPLAY AREA BUILDING SIGNAGE AREA ART & BALCONY LIGHT EXT CANOPY MOUNTED CYLINDER DOWNLIGHT EXT ENTRY LIGHT LEGEND 1. SEE OTHER SUBMITTED SIGNAGE PACKAGE FOR ACTUAL HEIGHT AND AREA OF ALL BUILDING SIGNAGE. 2. SEE SUBMITTED DOCUMENT "POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIVING ARTS IN PLACE COMMUNITIES", SPECIFICALLY THE "ARCHITECTURAL IMPLICATIONS" SHEET, FOR FURTHER DETAILS ON ARTWORK DISPLAY AREAS ON ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON THIS SHEET. NOTES FACES IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TRANSPARENT SURFACE ANALYSIS (SEE SHEET A211) D2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 80 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 1:18:07 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA212 SOUTH BUILDING ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATIONSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 0 8 3216 1/16" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE SOUTH ELEVATION - SUMMER RENDER1 A212 1/16" = 1' - 0" SOUTH ELEVATION - WINTER RENDER2 A212 1/16" = 1' - 0" City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 81 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 82 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 83 PLACE ST.LOUIS PARKDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN tel 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-04-05 DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE PUD Submission MD1101500 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 03/07/2017 PUD RESPONSE 02 DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 04/05/2017 PUD REVISION 03 A303 E-GEN ELEVATIONS 'C' NORTH ELEVATION1 1/8" = 1' - 0"A303 T.O.CO-GEN FLUE 39'-3" 0000 5 A303 FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 10'-0" T.O.GREENHOUSE 19'-5" CISTERN -6' RAINWATER CATCHMENT CISTERN RAINWATER CATCHMENT CISTERN METAL PANEL SIDING NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK FLUE GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE FLUE SOLAR PANEL LOC'S BREAK OUT PANEL DOWNSPOUT (TYP) BUILDING ADDRESS SIGNAGE GLASS PANEL OVERHEAD DOOR (TYP) EXT ENTRY LIGHTOVERHEAD DOOR FIRST FLOOR 0' SECOND FLOOR 10'-0" T.O.GREENHOUSE 19'-5" T.O.CO-GEN FLUE 39'-3" CISTERN -6' RAINWATER CATCHMENT CISTERN FLUE GREENHOUSE METAL PANEL SIDING METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF FLUE SOLAR PANEL LOC'S NICHIHA GRAY ARCHITECTURAL BLOCK DOWNSPOUT (TYP) CHANNEL GLASS WALL SYST AND WINDOWS 'A' SOUTH ELEVATION2 1/8" = 1' - 0"A303 'D' EAST ELEVATION3 1/8" = 1' - 0"A303 4'8'16' 1/8" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0' 'B' WEST ELEVATION4 1/8" = 1' - 0"A303 ELEVATIONS LEGEND A B C D TYPICAL CHANNEL GLASS WALL SYSTEM DETAIL5 NOT TO SCALEA303 A A303 A A303 B A303 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 84 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 3:29:16 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA401 3D VIEWPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 VIEW TO SOUTH BUILDINGS FROM 36TH STREET1 A401 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 85 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.tel DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2/24/2017 3:10:42 PMC:\Projects\PLACE_PUD-Resp-01_Site_natalya@msrdesign.com.rvtA501 ILLUSTRATIVE SECTIONSPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 PUD Submission MD1101500 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 86 NORTH BUILDING TYPICAL SECTION PLACE ST.LOUIS PARKDrawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN tel 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 309 3889 2017-02-27 DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO. PROJECT PHASE PUD Submission MD1101500 Drawing 2017 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. ISSUE Signature: Print Names: Date:License No: 02/24/2017 PUD RESPONSE DATEMARK DESCRIPTION tel 2335 Highway 36 West Street St. Paul, MN 55113-3819 651 604 4861 A502 SECTIONS 1 1/8" = 1' - 0"A301 SOUTH HOTEL TYP SECTION AT LOBBY2 1/8" = 1' - 0"A301 SOUTH BLDG TYP SECTION4 1/8" = 1' - 0"A301 4'8'16' 1/8" = 1' - 0" GRAPHIC SCALE 0'60'-2"56'-8"10'-8"11'-6"10'-8"10'-8"13'-2"8'-3"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"9'-11"TOP OF PARAPET 24" WOOD TRUSS TYPICAL SPAN FROM HALLWAY TO OUTSIDE BEARING WALL 2X6 2 HOUR RATED PANELIZED WOOD WALL SYSTEM WITH 5" SPRAY FOAM 58" INTERIOR GYP SHEATHING, 58" DENSGLASS EXT SHEATHING, FLUID APPLIED WRB, 1 12" GRAPHITE EPS INSULATION WITH CLIPS, 58" NICHIHA RAINSCREEN UP TO 8" TAPERED RIGID INSULATION WITH MIN 4" RIGID INSULATION AT CENTER ROOF DRAINS WHITE 60 MIL TPO ON COVER BOARD 18" WOOD TRUSS TYPICAL SPANNING INTERIOR DEMISING WALL TO INTERIOR DEMISING WALL WITH 1" GYP TOPPING AND ACOUSTIMAT . TRUSSES FILLED WITH CHOPPED FIBERGLASS INSULATION TYPICAL 8' CEILING IN HALLWAYS RESERVED FOR DOAS DUCTWORK SYSTEM IN CORRIDOR ON 2X8 JOISTS SPANNING ON HALLWAY WALLS 2X6 2 HOUR RATED PANELIZED WOOD WALL SYSTEM WITH 5" SPRAY FOAM 58" INTERIOR GYP SHEATHING, 58" DENSGLASS EXT SHEATHING, FLUID APPLIED WRB, 2" EPS INSULATION WITH CLIPS, 2 14" ENDURAMAX BRICK RAINSCREEN TOP OF ROOF ROOF BEARING FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR GRADE 10'-9"18'-0"11'-3"9'-0"TOP OF ROOF SIXTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"75'-9"72'-3"10'-9"15'-0"11'-3"9'-0"72'-9"69'-3"TOP OF ROOF SIXTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"9'-0"10'-9"10'-9"10'-9"7'-6"7'-6"9'-0"7'-6"5'-0"9'-0"6'-10"7'-6"15'-0"11'-8"27'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"77'-2"73'-8"TOP OF ROOF SIXTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 75'-9"72'-3"TOP OF ROOF SIXTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"7'-6"7'-6"9'-0"7'-6"2'-11"9'-0"7'-5"9'-0"7'-5"9'-0"7'-5"9'-0"7'-6"25'-4"8'-10"7'-4 3/4"7'-4 7/8"7'-5"8'-10 3/4"7'-6"7'-6"15'-0"11'-8"27'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"77'-2"73'-8"TOP OF ROOF SIXTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR FOURTH FLOOR THIRD FLOOR SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"SOUTH BLDG TYP SECTION5 1/8" = 1' - 0"A301 SOUTH HOTEL TYP SECTION AT CAFE3 1/8" = 1' - 0"A301 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 87 GPS CONTROL POINT JUDICIAL LAND MONUMENT MONUMENT COMPUTED ROW MONUMENT ROW MARKER POST SECTION CORNER TRAVERSE CONTROL POINT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC SYMBOLS SURVEY LINES FM FM FM >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> l l l l l l l l l l l l l EXISTING UTILITY LINES SURVEY SYMBOLS BACKSIGHT CONTROL POINT MONUMENT IRON FOUND MONUMENT IRON SET FM FM FM >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> l l l l l l l l l l l l l PROPOSED UTILITY LINES HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS CONCRETE GRAVEL HATCH PATTERNS CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER GRADING INFORMATION 952 950 952 950 BENCH MARK LOCATION 1:4 AERIAL CONTROL POINT SAND BEDROCK >>>> GROUND BITUMINOUS FORCE MAIN SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SERVICE STORM SEWER DRAINTILE STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE PIPE CASING FM FM FM >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> l l l l l l l l l l l l l FUTURE UTILITY LINES >>>> EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC LINES CTV-A CTV-A CTV-A CTV-B CTV-B CTV-B CTV-C CTV-C CTV-C CTV-D CTV-D CTV-D FO-A FO-A FO-A FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-C FO-C FO-C FO-D FO-D FO-D E-A E-A E-A E-B E-B E-B E-C E-C E-C E-D E-D E-D G-A G-A G-A G-B G-B G-B G-C G-C G-C G-D G-D G-D XXXXXXXXXEXISTING PRIVATE UTILITY LINES STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER BEEHIVE CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER FLARED END SECTION CURB BOX FIRE HYDRANT MANHOLE WATER REDUCER VALVE PROPOSED TOPOGRAPHIC SYMBOLS SANITARY CLEANOUT BOLLARD SANITARY OR STORM LIFT STATION RIP RAP OHP OHP OHP C-A C-A C-A C-B C-B C-B C-C C-C C-C C-D C-D C-D DRAINAGE FLOW BASKETBALL POST BENCH BUSH DECIDUOUS CATCH BASIN BEEHIVE CURB BOX CATCH BASIN CONTROL BOX SIGNAL CLEAN OUT (SEWER) SEPTIC DRAIN FIELD DRINKING FOUNTAIN ENERGY DISSIPATER STORM SEWER APRON FLAG POLE FUEL PUMP GRILL HANDICAP SPACE HANDHOLE FIRE HYDRANT LOOP DETECTOR LIGHT YARD MAIL BOX MANHOLE-HEAT MANHOLE-POWER MANHOLE-GAS MANHOLE-SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE-STORM SEWER MANHOLE-COMMUNICATIONS MANHOLE-UNKNOWN METER POWER METER GAS ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON PEDESTAL POWER PEDESTAL COMMUNICATIONS POST INDICATOR VALVE PARKING METER POLE-COMMUNICATIONS POLE-GUY POLE-LIGHT POLE-POWER POLE-UTILITY POST PICNIC TABLE PROPANE TANK SAMPLING WELL ROCK RR SIGNAL CONTROL BOX RR CROSSING GATE RR SIGNAL REGULATION STATION GAS TREE-DECIDUOUS SATELLITE DISH SEPTIC TANK SEPTIC VENT SIGN STAND PIPE GAS SPIGOT WATER SPRINKLER HEAD SPRINKLER VALVE BOX STUMP SERVICE-SANITARY SEWER POINT ON LINE SERVICE-WATER POINT ON LINE TELEPHONE BOOTH TRANSMISSION TOWER ELECTRIC TEST PIT LOC TRANSFORMER POWER TREE DEAD TRASH CAN TRAFFIC SIGNAL VALVE GAS VALVE WETLAND WELL-WATER TREE-CONIFEROUS TREE-FRUIT GUY WIRE LIFT STATION WET WELL LIFT STATION DRY WELL LIFT STATION CONTROL PANEL MANHOLE-WATER BASKETBALL POST BARRICADE PERMANENT BURIAL CONTROL MONUMENT BUILDING LOWEST OPENING COLUMN CULVERT END WELL-MONITORING OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SERVICE-GAS POINT ON LINE SOIL BORING MAIL RELAY BOX INLET (SMALL DIA.) SERVICE-STORM SEWER POINT ON LINE ABBREVIATIONS AD ALGEBRAIC DIFFERENCE BV BUTTERFLY VALVE BVCE BEGIN VERTICAL CURVE ELEVATION BVCS BEGIN VERTICAL CURVE STATION ℄CENTER LINE CL. CLASS CMP CORRUGATED METAL PIPE C.O. CHANGE ORDER DIP DUCTILE IRON PIPE EL/ELEV ELEVATION EVCE END VERTICAL CURVE ELEVATION EVCS END VERTICAL CURVE STATION EX EXISTING FES FLARED END SECTION F/F FACE TO FACE FM FORCE MAIN F.O. FIELD ORDER G GROUND GV GATE VALVE GTD GRADE TO DRAIN HP HIGH POINT HWL HIGH WATER LEVEL INV INVERT K CURVE COEFFICIENT LP LOW POINT MH MANHOLE NTS NOT TO SCALE NWL NORMAL WATER LEVEL P PAVEMENT PC POINT OF CURVE ⅊PROPERTY LINE PPVC PERFORATED POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE R RADIUS RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE R/W RIGHT-OF-WAY SAN SANITARY SEWER STRM STORM SEWER SS STORM SEWER STRUCTURE STA STATION TC TOP OF CURB TCE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT TNH TOP NUT HYDRANT TYP TYPICAL WM WATER MAIN RETAINING WALL FENCE - BARBED WIRE FENCE - CHAIN LINK FENCE - DECORATIVE FENCE - STOCKADE FENCE - WOOD FENCE - ELECTRIC GUARD RAIL TREE LINE WETLAND CABLE TV QUALITY LEVEL D CABLE TV QUALITY LEVEL C CABLE TV QUALITY LEVEL B CABLE TV QUALITY LEVEL A FIBER OPTIC QUALITY LEVEL D FIBER OPTIC QUALITY LEVEL C FIBER OPTIC QUALITY LEVEL B FIBER OPTIC QUALITY LEVEL A POWER QUALITY LEVEL D POWER QUALITY LEVEL C POWER QUALITY LEVEL B POWER QUALITY LEVEL A GAS QUALITY LEVEL D GAS QUALITY LEVEL C GAS QUALITY LEVEL B GAS QUALITY LEVEL A COMMUNICATION QUALITY LEVEL D COMMUNICATION QUALITY LEVEL C COMMUNICATION QUALITY LEVEL B COMMUNICATION QUALITY LEVEL A OVERHEAD POWER OVERHEAD COMMUNICATION OVERHEAD UTILITIES 953.53 FORCE MAIN SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SERVICE STORM SEWER DRAINTILE STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE PIPE CASING FORCE MAIN SANITARY SEWER SANITARY SERVICE STORM SEWER WATER MAIN WATER SERVICE BOUNDARY CENTERLINE EXISTING EASEMENT LINE PROPOSED EASEMENT LINE FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY EXISTING LOT LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY SETBACK LINE SECTION LINE QUARTER SECTION LINE SIXTEENTH SECTION LINE EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS / SLOPE LIMITS PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION RISE:RUN (SLOPE) EXISTING PROPOSED FUTURE DEMOLITION OHC OHC OHC OHU OHU OHU MAIL HYDRANT PVMNT MARKER (REFLECTOR) HYDRANT VALVE PEDESTAL CATV AR MANHOLE-AIR RELEASE PEDESTRIAN RAMP POLE-UTILITY SERVICE RESECTED POINT VENT GAS STORM SEWER OUTLET STRUCTURE STORM SEWER OVERFLOW STRUCTURE BOOSTER STATION WATER REDUCER STA:5+67.19 980.87 G002 LEGEND 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 88 SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION: 1. THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION ON THIS PLAN IS SHOWN TO UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LEGEND PROVIDED BELOW. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA. UTILITY DESIGNATIONS ARE SHOWN ON DRAWING G0.02. UTILITY QUALITY LEVELS: LEVEL D - INFORMATION COMES SOLELY FROM EXISTING UTILITY RECORDS. LEVEL C - SURVEYING ABOVE GROUND UTILITY FACILITIES, SUCH AS MANHOLES, VALVE BOXES, ETC; AND CORRELATING THIS INFORMATION WITH EXISTING UTILITY RECORDS. LEVEL B - THE USE OF SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL TECHNIQUES TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE AND HORIZONTAL POSITION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. LEVEL A - THE USE OF NONDESTRUCTIVE DIGGING EQUIPMENT AT HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL POSITION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, AS WELL AS THE TYPE, SIZE, CONDITION, MATERIAL AND OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. 2. PRIVATE UTILITIES ARE SHOWN IN THE LOCATIONS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. PROJECT CONTROL NOTES: 1. ALL COORDINATES ARE HENNEPIN COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM. 2. HORIZONTAL DATUM: HENNEPIN COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD83-1986 ADJUSTMENT, U.S. SURVEY FOOT. 3. VERTICAL DATA: NAVD88 MnDOT Monument “BR 27B65 SE”, GSID Station #91466 Elevation=922.088 4. PIPE LENGTH AND ELEVATIONS IN PROFILES ARE TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE REMOVAL NOTES: 1. ALL PRECAUTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN TO AVOID DAMAGE TO TREES THAT SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE. TREES THAT ARE DAMAGED SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY AND NECESSARY REPAIR MEASURES SHALL BE TAKEN. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE TO UNDERSTAND THE EXTENT OF CLEARING AND GRUBBING THAT WILL BE NECESSARY PRIOR TO BIDDING THE PROJECT. 3. PAVEMENT REMOVALS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANS. ALL PAVEMENTS SHALL BE SAW CUT AT THE REMOVAL LIMITS PROVIDING A CLEAN EDGE. GRADING NOTES: 1. GRADING LIMITS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON THE DRAWINGS. CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE ASSUMED TO BE 1' BEYOND THE GRADING LIMITS. 2. SUBGRADE SHALL PASS PROOF ROLL PER SPECIFICATIONS. 3. DEWATERING SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT. WATER UTILITY NOTES: 1. DISCONNECTION OF EXISTING WATER SERVICE WILL NEED TO BE DISCONNECTED AT CITY MAIN WITH APPROVED CAP AND SHUT OFF MUST BE DONE IN THE PRESENCE OF THE INSPECTOR. 2. TAPPING REQUIREMENTS: CONNECTIONS LARGER THAN ONE-INCH REQUIRE A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET BETWEEN TAPS. A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE TAP AND A HYDRANT TEE OR VALVES. A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 2 FEET IS REQUIRED BETWEEN A TAP AND THE BELL OR FITTING. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFORM TO THE TESTING PROCEDURES OF THE SANITARY SEWERS, STORM SEWERS, AND WATER SERVICES PER MINNESOTA RULES, PART 4715.2820 4. ALL PIPING MUST BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURES INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. 5. ALL TEES, PLUGS, CAPS, BENDS, AND HYDRANT BRANCHES SHALL BE RESTRAINED AGAINST MOVEMENT. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE 48 HOUR MINIMUM NOTICE FOR TAP INSPECTION AND INSPECTION OF PIPING INSTALLED. 7. A HYDROSTATIC TEST OF 200PSI IS REQUIRED FOR 2 HOURS. 8. CONDUCTIVITY TEST REQUIRED PER CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA. CONDUCTIVITY TEST MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN ONE WEEK AFTER COMPLETION OF PRESSURE TESTING OF THE MAIN ON ALL IRON PIPE WATER MAINS TO ESTABLISH THAT ELECTRICAL THAWING MAY BE CARRIED OUT IN THE FUTURE. 9. WATER SAMPLE MUST BE DRAWN AND VERIFIED BY AN INSPECTOR OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK. SAMPLE RESULTS CAN BE EMAILED TO DSKALLET@STLOUISPARK.ORG OR FAXED 952.924.2663. 10. VALVE ACCESS WILL BE REQUIRED AFTER FINAL LAYER OF ASPHALT IS INSTALLED. BUILDING SEWER NOTES: 1. TAPS WILL BE INSTALLED BY LICENSED PLUMBER AND WITNESSED BY AN INSPECTOR WORKING FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK. 2. NO ROOF DRAINS, UNDER DRAIN OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF STORM DRAINS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. 3. ALL PIPE AND FITTINGS MUST BE INSTALLED IN POSITIONS THAT ALLOW INSPECTION OF ALL MARKINGS AND IDENTIFICATIONS. 4. WATER AND SEWER SERVICE LINES MUST HAVE AT LEAST A 10 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN TRENCHES. GENERAL NOTES: 1. EROSION CONTROL PERMITS FROM THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ARE REQUIRED. 2. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UTILITIES DIVISION (952-924-2558) SHALL BE CONTACTED AT LEAST 48-HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WATER-SHUT OFFS, SEWER CONNECTIONS, EXCAVATIONS, OR ANY OTHER WORK RELATED TO THE CITY'S UTILITY SYSTEM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING THE COST OF REMOVING AND CLEANING OF ANY DEBRIS IN THE LINES BOTH DURING AND AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. 3. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMITS FROM THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ARE REQUIRED . 4. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ALONG ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ADA REQUIREMENTS. THIS WILL INCLUDE SIGNING, STRIPING, DETOUR SIGNING, AND ANY OTHER MEASURES NEEDED TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE AND GENERAL PUBLIC SAFETY. 5. CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ANY WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING UTILITY WORK, CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALK, DRIVEWAY APRONS, PARKING BAYS, ROAD CLOSURES AND SIDEWALK CLOSURES. EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA 3.01 ACRES NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA (NET) 1.42 ACRES SODDED AREA 0.00 ACRES SEEDED AREA 9.5 ACRES TOTAL DISTURBED AREA 13.7 ACRES LOCATION OF SWPPP REQUIREMENTS DESCRIPTION SHEET NUMBER SPEC SWPPP NARRATIVE CHAIN OF COMMAND YES RECEIVING WATERS C201 YES DISCHARGE LOCATION C201 YES EROSION CONTROL BMPS C201 YES SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS C201 YES POLLUTION PREVENTION / GOOD HOUSEKEEPING BMPS C201 YES DEWATERING / BASIN DRAINING YES INSPECTION / MAINTENANCE BMPS YES PERMANENT STORMWATER SYSTEM C402 YES SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY YES EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES: 1. PERMITTEES, CONTRACTORS, AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PLAN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES PHASE II PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THEIR CONTENTS AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS STATED THEREIN. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL SUPERVISOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL INSPECTIONS, DOCUMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIRED AS OUTLINED IN THE SWPPP AND REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. 3. THE BMP'S SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, THE PERMITTEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL ANTICIPATE THAT ADDITIONAL BMP'S MAY BE REQUIRED AS SITE CONDITIONS CHANGE AND SHALL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BMP'S TO MEET APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS. 4. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLANS AND SWPPP. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS SHALL REQUIRE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE OWNER. 5. GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION. 6. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY REMOVAL WORK AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION HAS BEEN ELIMINATED. 7. ADJACENT STREETS MUST BE SWEPT TO KEEP THEM FREE OF SEDIMENT. CONTRACTOR MUST MONITOR CONDITIONS AND SWEEP AS NEEDED OR WITHIN 24 HOURS OF NOTICE BY THE OWNER, CITY OR ENGINEER. 8. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR PERMANENT TURF/GROUND COVER. 9. ALL DISTURBED AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR SEED OR SOD SHALL RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 6" OF TOPSOIL, ALL SEEDED OR SODDED AREAS OUTSIDE OF WOODED AREAS SHALL BE TILLED TO A DEPTH OF 12" PRIOR TO SEEDING OR SODDING (INCIDENTAL). 10. AREAS IDENTIFIED FOR SEEDING SHALL USE SEED, FERTILIZER AND EROSION CONTROL BLANKET AS DEFINED AND AT THE RATES INDICATED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. 11. PERMANENT SEEDING SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 7 DAYS OF COMPLETION OF FINAL GRADING. ANY EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE STABILIZED FOR ANY TEMPORARY STOPS OF 3 DAYS OR MORE. 12. PERMITEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE SITE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS. INSPECTIONS SHALL BE RECORDED IN WRITING AND RECORDED WITH THE PROJECT SWPPP. PERMITEE/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT AND MAINTAIN EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S FOR SECTION IV. E OF THE NPDES PERMIT. 13. DUST CONTROL SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR, AND SHALL BE ADDRESSED WITHIN 4 HOURS OF A REQUEST BY THE ENGINEER. 14. SILT FENCE SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE DRIP LINES OF EXISTING TREES. WHERE PERIMETER PROTECTIONS IS NECESSARY WITHIN DRIP LINES, BIOROLLS SHALL BE INSTALLED. THESE AREAS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER IN THE FIELD. ACREAGE SUMMARY G003 GENERAL NOTES 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 89 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > l lllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l llllllll l l l l l l >>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l lllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllllllllllll lll l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllll l lllll llllllll6" WM6" WM6" WM 12" WM 12" WM 8" WM 8" WM 8 " WM 6" WM 6" WM 12" WM 12" WM 12" WM 8 " W M >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO- B FO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BG- B OHPOHPOHPFO-BFO-BFO -B FO -B F O - B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B O H P FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO-B FO-B OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SW 35 TH STREET CEDAR L A K E T R AI L WO O D D A L E A V E S MN 7 S E R VI C E R D EB HIG H W A Y 7 O N- R A M P llllllllllllllllll lllllllllllll l l l lS S S C-3 C-2/B-2 C-7/B-7 C-8 C-11 C-1 C-9 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-10 C-12/B-12 BENCHMARK TOP NUT HYDRANT ELEV=913.01 R 27B65 SE, EV. 922.088 >>>>l l l l l l l l l l >>>llllllll>>>>llllllllllllllll>>STORM SEWER STRUCTURE TREE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT STORM SEWER REMOVALS LEGEND >>S CONCRETE SIDEWALK/PAVEMENT BUILDING>>SANITARY SEWER CURB AND GUTTER WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C001 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS 1 KEYNOTES: REMOVE SANITARY SERVICE. BULKHEAD AT MANHOLE. REMOVE STORM SEWER AND CULVERT REMOVE LIGHT POLE REMOVE FLAG POLE REMOVE OVERHEAD POWER LINE, TRANSFORMERS, AND POLES REMOVE BURIED GAS LINE SALVAGE AND RELOCATE LIGHT POLE SALVAGE AND PROTECT LIGHT POLE REMOVE LANDSCAPE ISLAND REMOVE BUILDING WATER SERVICE LINE TO WATERMAIN AND PLUG AT W.M. APPROXIMATE SERVICE LOCATION SHOWN, VERIFY IN FIELD. REMOVE AND SALVAGE ALL BENCHES, BODY BENCHES, BIKE RACKS, AND WASTE RECEPTACLES REMOVE BOLLARDS RELOCATE FIBER OPTIC CABLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 22 2 3 33 5 6 4 8 3 3 3 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 7 7 7 7 8 11 11 12 12 04080 N 10 13 13 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 90 l l l l l l l >FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO- B FO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BOHPOHPOHPFO-B FO-B W 36TH STREET YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SW 35 TH STREET CEDAR L A K E T R AI L WO O D D A L E A V E S MN 7 S E R VI C E R D EB HIG H W A Y 7 O N- R A M P S S S C-3 C-2/B-2 C-7/B-7 C-8 C-11 C-1 C-9 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-10 C-12/B-12 W 35TH ST N/S Site Tree Diameter (inches)Tree Type Tree Significant? (Y/N)Removed / Preserved North 15 Honey Locust Y Removed North 10 Honey Locust Y Removed North 12 Honey Locust Y Removed North 15 Ohio Buckeye Y Removed North 4 Pine N Removed North 6 Pine Y Removed North 6 Box Elder N Removed North 6 Box Elder N Removed NORTH 58 TOTAL caliper inches of significant trees REMOVED NORTH 70 TOTAL caliper inches of REPLACEMENT trees South 4 Quaking Aspen N Removed South 4 Quaking Aspen N Removed South 4 Quaking Aspen*N Removed South 4 Quaking Aspen N Removed South 6 Quaking Aspen*N Removed South 6 Quaking Aspen*N Removed South 2 Fruiting Ornamental N Removed South 2 Fruiting Ornamental N Removed South 15 Red Pine Y Removed South 15 Red Pine Y Removed South 4 Japanese Tree Lilac N Removed South 8 Silver Maple N Removed South 8 Silver Maple N Removed South 6 Japanese Tree Lilac Y Removed South 10 Silver Maple N Removed South 15 Red Pine Y Removed South 4 Japanese Tree Lilac N Removed South 4 Honey Locust N Removed South 8 Box Elder N Removed South 6 Honey Locust Y Removed South 4 Amur Maple N Removed South 6 Amur Maple Y Removed South 8 Amur Maple Y Removed South 12 Amur Maple Y Removed South 18 Siberian Elm N Removed South 8 Box Elder N Removed South 3 Amelanchier spp.N Removed South 3 Amelanchier spp.N Removed South 15 Amur Maple Y Removed South 15 Amur Maple Y Removed South 4 Crab Apple*N Removed South 4 Crab Apple*N Removed South 4 Crab Apple*N Removed South 6 Pine Y Removed South 6 Pine Y Removed South 3 Pine N Removed SOUTH 125 TOTAL caliper inches of significant trees REMOVED SOUTH 150 TOTAL caliper inches of REPLACEMENT trees * denotes unhealthy or diseased condition | SIGNIFICANT TREE = any tree, with the exception of Salix, Boxelder, Siberian Elm, and Black Locust is considered to be significant under the landscaping section of the zoning ordinance if it is at least 5-caliper inches for deciduous trees and 6-caliper inches for conifers. Aspen, Cottonwood, or Silver Maple are considered significant if it is at least 12 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH). (Ord. No. 2325-07, 5-7-07; Ord. No. 2449-13, 11-15-2013) Caliper inches of replacement trees was determined using ((A/B)-0.2) x C x A = D; where: A = Total diameter inches of significant trees lost as a result of land alteration or removal | B = Total diameter inches of signficant trees situated on the land | C = Tree replacement constant (1.5) | D = Replacement trees (# of caliper inches) 04080 N WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C003 TREE REMOVALS AND PRESERVATION PLAN 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 91 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C101 SITE PLAN - OVERALL 04080 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SITE DATA EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL SITE AREA 6.94 ACRES 5.25 ACRES ZONING CLASSIFICATION: NORTH I-G (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) PUD SOUTH C-2 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) PUD PARKING DATA NORTH SOUTH TOTAL OFF-STREET SURFACE 56 4 60 ON-STREET 61 0 61 OFF-STREET STRUCTURED 99 227 326 TOTAL STALLS 216 231 447 DORA NORTH SOUTH TOTAL URBAN FOREST 33,560 0 33,560 ROOFTOP SPACES 735 728 1,463 SHARED BALCONIES 1,376 0 1,376 PERFORMANCE GATHERING 0 424 424 DOG RUN 0 752 752 TOTAL DORA 35,671 1,904 37,575 (16.4%) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 92 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C102 SITE PLAN - NORTHWEST C104 SEE SH E E T C103SEE SHEET02040 N NOTES: 1. STRIPING COLORS SHALL CONTRAST WITH THE PAVEMENT SURFACE OR AS SPECIFIED BY LOCAL CODES. 2. REFER TO DETAIL SHEET FOR SIGN MOUNTING DETAIL. VAN 8.0'8.0'SEE SITE PLANFOR DIMENSION6" WHITE (TYP.) INCLUDE "VAN" FOR VAN ONLY STALLS AS NOTED ON THE SITE PLAN R7-8m AND R7-8bP (FOR ALL ACCESSIBLE STALLS). 45° 4" WIDE STRIPING @ 2'-0" SPACING. 90° ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL STRIPING NO SCALE UNMARKED DISTANCE 6' MIN. 1.75' 2.5'24'CROSSWALK MARKING NO SCALE 2' DETAIL P-2 DETAIL P-1 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 93 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C103 SITE PLAN - NORTHEAST C104 SEE SH E E TC102SEE SHEET02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 94 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C104 SITE PLAN - SOUTH C102 SEE SH E E T 02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 95 l l l l l l l >SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO- B FO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BOHPOHPOHPO H P FO-B FO-B OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SW 35 TH STREET CEDAR L A K E T R AI L WO O D D A L E A V E S MN 7 S E R VI C E R D EB HIG H W A Y 7 O N- R A M P S S S C-3 C-2/B-2 C-7/B-7 C-8 C-11 C-1 C-9 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-10 C-12/B-12 MS MS MS MS MSMSMSMSMS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MSMSMSMSMSMSMS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MSMS MS MS MS MSMS MS MSMSMSMS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MSMSMSMSMSMSMS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MSMSMSMSMSMSC W C W lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l >>>llllllllllllll>>>>llllllllll>>llllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.68 ADJ.) SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E>>>>>CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE / EXIT DITCH CHECK - BIOLOG DIVERSION AND PIPE DRAIN MACHINE SLICED SILT FENCE BLANKET HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE EROSION CONTROL LEGEND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP BASIN W/ PIPE DRAIN DITCH CHECK - ROCK CONCENTRATED SURFACE FLOW MS HD INLET PROTECTION CULVERT / PIPE PROTECTION SEDIMENT REMOVE BITUMINOUS. BIOROLL CLEAR AND GRUB TREE SAVE AND PROTECT TREE TO REMAIN CONCRETE WASHOUT C201 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 04080 N MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS MS C201 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 96 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>C - B OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SW 35 TH STREET CEDAR L A K E T R AI L WO O D D A L E A V E S MN 7 S E R VI C E R D EB HIG H W A Y 7 O N- R A M P S S S FFE 917.03 FFE 914.33 FFE 911.5 FFE 913.5 FFE 917.0 FFE 914.38 FFE 914.34 FFE 915.34 FFE 915.84 C301 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN - OVERALL 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 04080 N NOTES: 1. SEE SHEETS C001 AND C003 FOR REMOVALS AND PRESERVATION PLANS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR IS SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONED THAT THE LOCATION AND/OR ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS BASED ON RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY COMPANIES, AND WHERE POSSIBLE, MEASUREMENTS TAKEN IN THE FIELD. THE INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE RELIED ON AS BEING EXACT OR COMPLETE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE FIELD LOCATION OF ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT (651) 454-0002. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 3. ALL CUT OR FILL SLOPES SHALL BE 3:1 OR FLATTER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4. EXISTING GRADE CONTOUR INTERVALS SHOWN AT 1 FOOT INTERVALS. 5. PROPOSED GRADE CONTOUR INTERVALS SHOWN AT 1 FOOT INTERVALS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ADHERE TO ALL TERMS & CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE GENERAL N.P.D.E.S. PERMIT FOR STORMWATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. 7. TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION TAKEN FROM A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY LAND SURVEYORS, IF CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, HE SHALL HAVE MADE, AT HIS EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AND SUBMIT TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW. 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ST LOUIS PARK SURFACE WATERS AND SEWERS 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION OR CONSTRUCTION RELATED TO OR IN THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATTER MANAGEMENT BMP. 9. UPON THE PROJECT'S COMPLETION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A FINAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT INCLUDING RECORD DRAWINGS. THE REPORT WILL SERVE AS A MEANS OF VERIFICATION THAT THE INTENT OF THE APPROVED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN HAS BEEN MET. THIS FINAL REPORT SHALL SUBSTANTIATE THAT ALL ASPECTS OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN HAVE BEEN ADEQUATELY PROVIDED FOR THE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. 10. PROTECT EXISTING FORCE MAIN AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK. 11. REFER TO MPCA APPROVED RESPONSE ACTION PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 97 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > l lllllllllllllllllllll ll l l l llllllll l l l l l l >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FMFMFMFMFMFM FM FM FM F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FF M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ll l l ll l lllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l ll ll lllll l l l l l l lllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllllllllllll lll l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllll l l l lllll llllllll6"WM6" WM 6"WM 1 2 "W M 1 2 "W M 8 "W M 8 "W M 8 "WM6"WM 6 " W M 12"WM 12"WM 12"WM 8 "WM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SS SSSSSSS SS SS SS >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E-BE-BE-BE-BFO -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B E-BC -B E-B E-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE -B E-BE-BE -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E-BF O -B E-B FO-BF O-BF O-BF O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B E - B E - B E-BO H P F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITEAVESXENWOODAVESW 35 TH STREET C E D A R L A K E T R A IL WO O D D A L E A V E S M N 7 S E R V IC E R D E B H IG H W A Y 7 O N -R A M P llllllllllllllllll lllllllllllll l l l lS S S C-3 C-2/B-2 C-7/B-7 C-8 C-11 C-1 C-9 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-10 C-12/B-12 C10C10 666BB >llllF M F M F M F M M F M F M F M F M M F M F M >>>>>>FF MM F M F M F M F M F MM F FF MMM EEBOHP C-4 66lllFM -BB EEF OEBEBC B - B 2/B2 F MM F M F M F M F M FF FFF MMM FF MMM F MMM >>lll>F M F M FFFF MMM F M F M E OH H P l FFFFFMMMMM E -B O BBBBOOOOB > > S >>>>>>>>>>>F M >>>>>>>>>FM >>FMFM >>>>>>>>>l>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > M SSSS > > >>>>>>l lll>llllllllllllllllllllll l lllllllF l l l l l l l >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M B F M F M F M F M F M FMFMFMFMFMFM >>>>>>FM FM FM F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FF M F M F M F M F M >>ll F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>OHHPPPPPPO B--7- > l l >>>>>>>>>>M >>>>>>l>>>>>l>>>SS SS >>>>>>>>SS S >>>>>>>>>SS SSS >>>>>>>SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS >>>>>>SS SS > > > > > SSS > > > > > > > > SSS >>>>l>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llllll>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l >>lllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l >l l l l l l l l l l lllllllllll ll>>llllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l lllllllSSSllll llllllllXElWOODlAVAESlllllll lll l l l l l l l l l l l l l >llllllll l lllll llllllll6"WM6" WM 6"WM 1 2 "W M 1 2 "W M 8 "W M 8 "W M 8 "WM6"WM 6 " W M 12"WM 12"WM 12"WM 8 "WM >>>>>>>>>>>>>SSS >>>SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS HPPHPP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>P >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> l >> >>>>>> >> > >ll>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>S >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>S >>>>ll>>>>>>>>>>>>S >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>O>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SSSSSS POH HPOOHPO OOHP121 E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E-BE-BE-BE-BB FO -B F O F O -B F O F O -B F O F O -B F O F O -B EE-BFF O B BBBOBB B C -B FF OOOB E-B E-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE -B E-BE-BE -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E -B E-B>> ll >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F O -B FFFFOO >>> > >>>>>> E-B FO-BF O-BMMMMMMM FF MM F O-BC --BB F O -B OO --BB F O -B OO --BB F O -B OO --BB F O -B OO --BB F O -B FFFFFFBBBBBBFFBBFF E - B E - B BBE-BBBBBBBB O H P OO EE FF OO llll>>>>>lllllllllllllllPPP >>>>>>>>lllllllllllF O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B F O -B OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITEAVESXENWOODAVESW 35 TH STREET C E D A R L A K E T R A IL WO O D D A L E A V E S M N 7 S E R V IC E R D E B H IG H W A Y 7 O N -R A M P llllllllllFF l>>>lllllll ll>>>>>>>lWWMMl>>>>>>>llllWWMM l1122 llll l l l lS S S C-3 C-2/B-2 C-7/B-7 C-8 C-11 C-1 C-9 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-10 C-12/B-12 MMMMMFFMMMMMMMMMM FFFFFFFFFFMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FF>>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.68 ADJ.) SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E >I=1 H 30 7 > >FF MM FF MM >FF MM >FF MM > EEEE > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>FFFMM>>>>FFFF>>FFMMMM FF> FF MMMMMMMMMM FF MM > FF MM >FF MM >FF MMMM >FF MM > FF MMMM >FF MM FFFF MMMMMM > >F MM > >MM FFFFFFFFMMFFMMFFMMFFFFFFFFMMMMFFFF >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FFFFFFFFMMFFMMFFMMFFFFFFFFMMFF FF MMFFMMFFMMFFFFMMMM FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF MMMMMMMMMM >>>>>>F>>FFMMMMFFMM >>>>>>>>MMMM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> ll ll BBBBBB OO HH PP----llll ll>>> >> EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE EE BB EE BB EE BB EE EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE EE BB EE BB EE BB EE BB EE llllllllllllllllllll llllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>8 W388 WW 9 BB E .38 SAN 1.98 =89 I N M R= OO HH PP OO HH PP OO HH OO HH PP OO HH llllllll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>-->>>>>>>>BBBB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H BBBBHH >>>>W .05 I MH OOHHOOHHPP >> ll llll ll llll OO HHHH PPPP BBEE BB EEEEEEEEEEE --BBBBBBBBBBBOO--BB89 23 979 EE BB SSSSSSS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>EEEEBBEEEEEEEEEEEEEBBEEEEEEEEEBBEEEEBBEEEEEEEEEEBBEEEEEEEEEEBBEEEEEEEEE--EEBBEEEEEEEEEEBBEEEEEEEE--EEBBEEEEEEE>>EE--EEBBEEEEEEE--BB--llIIII N N N N MMMMMMHMHMHMMMMMMMMMMHMMM IIII N N N N MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM WW88 "">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>llllllllll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>- BBBB ll ll ll FF MMM FFFF MMMMMMM ll ll llll>>>>ll>>>>>>>>> FF O >> >>> CC FFFFFFFFFF EEEEEEEE>>FFFF MMMM lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l >>>llllllllllllll>>>>llllllllllllllll8 4 +0 0 8 5 +0 0 8 6 +0 0 8 7 +0 0 8 8 +0 0 8 9 +0 0 9 0 +0 0 91+0092+0093+009 4 +0 0 9 5 +0 0 9 6 +0 0 97+009 8 +0 0 99+00SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.68 ADJ.) SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E H IG H W A Y 7 STANDAL PROPERTY FIRE SERVICE 6" X 8" WET TAP AND VALVE 75' - 6" PVC DOMESTIC SERVICE 2" X 8" WET TAP AND VALVE 2" CORP STOP 75' - 2" TYPE K COPPER FIRE SERVICE 8" X 8" TEE 8" GV 54' - 8" PVCDOMESTIC SERVICE 6" X 8" TEE 6" GV 54' - 6" HDPE HOT WATER SAN MH 1 RIM=906.3 INV=898.6868 LF-8" PVC SANITARY SERVICE @ 1.0% SCHEDULE 40 HOT WATER SUPPLY WITH INSULATION FIRE SERVICE 8" X 8" TEE 8" GV & BOX 56' - 8" PVC DOMESTIC SERVICE 6" X 8" TEE 6" GV & BOX 56' - 6" HDPE PVC SANITARY SERVICE 65 LF-6" SAN @ 2.0% INSTALL WYE FITTING AND RISER EX. INV=884.8 FIRE SERVICE 8" X 12" WET TAP AND VALVE 72' - 8" PVC DOMESTIC SERVICE 6" X 12" WET TAP AND VALVE 72' - 6" HDPE SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.68 ADJ.) 1 94' 2 4" @ 0.1 2 % 2 3 2' 2 4 "@0.1 2 %1 5 8' 2 4 "@0.1 2 %SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) 1 8 0 '9 "V C P @ 0 .4 % SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) 3 2 5 '9 "V C P @ 0 .3 2 % SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) 3 5 0 '9 "V C P @ 0 .3 2 % 2 7 5 '9 "V C P @ 0 .4 8 % SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) 250'8"CIP @ 0.4% SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) 256'8"CIP @ 0.4% 186'9"VCP @ 0.29% SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E F F E = 9 1 7.0 3 L F E = 8 9 9.2 2 FFE= 914.33 FFE=911.5 FFE=913.5 LFE=902.5 FFE=917.0 PVC SANITARY SERVICE 48 LF-6" SAN @ 2.0% INSTALL WYE FITTING AND RISER EX. INV=882.85 FFE=915.84FFE= 915.34 FFE= 914.34 FFE= 914.34 LFE=899.55 PVC SANITARY SERVICE 65 LF-6" SAN @ 2.0% INSTALL WYE FITTING AND RISER CONNECT TO EX. MANHOLE. INV=898.00 21 LF-8" PVC SANITARY SERVICE @ 1.0% 8" PVC SANITARY INV=898.89 PVC SANITARY SERVICE 34 LF-6" SAN @ 2.0% INSTALL WYE FITTING AND RISER EX. INV=899.8 FIRE SERVICE STAND PIPE RISER FIRE SERVICE STAND PIPE RISER FIRE SERVICE STAND PIPE RISER FIRE SERVICE STAND PIPE RISER REMOVE AND REINSTALL EX. FIRE HYDRANT WITH 3.5' EXTENSION ON END OF WATER SERVICE LINE. MATCH EXISTING PIPE SIZE AND MATERIAL. EX. FIRE HYDRANT EX. FIRE HYDRANT EX. FIRE HYDRANT EX. FIRE HYDRANT EX. FIRE HYDRANT NOTES: 1. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UTILITIES DIVISION (952-924-2558) SHALL BE CONTACTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WATER SHUT-OFFS, SEWER CONNECTIONS, EXCAVATIONS, OR OTHER WORK RELATED TO THE CITY'S UTILITY SYSTEM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING THE COST OF REMOVING AND CLEANING OF ANY DEBRIS IN THE LINES BOTH DURING AND AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. 2. TAPPING REQUIREMENTS: WATER TAPS WITH ONE-INCH CONNECTIONS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET BETWEEN TAPS WHEN TAPS ARE ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE WATER MAIN. ONE-INCH CONNECTIONS MADE ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE WATER MAIN REQUIRE A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 18-INCHES. CONNECTIONS LARGER THAN ONE-INCH REQUIRE A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET BETWEEN TAPS. A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF FIVE FEET IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE TAP AND A HYDRANT TEE OR VALVES. A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 2 FEET IS REQUIRED BETWEEN A TAP AND THE BELL OR FITTING. SCHEDULE 40 STEEL CASING PIPE EXTENDING MINIMUM 10 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF LRT TRACKS BURIED MINIMUM 6' UNDER TRACKS. HYDRANT BY SWLRT PROJECT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C401 SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 04080 N City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 98 HIGHW A Y 7 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > l lllllllllllllllllllllllll l llllllll l l l l l l >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFMFM>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l lllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllllllllllllllllllll lll l l l l l l l l l l l l l llllllll l lllll llllllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>OHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHPOHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHP OHPOHP W 36TH STREET YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SW 35 TH STREET CEDAR L A K E T R AI L WO O D D A L E A V E S MN 7 S E R VI C E R D EB HIG H W A Y 7 O N- R A M P llllllllllllllllll lllllllllllll l l l lS S S XENWOOD AVE SSTANDAL PROPERTYlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l l l l l l l l l >>>llllllllllllll>>>>llllllllll>>llllll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>STORMWATER FILTERER MANHOLE INV 896.18 (EX W) (DEMO) INV 890.01 (EX SE) INV 900.78 (EX) STORMWATER FILTERER MANHOLE CONSTRUCT MANHOLE OVER EX. STORM SERWER PIPE INV 906.97 (EX 24") > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>SAN MH 30 I=172.85 (AS-BUILT 422S) (883.15 ADJ.) SAN MH 29 I=172.57 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.87 ADJ.) SAN MH 28 I=186.56 (9" W AS-BUILT 422S) (896.86 ADJ.) I=174.00 (9" E AS-BUILT 185) (884.30 ADJ.) I=172.38 (AS-BUILT 422S) (882.68 ADJ.) SAN MH I=185.75 (AS-BUILT 39S) (896.05 ADJ.) SAN MH I=186.79 (AS-BUILT 39S) (897.09 ADJ.) SAN MH I=187.91 (AS-BUILT 39S) (898.21 ADJ.) SAN MH I=175.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (885.30 ADJ.) SAN MH I=176.00 (AS-BUILT 185S) (886.30 ADJ.) SAN MH R=911.98 I=896.42 E I=896.38 W SAN MH R=910.23 I=897.05 SAN MH R=906.87 I=897.85 S I=897.72 N SAN MH R=910.57 I=899.69 SW I=899.67 NE SAN MH R=900.63 I=894.25 SAN MH R=899.84 I=894.46 S I=893.71 W I=893.69 E>>>>>STM MH R=906.60 I= 902.35 STM MH R=906.58 I= 903.18 1 5 " R C P 1 5 " R C P F F E = 9 1 7 . 0 3 L F E = 8 9 9 . 2 2 FFE= 914.33 FFE=911.5 FFE=913.5 LFE=902.5 FFE=917.0 FFE=915.84FFE= 915.34FFE= 914.34 FFE= 914.34 LFE=899.55 EX MH R=909.31 I=903.01 EX MH R=911.77 I=905.87 EX MH R=915.08 I=908.08 268 LF-24" RCP 266 LF-24" RCP GREEN ROOF - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS GREEN ROOF - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS GREEN ROOF - SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS 7,000 SF X 4' DEEP TREE TRENCH NOTE: THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UTILITIES DIVISION (952-924-2558) SHALL BE CONTACTED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WATER SHUT-OFFS, SEWER CONNECTIONS, EXCAVATIONS, OR OTHER WORK RELATED TO THE CITY'S UTILITY SYSTEM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING THE COST OF REMOVING AND CLEANING OF ANY DEBRIS IN THE LINES BOTH DURING AND AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C402 STORM SEWER PLAN 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 04080 N City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 99 #5 REBAR @ 16" O.C. EACH WAY EACH FACE. MINIMUM 3" COVER OVER REBAR. OVERLAP SPLICES AT CORNERS 18" MIN. 14" RAD TYP. ALL EXPOSED CORNERS AND EDGES UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE 12" COMPACTED GRANULAR BASE CONCRETE WALK6"18"1'PLANTING AREA 3" DEEP RECESS FOR INLAID ARTWORK PANEL BY OTHERS. SLOPE BOTTOM OF RECESS TO DRAIN. #4 REBAR WITH #3 HOOK TIES @ 36" O.C. 14" RAD TYP. ALL EXPOSED CORNERS AND EDGES UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE 12" COMPACTED GRANULAR BASE CONCRETE WALK6"8" (TYP)1'PLANTING AREA POURED-IN-PLACE CONCRETE CURB. CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 6'-0" SPACING & DOWELED EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 24' 2 DOWELS PER EXPANSION JOINT WOOD FLOAT FINISH SLOPE TOP AT 14" PER FOOT TOWARD PLANTINGS 1'-6"6"6"8' WIDE BY 2.5' DEEP AGGREGATE SOIL TREE TRENCH. WRAP SIDES AND BOTTOM WITH EPDM LINER, AS SPECIFIED 3'-0"4' TO 7' (VARIES)8'-0" 4" HDPE DRAIN TILE IN FABIC SOCK TYP OF 2 ENTIRE LENGTH OF PLANTING AREA, CONNECT TO CATCH BASIN IN WOODDALE CONC. WALK 2'-6"PLANTING BED WITH PERENNIALS AND MULCH C801 SITE DETAILS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C801 SITE DETAILS 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER B PLANTER CURB NTS D NORTH BUILDING-RETAINING WALL AND SEATWALL BENCHES NTS CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE RETAINING WALL ARCHITECTURAL METAL RAILING CAST STONE ART WALLS A RAISED PLANTER WALL - ART INSET NTS C STORMWATER FILTRATION PLANTER-WOODDALE AVE NTS City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 100 AGGREGATE SOIL MIX, AS SPECIFIED UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE PAVING, SEE PLANS CONC. WALK TREE, SEE PLANS 15'-0"3'EPDM FABRIC TREE PLANTINGS AS SPECIFIED SEE PLAN FOR TREE LOCATIONS NOTE: COORDINATE PLANTING OF TREES WITHIN AGGREGATE SOILS WITH GENERAL AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO DETERMINE THE MOST EFFICIENT MEANS OF PLANTING. MODIFIED PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE APPROX. 4'-0"2"- 4" ROCK BORROW AGGREGATE SOIL MIX APPROX.18" DEPTH, IN UPPER STORAGE LEVEL, AS SPECIFIED. 2"- 4" ROCK BORROW AGGREGATE APPROX. 2'-6" DEPTH, IN LOWER STORAGE LEVEL, AS SPECIFIED. 8" PERF. PVC DIST. PIPE 8" PERF. PVC DRAIN PIPE 2'-6"B 4 1 2' A D2'1 4 5D B A RIPRAP 4 CUBIC YARDS CL.3 8 CUBIC YARDS CL.3 12 CUBIC YARDS CL.3 16 CUBIC YARDS CL.3 20 CUBIC YARDS CL 4 PLAN (ONE CUBIC YARD IS APPROXIMATELY 2,800 LBS.) 2'12"RIPRAP GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL (MN/DOT 3601.2B1) GEOTEXTILE FILTER-TYPE IVNOTE FILTER BLANKET REQUIRED UNDER RIPRAP OR 2 LAYERS OF 500X MIRAFI FABRIC OR EQUAL 12"RIPRAP GRANULAR FILTER MATERIAL (MN/DOT 3601.2B1) GEOTEXTILE FILTER-TYPE IV SECTION A-A SECTION B-B PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: RIPRAP AT OUTLETS STO-11 APRIL 2004 RIPRAP REQUIREMENTS 12" TO 18" 21" TO 27" 30" TO 36" 42" TO 48" 54" AND UP 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 www.stantec.comPlot Date: 04/10/2017Drawing name: U: 193803195 CAD Dwg 193803195C801.dwgXre s:, 193803195BRDR 3042COURSE FILTER AGGREGATE MNDOT 3149.2H 12" DEEP (MINIMUM OF 2" AROUND BOTTOM HALF OF DRAINTILE) GEOTEXTILE WRAP SHALL BE ADDED AT THE REQUEST OF THE OWNER. 10" AGGREGATE BASE SELECT GRANULAR BORROW GRADE TO DRAIN SUB-GRADE NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 4" PERFORATED PE DRAINTILE NOTCH CLAY SUB-GRADE FOR PIPE PLACEMENT. TOP OF PIPE MAX. 1" ABOVE EDGE OF SUBGRADE. TRENCH DETAIL COURSE FILTER AGGREGATE MNDOT 3149.2H 4" PERFORATED PE PIPE 1/4"∅ HOLE TYPICAL 6" DIA. 2'-0" PVC PIPE DETAILNOTE: PVC PIPE IS ACCEPTABLE ONLY WITH PRIOR ENGINEER APPROVAL OR SPECIFACTION. 160° 90° PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: PERFORATED P.E. PIPE BELOW CONCRETE CURB STO-12 MAY 2014 2" 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 www.stantec.comPlot Date: 04/10/2017Drawing name: U: 193803195 CAD Dwg 193803195C801.dwgXre s:, 193803195BRDR 3042CORE DRILL HOLE FOR 4" PVC DRAINTILE AT APPROX. 22.5° FROM CENTER NOTE: ANY ADDITIONAL BENDS OR FITTINGS USED TO CONNECT THE PVC DRAIN TILE TO THE PE DRAIN TILE OR STRUCTURE ARE INCIDENTAL TO THE COST OF THE PVC PIPE. SEE DETAIL PLATE STO-12 FOR AGGREGATE BACKFILLING AND BEDDING PVC TO PE ADAPTER WITH TAPED JOINTS PERF. SDR-26 PVC DRAINTILE 10'-0" TYP.VAR. TYP. PERF. PE DRAINTILEVARIES VARIESPLAN 12" 1"6" PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: DRAINTILE INSTALLATION INTO CATCHBASIN MANHOLE STO-14 MARCH 2008 CURB AND GUTTER BITUMINOUSAGGREGATEGRANULARSUBGRADE DOGHOUSES REQUIRED ON INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF DRAINTILE CONNECTION 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 www.stantec.comPlot Date: 04/10/2017Drawing name: U: 193803195 CAD Dwg 193803195C801.dwgXre s:, 193803195BRDR 3042PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN PIPE OUTLET ERO-8A APRIL 2008 II. SECTION A-A III. BASIN EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PIPE OUTLET BERM STABILIZED WITH MnDOT 3885 CATEGORY 3 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET EMERGENCY OVERFLOW- MnDOT 3101 CLASS II RIP RAP OVER MnDOT 3733 TYPE III GEOTEXTILE FABRIC OUTLET- MnDOT 3601 CLASS II RIP RAP OVER MNDOT 3733 TYPE III GEOTEXTILE FABRIC NOTES: BASIN USED FOR 10 ACRES DRAINAGE AREA OR MORE. DESIGN RUNOFF VOLUME IS FROM A 2-YR, 24-HR STORM PER ACRE DRAINED TO THE BASIN. BASIN VOLUME MUST BE A MIN. OF 1800 CUBIC FEET/ACRE. SEE PLANS/SPECIFICATIONS FOR BASIN DIMENSIONS AND PIPE SIZE AND SLOPE. 3 1D=10-YR STORM PIPE, MIN. 8" DIA. ANTI-SEEPAGE COLLARI. PLAN VIEW DRAINAGE WAYLC A WOVERFLOW A L = VARIABLE 6' MIN. INLET ANTISEEPAGE COLLAR (TYP.) PIPE 21 10' MIN.6' MIN. 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 www.stantec.comPlot Date: 04/10/2017Drawing name: U: 193803195 CAD Dwg 193803195C801.dwgXre s:, 193803195BRDR 3042PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN STANDPIPE OUTLET ERO-8B APRIL 2008 II. SECTION A-A III. BASIN STANDPIPE AND EMERGENCY OVERFLOW PIPE OUTLET EMERGENCY OVERFLOW- MnDOT 3601 CLASS II RIP RAP OVER MnDOT 3733 TYPE III GEOTEXTILE FABRIC D = DIAMETER OF STANDPIPE EQUAL TO DIAMETER OF PIPE PERFORATED STANDPIPE 1"-2" DIAM. ROCK, CONE EQUAL TO 13 Z NOTE: PIPE MATERIAL SHOULD BE RIGID OUTLET- MnDOT 3601CLASS II RIP RAP OVER MnDOT 3733 TYPE III GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 6" BELOW 10-YR STORM 3 1 BERM STABILIZED WITH MnDOT 3885 CATEGORY 3 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET OVERFLOW NOTES: BASIN USED FOR 10 ACRES DRAINAGE AREA OR MORE. DESIGN RUNOFF VOLUME IS FROM A 2-YR, 24-HR STORM PER ACRE DRAINED TO THE BASIN. BASIN VOLUME MUST BE A MIN. OF 1800 CUBIC FEET/ACRE. SEE PLANS/SPECIFICATIONS FOR BASIN DIMENSIONS AND PIPE SIZE AND SLOPE. ANTI-SEEPAGE COLLAR PIPE STANDPIPE & ROCK MONOFILAMENT GEOTEXTILE FABRIC PER MNDOT TABLE 3886-1 (MACHINE SLICED) I. PLAN VIEW A WDRAINAGE WAY A 6' MIN.L = VARIABLE INLET STANDPIPE PIPE Z D 10' MIN.6' MIN. 21 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW 34" HOLES SPACED 8" TO 10" ON CENTER ANTISEEPAGE COLLAR (TYP.) CL 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 www.stantec.comPlot Date: 04/10/2017Drawing name: U: 193803195 CAD Dwg 193803195C801.dwgXre s:, 193803195BRDR 304220' 20' 20' 1)ALL WASHING OF CONCRETE TRUCKS WILL BE CONDUCTED AT THIS SITE. 2)ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON SITE CONSTRAINTS. 3)WHEN WASHOUT PIT IS NO LONGER NEEDED, SOLIDIFIED CONCRETE AND THE ROCK PAD WILL BE DISPOED OF OFF-SITE AND THE AREA LEVELED OUT TO MATCH THE SURROUNDING GRADE. SIGN SIGN DETAIL CONCRETE TRUCK WASHOUT AREA 36" 18" 2" MINIMUM WASHED ROCK OR RAW WOOD/MULCH PLATE NO. LAST REVISION: CONCRETE WASHOUT PIT ERO-13A April 2008 SECTION B-B SILT FENCE 2" MINIMUM WASHED ROCK OR RAW WOOD/MULCH STREET 1-2' B SLOPEB BACK OF CURB MACHINE SLICED SILT FENCE 6 ga / jauge [∅4.88mm] 1 31/32" [50mm] c/c 1" [25.4mm]6" [152.4 mm] POST ABOVE GROUND 2.6875" [68mm] 2" [51mm] GATE APPROX 36" [914mm] LATCH HINGE GATE OPENING Poteau hors-sol Porte Loquet Penture Porte Ouverture 9234" [2356mm] ext. 70" [1778mm] 6' SINGLE GATE C802 SITE DETAILS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C SECTION - TYPICAL PAVER & TREE SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"B SECTION - TREE TRENCH SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"C802 SITE DETAILS 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER A ENCLOSURE FENCE SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0" City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 101 C901 CITY STD UTILITY PLATES WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C901 CITY STD UTILITY PLATES 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 102 C902 CITY STD UTILITY PLATES WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C902 CITY STD UTILITY PLATES 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 103 C903 CITY STD SITE PLATES WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C903 CITY STD SITE PLATES 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 104 C904 CITY STD EROSION CONTROL PLATES WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C904 CITY STD EROSION CONTROL PLATES 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 105 C1001 MNDOT STD PED CURB RAMP DETAILS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C1001 MNDOT STD PED CURB RAMP DETAILS 21711 DAVAID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 106 C1002 MNDOT STD PED CURB RAMP DETAILS 21711 DAVID A. AHRENS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERWAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 107 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 L101 PLANTING PLAN - OVERALL 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 04080 N TOTAL TREE/SHRUB COUNTS 244 - DECIDUOUS TREES 12 - CONIFEROUS TREES 8 - ORNAMENTAL TREES 422 - SHRUBS NOTES 1. SEE L8.01 FOR FULL PLANT SCHEDULE IRRIGATION NOTE: 1. ALL TURF, SEEDING AND PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH WATER EFFICIENT, 2. LOW PRECIPITATION RATE, ROTARY NOZZLE OVERHEAD SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. 3. NO DRIP IRRIGATION WILL BE ALLOWED. 4. IRRIGATION CONTROLLER SHALL BE 'SMART' WITH WEATHER BASED CONTROL. 5. IRRIGATION POC SHALL BE A SUB-METERED CONNECTION ON FROM THE PRIVATE UTILITY WATER SYSTEM. IRRIGATION MAINLINE SHALL BE BACKFLOW PROTECTED. EXTERNAL BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY IN AN APPROVED ABOVE GROUND LOCKABLE VAULT BOX. IRRIGATION VAULT BOX AND POC E UIPMENT SHALL BE NEMA COMPLIANT. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 108 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 L102 PLANTING PLAN - NORTHWEST L104 SEE SH E E T L103SEE SHEET02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 109 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 L103 PLANTING PLAN - NORTHEAST L104 SEE SH E E TL102SEE SHEET02040 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 110 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 L104 PLANTING PLAN - SOUTH L102 SEE SH E E T 02040 N City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 111 MULCH AS SPECIFIED DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH THE PLANT. MAINTAIN THE MULCH WEED-FREE FOR THE DURATION OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF SECOND WATERING. DIG HOLE 2 ROOT BALL DIA. SCARIFY THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE HOLE BEFORE PLACING THE SHRUB IN THE PLANTING HOLE. BACKFILL WITH MODIFIED PLANTING SOIL AND ADD ANY SOIL AMENDMENTS OR FERTILIZERS AS SPECIFIED AND CONSTRUCT 3" HIGH EARTH SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS. SPACE PLANTS ACCORDING TO PLANS IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A CONTAINER AROUND THE ROOTBALL, SLICE SIDES OF CONTAINER AND REMOVE COMPLETELY. USE FINGERS OR SMALL HAND TOOLS TO PULL ROOTS OUT OF THE OUTER LAYER OF POTTING SOIL, THEN CUT OR PULL APART ANY CIRCLING ROOTS. REMOVE ALL ROPE, TWINE AND BURLAP FROM TOP HALF OF ROOT BALL FROM B&B SHRUBS. DO NOT HEAVILY PRUNE AT PLANTING. PRUNE ONLY BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES, RETAINING NATURAL FORM. DURING THE SPRING PLANTING SEASON, ANY EVERGREEN SHRUB DELIVERED WITH NEW GROWTH IN ADVANCE STAGE OF CANDLING OUT WILL BE REJECTED. SET TOP OF ROOT BALL FLUSH TO GRADE OR 1-2 IN. HIGHER IN SLOWLY DRAINING SOILS. ADD MYCORRHIZAL TRANSPLANT INOCULANT AT PLANTING TIME PER MANUFACTURER'S DIRECTIONS.MULCH AS SPECIFIED DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH THE PLANT. MAINTAIN THE MULCH WEED-FREE FOR THE DURATION OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF SECOND WATERING. DIG HOLE 2 ROOT BALL DIA. SCARIFY THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE HOLE BEFORE PLACING THE PLANT IN THE PLANTING HOLE. BACKFILL WITH MODIFIED PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS. IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A CONTAINER AROUND THE ROOTBALL, SLICE SIDES OF CONTAINER AND REMOVE COMPLETELY. USE FINGERS OR SMALL HAND TOOLS TO PULL ROOTS OUT OF THE OUTER LAYER OF POTTING SOIL, THEN CUT OR PULL APART ANY CIRCLING ROOTS. SET TOP OF ROOT BALL FLUSH TO GRADE OR 1-2 IN. HIGHER IN SLOWLY DRAINING SOILS. ADD MYCORRHIZAL TRANSPLANT INOCULANT AT PLANTING TIME PER MANUFACTURER'S DIRECTIONS. SPACE PLANTS ACCORDING TO PLAN.18"PLANTING AS SHOWN ON PLANS TOP OF MULCH SHALL BE EVEN WITH WALK. PLANTING SOIL FINISH GRADE SHALL BE 2" BELOW CURB OR WALK ELEVATION. STRUCTURED EDGE AS PER PLANS PAVEMENT OR CURB SUBGRADE AS PER PLANS SLOPE EDGE OF COMPACTED BASE AND SUBGRADE AT 45 DEGREE ANGLE UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBSOIL PLANTING AS SHOWN ON LANDSCAPE PLANS STEEL EDGING: 3/16" (7 GAUGE), 6" DEPTH, TOP OF EDGING FLUSH WITH GRADE, COLOR AS SPECIFIED TURF/ SOD AS SPECIFIED STEEL ANCHORING STAKES: 10 GAUGE, 12" LENGTH, 4 STAKES PER EACH 10', INSTALL ON BED SIDE OF EDGER. COLOR AS SPECIFIED UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL NOTE: - CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SAMPLES OF STEEL EDGING AND COLOR OPTIONS FOR APPROVAL. - SEE PLANS FOR LOCATION OF STEEL EDGING. STEEL EDGING LOCATED BETWEEN SOD AND PERENNIAL PLANTING AREAS AND BETWEEN PLANTING AREAS AND NATURALIZED AREAS. GENERAL NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 2. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA MUST BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION. 3. ALL NEW PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH DRAINAGE SWALES, POORLY DRAINED AREAS, AND ALL UTILITIES. 4. ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN CONSTRUCTION LIMITS ARE TO BE SEEDED OR SODDED. 5. IF THE NUMBER OF PLANTS ON THE PLAN DIFFERS FROM THAT SHOWN ON THE PLANT SCHEDULE, THE NUMBER OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE PLAN WILL TAKE PRECEDENCE. 6. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY FROM LANDSCAPE WORK MUST BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 7. SOD AREAS TO RECEIVE 6" TOPSOIL BORROW. 8. UANTITIES PROVIDED IN THE PLANT SCHEDULE AND ON THE PLANS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING ALL UANTITIES. IRRIGATION 9. ALL TREES AND PLANTING BEDS TO BE IRRIGATED. 10. IRRIGATION SLEEVING IS TO BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF ALL GRANITE PAVING AND WALKWAYS. 11. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF THE INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS TO BE IRRIGATED. DO NOT HEAVILY PRUNE THE TREE AT PLANTING. PRUNE ONLY CROSSOVER LIMBS, CO-DOMINANT LEADERS AND BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES, SOME INTERIOR TWIGS AND LATERAL BRANCHES MAY BE PRUNED; HOWEVER DO NOT REMOVE THE TERMINAL BUDS OF BRANCHES THAT EXTEND TO THE EDGE OF THE CROWN. STAKE TREES ONLY AS SPECIFIED AT THE DIRECTION OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WRAP TREE TRUNKS AS SPECIFIED. MARK THE NORTH SIDE OF THE TREE IN THE NURSERY, AND ROTATE TREE TO FACE NORTH IN THE FIELD. SET TOP OF ROOT BALL FLUSH TO GRADE OR 1-2 IN. HIGHER IN SLOWLY DRAINING SOILS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TESTING PERCOLATION RATES PRIOR TO PLANTING. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY POTENTIAL DRAINAGE ISSUES PRIOR TO FINAL PLANTING. INSTALL APPROVED DRAINAGE MATERIALS AS DIRECTED. ADD MYCORRIZAL TRANSPLANT INOCULANT AT PLANTING TIME PER MANUFACTURER'S DIRECTIONS. IF PLANT IS SHIPPED WITH A CONTAINER AROUND THE ROOTBALL, SLICE SIDES OF CONTAINER AND REMOVE COMPLETELY. USE FINGERS OR SMALL HAND TOOLS TO PULL ROOTS OUT OF THE OUTER LAYER OF POTTING SOIL, THEN CUT OR PULL APART ANY CIRCLING ROOTS. TO IMPROVE TRANSPLANTING SUCCESS THE FOLLOWING VARIETIES SHOULD BE SPRING PLANTED ONLY: PINE, OAK, MAPLE, HONEYLOCUST AND CRABAPPLE SET TREE PLUMB AND MAINTAIN THROUGHOUT WARRANTY PERIOD. REMOVE ALL FLAGGING AND LABELS. EACH TREE MUST BE PLANTED SUCH THAT THE ROOT FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. TREES WHERE THE ROOT FLARE IS NOT VISIBLE SHALL BE REJECTED. DO NOT COVER THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL WITH SOIL. ROOT BALLS DELIVERED WITH THE ROOT FLARE MORE THAN 4" BELOW THE TOP OF THE BALL WILL BE REJECTED. MULCH AS SPECIFIED, DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK, MAINTAIN THE MULCH WEED-FREE FOR THE DURATION OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF SECOND WATERING. MULCH SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO PROJECT. REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE AND WIREBASKET AND BURLAP FROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOT BALL OR TO 2ND RING OF WIRE BASKET, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. REMOVE ALL PLASTIC WRAP OR ROPE FROM ENTIRE BALL. PLACE ROOT BALL ON FIRM UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL. TAMP SOIL AROUND BASE OF ROOT BALL FIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT. SPACE TREES ACCORDING TO PLANS. DIG HOLE 3x ROOT BALL DIA. OR AS SPECIFIED FOR SOIL CONDITION ENCOUNTERED WITH TAPERED SIDES. SCARIFY THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE HOLE BEFORE PLACING THE TREE IN THE PLANTING HOLE. BACKFILL 2/3 WITH MODIFIED PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED FOR THE SPECIFIC SOIL CONDITION ENCOUNTERED AND WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS. BACKFILL REMAINING 1/3 WITHIN 48 HOURS AND CONSTRUCT 4" HIGH EARTH SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL AND WATER THOROUGHLY. PROVIDE GRAVEL FILLED DRY WELL FOR POORLY DRAINED SOILS AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. EXIS T I N G G R A D E SEE PLANTING DETAILS FOR INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASE AND WATERING RING FIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT. MAINTAIN UNDISTRUBED SUBGRADE UNDER ROOTBALL. EXTEND EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL SOIL TO A POINT DOWNSLOPE EQUAL TO OR LOWER IN ELEVATIONS THAN BOTTOM OF PLANTTING HOLE TO ENSURE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE IN HEAVY SOILS. GRANULAR SOIL MUST BE ADDED AS A BACKFILL IN AREAS OF POOR DRAINAGE. TYPICAL EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING NO SCALE BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE PLANTING ON SLOPE NO SCALE DURING THE SPRING PLANTING SEASON, ANY EVERGREEN PLANT DELIVERED WITH NEW GROWTH IN ADVANCE STAGE OF CANDLING OUT WILL BE REJECTED. EVERGREEN TREES NOT FULLY BRANCHED FROM BOTTOM TO TOP WILL BE REJECTED AND THOSE WITH TERMINAL LEADERS EXCEEDING 300 MM 12" IN LENGTH WILL ALSO BE REJECTED STAKE TREES ONLY AS SPECIFIED AT THE DIRECTION OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MARK THE NORTH SIDE OF THE TREE IN THE NURSERY, AND ROTATE TREE TO FACE NORTH IN THE FIELD SET TOP OF ROOT BALL FLUSH TO GRADE OR 1-2 IN. HIGHER IN SLOWLY DRAINING SOILS. MYCORRHIZAL TRANSPLANT INOCULANT TO BE ADDED AT PLANTING TIME PER MANUFACTURER'S DIRECTIONS. SET TREE PLUMB AND MAINTAIN THROUGHOUT WARRANTY PERIOD. EACH TREE MUST BE PLANTED SUCH THAT THE ROOT FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL. TREES WHERE THE ROOT FLARE IS NOT VISIBLE SHALL BE REJECTED. DO NOT COVER THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL WITH SOIL. ROOT BALLS DELIVERED WITH THE ROOT FLARE MORE THAN 4" BELOW THE TOP OF THE BALL WILL BE REJECTED. 3" MULCH AS SPECIFIED, DO NOT PLACE MULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK, MAINTAIN THE MULCH WEED-FREE FOR THE DURATION OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD. PLACE MULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF SECOND WATERING. DIG HOLE 2 ROOT BALL DIA. SCARIFY THE SIDES AND BOTTOM OF THE HOLE BEFORE PLACING THE TREE IN THE PLANTING HOLE. BACKFILL WITH MODIFIED PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED AND CONSTRUCT 4" HIGH EARTH SAUCER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS. REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE AND WIREBASKET AND BURLAP FROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOT BALL OR TO 2ND RING OF WIRE BASKET, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. REMOVE ALL PLASTIC WRAP OR ROPE FROM ENTIRE BALL. PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL. TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOT BALL BASE FIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT. PROVIDE GRAVEL FILLED DRY WELL FOR POORLY DRAINED SOILS AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. A BALLED AND BURLAPPED TREE NTS B PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL NTS D TYPICAL EDGER DETAIL NTS C SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NTS TREES BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME CONT TY NM Acer rubrum Northwood / Northwood Maple 2.5" B&B 3 AM Acer saccharum Green Mountain TM / Green Mountain Sugar Maple 2.5" B&B 5 AG Amelanchier grandi lora Autumn Brilliance / Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry 1.5" BB 8 BN Betula nigra / River Birch Multi-Trunk 2.5" B&B 6 BF Betula platyphylla Fargo TM / Dakota Pinnacle Asian White Birch 2.5" B&B 5 CS Catalpa speciosa / Northern Catalpa 2.5" B&B 2 CO Celtis occidentalis / Common Hackberry 2.5" B&B 9 SH Gleditsia triacanthos Skyline / Skyline Honey Locust 2.5" B&B 11 WO uercus bicolor / Swamp White Oak 2.5" B&B 11 M uercus macrocarpa / Burr Oak 2.5" B&B 5 TM Tilia americana McKSentry / Sentry Linden 2.5" B&B 5 UA Ulmus Accolade / Accolade Elm 2.5" B&B 5 SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME CONT TY CR Cornus alba Red Gnome / Tatarian Dogwood 5 57 IA Ile verticillata A terglow / A terglow Winterberry 5 27 ID Ile verticillata Jim Dandy / Jim Dandy Winterberry 5 4 PL Physocarpus opuli olius Little Devil TM / Dwar Ninebark 5 30 VN Viburnum opulus Nanum / Dwar European Viburnum 5 48 PLANT SCHEDULE URBAN FOREST - DECIDUOUS CANOPY TREE 98 - SIZE RANGE: 1.5" – 4" B&B or bare root caliper trees depending on availability and conversations with City Forester. - TREE SPECIES/VARIETIES: Sugar Maple Acer saccharum Red Maple Acer rubrum American Elm Dutch Elm disease resistant var. Ulmus americana var. American Basswood Tilia americana Red Oak uercus rubra Hackberry Celtis occidentalis - SPACING: as shown on plans - URBAN FOREST - DECIDUOUS UNDERSTORY TREE 79 - SIZE RANGE: 1IN – 3IN B&B or Bare Root caliper trees depending on availability and conversations with City Forester. - TREE SPECIES/VARIETIES: Ironwood Ostrya virginiana Aspen Populus spp. Yellow Birch Betula alleghaniensis Blue Beech Carpinus caroliniana Pagoda Dogwood Cornus alterni olia Serviceberry Amelanichier spp. Chokecherry Prunus virginiana - SPACING: as shown on plans - URBAN FOREST - CONIFEROUS TREE 12 SIZE RANGE: 4 t- 12 t height B&B or container-grown trees depending on availability and conversations with City Forester. - TREE SPECIES/VARIETIES: White Pine Pinus strobus Eastern Red Cedar Juniperus virginiana - SPACING: as shown on plans - URBAN FOREST - LARGE SHRUBS 215 - SHRUB SIZE: 5gal container minimum. Canes may be planted depending on availability. - SHRUB SPECIES/VARIETIES: Dwar bush Honeysuckle Diervilla lonicera American Ha el Corylus americana Leatherwood Dirca palustris Nannyberry Viburnum lentago Wild Black Currant Ribes americanum Raspberry/Blackberry Rubus var. Blueberry Vaccinium angusti olium var. -SPACING: 4 O.C. TYP staggered spacing per L8.01/B - URBAN FOREST - SMALL SHRUBS 41 - SHRUB SIZE: 5gal container minimum. Canes may be planted depending on availability. - SHRUB SPECIES/VARIETIES: see URBAN FOREST - LARGE SHRUBS list. -SPACING: 2.5 O.C. TYP staggered spacing per L8.01/B - RAIN GARDEN SEED MIX & PLUGS 5,219 s - Seed mi as speci ied below shall be used to achieve diverse, wet mesic prairie. - Minimum seeding rate shall be Pure Live Seed PLS o 20 lbs per s . acre. Seeding rates will be speci ied on a PLS basis to ensure ade uate germination and coverage. - Rain Garden Areas shall be overplanted with 2" plugs at a rate o 1 plug per 5 s . t. - RAIN GARDEN SEED MIX: Canada Anemone Anemone canadensis New England Aster Aster nova-angliae Shooting Star Dodecatheon meadia Rattlesnake Master Eryngium yucci oloim Prairie Smoke Geum tri olium Alumroot Heuchera richardsonii Blue lag Iris Iris virginica Cardinal Flower Lobelia cardinalis Great Blue Lobelia Lobelia siphilitica Prairie Bla ingstar Liatris pycnostachya Virginia Bluebells Mertensia virginica Prairie Phlo Phlo pilosa Wild Rose Rose arkansana Sweet Cone lower Rudbeckia subtomentosa Sti Goldenrod Solidago ridiga Golden Ale anders Zi ia aurea Big Bluestem Andropogon gerardi Switch Grass Panicum virgatum Little Bluestem Schy achyrium scoparium Indian Grass Sorghastrum nutans Prairie Dropseed Sporobolus heterolepis - KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS TURF - SOD 11,965 s - Sod shall consist o a minimum o two varieties o Kentucky Bluegrass, be relatively ree o all weeds. - Sod shall con orm to MnDOT Spec 3878 Type D - "Mineral Soil." - URBAN FOREST PERENNIALS 25,804 s - Herbaceous layer rom Big Woods ecological community. - SIZES: plant with 2" plugs - PLANT SPECIES/VARIETIES: Pennsylvania Sedge Care pennsylvanica Trillium Trillium spp. Bloodroot Sanguinaria canadensis Violet Viola spp. Dutchman s Britches Dicentra cucullaria Bellwort Uvularia spp. Trout Lily Ethryonium spp. Enchanter s Nightshade Cicaea lutetiana Wood Ferns Dryopteris spp. May Apple Podophyllum peltatum Wild Geranium Geranium maculatum Northern Bluebells Mertensia paniculata -SPACING: Appro . 2 t O.C. TYP staggered spacing per L8.01/B SUN PERENNIALS 5,679 s - PERENNIAL SIZE: 1gal container minimum. - PERENNIAL SPECIES/VARIETIES: Cone lower Echinacea spp. Black-Eyed Susan Rudbeckia spp. Bla ingstar Liatris spp. Walker s Low Catmint Nepeta aassenii Walker s Low Purple Dome New England Aster Aster novae-angliae Purple Dome Wild Lupine Lupinus perennis Bee Balm Monarda didyma var. Sedum Sedum s var. Yarrow Achillea mille olium var. Butter ly Milkweed Asclepias tubersoa Prairie Coreposis Coreopsis palmata Prairie Dropseed Sporobolus heterolepis Karl Foerster Grass Calamagrostis acutil lora Karl Foerster Little Bluestem Schy achyrium scoparium -SPACING: Appro . 2 t O.C. TYP staggered spacing per L8.01/B - SHADE PERENNIALS 1,790 s - PERENNIAL SIZE: 1gal container minimum. - PERENNIAL SPECIES/VARIETIES: Wild Geranium Geranium maculatum Coralbells Hecuhera var. Hosta Hosta var. Ligularia Ligularia var. Pulmonaria Pulmonaria var. Bugbane Cimici uga ramosa var. Lady Fern Athyrium oli - eminia Culvers Root Veronicastrum virginicum Palm Sedge Care muskigumensis Karl Foerster Grass Calamagrostis acutil lora Karl Foerster Little Bluestem Schy achyrium scoparium -SPACING: Appro . 2 t O.C. TYP staggered spacing per L8.01/B - POLLINATOR LAWN - SEED MIX 16,086 s - Seed mi as speci ied below shall be used to achieve low-growing, low-input, lowering tur lawn. - Minimum seeding rate shall be Pure Live Seed PLS o 4 lbs per 1,000 s . t. Seeding rates will be speci ied on a PLS basis to ensure ade uate germination and coverage. - POLLINATOR LAWN SEED MIX: Beacon Hard Fescue Festuca trachyphylla Beacon Kura Clover Tri oilium ambiguum Kentucky Bluegrass Poa pratensis Lancelea coreopsis Coreopsis lanceolata Dutch White Clover Tri olium repens Lancelea Sel -Heal Prunella vulgaris ssp. Creeing Thyme Thymus serpyllum -CREEPING IVY 282 s - SIZE: 1gal container minimium - SPACING: 3 O.C. TYP . Parthenocissus tricuspidata Robusta / Boston Ivy URBAN MEADOW SEED MIX & PLUGS 13,759 s - Seed mi as speci ied below shall be used to achieve diverse, drought-tolerant, and pollinator-supporting lowering meadow. - Minimum seeding rate shall be Pure Live Seed PLS o 20 lbs per s . acre. Seeding rates will be speci ied on a PLS basis to ensure ade uate germination and coverage. - Urban Meadow Areas shall be overplanted with 2" plugs at a rate o 1 plug per 5 s . t. - URBAN MEADOW SEED MIX: Little Bluestem Schi achyrium scoparium Black-Eyed Susan Rudbeckia spp. Bla ingstar Liatris spp. Yarrow Achillea mille olium Milkweed Asclepias spp. Wild Lupine Lupinus perennis Pennsylvania Sedge Care pennsylvanica Purple Prairie Clover Dalea purpurea Prairie Dropseed Sporobolus heterolepis Lancelea coreopsis Coreopsis lanceolata Cone lower Echinacea spp. - GREEN ROOF PLANTINGS - 29,500 s WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 L801 PLANTING DETAILS 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT URBAN FOREST PLANTING DEFINITIONS & NOTES UANTITY ADDITIONAL PLANT HATCH TYPE DEFINITIONS & NOTES UANTITY City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 112 The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 E101 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN - OVERALL 04080 N STATISTICS DESCRIPTION AVG MAX MIN MAX/MINAVG/MIN 1 CALCULATION ZONE #1 0.3 fc 49.6 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/A 2 DROP OFF STREET 1.6 fc 49.6 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/A 3 MN 7 SERVICE ROAD 1.2 fc 2.3 fc 0.7 fc 3.3:1 1.7:1 4 PARKING GARAGE TOP 1.7 fc 2.6 fc 0.9 fc 2.9:1 1.9:1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 113 600.00 S64°21' 4 5" W 132.21S55°39'42"W 280.46 S64°21' 4 5" W S25°38 '15 "E197.40 N64°10' 5 2" E 853.87 N55°44'40"E212.271 0 1 . 5 2 N 4 1 ° 3 1 ' 4 1 " W95.65N01°19'57"WPARCE L 2 PARCEL 4 PARCE L 5 PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1 10010080 8029.0 0 29.00 600.00 Southw e st erl y c or n er of A U DI T O R' S SUBDI VI SI O N N U M B E R 2 4 9 (50.00 f e et n ort h w e st erl y fr o m c e nt erli n e of southb o u n d m ai n tr a c k, n o w a b a n d o n e d)Sou thwe s te r l y bounda r y l ine o fAUDITOR 'S SUBD IV IS ION NUMBER 24 9 EXISTI N G B UI L DI N G Line des cri b e d p er Doc. N o. 2 3 8 4 4 2 8 5 foo t san i ta ry ea semen tpe r Do c . No . 1017293 Sanitar y s e w er e as e m e nt p er Doc. N o. s 1 0 1 7 2 9 3 & 1 0 1 2 9 2 0 80 15155 foo t san i ta r y e a semen tper Do c . No . 1012920 13.5 fo ot s a nit ar y s e w er e as e m e nt p er D o c. N o. 1 0 1 2 9 2 0 13.513 .5 5 foot c o m m u ni c ati o n e a s e m e nt per Doc. N o. 5 7 2 1 7 6 3 5 foot c o m m u ni c ati o n e a s e m e nt per Doc. N o. 5 7 2 1 7 6 3 FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FM FMFMFMFM139.8 302.1 40.1 60.0 56.4 48.5 19.6 45.2 14.814.6 5.0 4.4 3 7 . 4 6 6 . 0 1 6 . 0 1 6 . 0 1 5 .7 5 . 9 7 6 . 2 1 1 5 . 1 7 2 .9 2 . 1 8 . 4 8 . 4 E-B E-B E-B E-B E-B E-B E-BE-BE-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B E-BC - B E- B E-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-BE-B E-B E-B E-B E-B E-B E-B E-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO-BFO-BFO-BFO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B G- B OHPOHPFO-B E- B FO-BFO -B F O - B FO-B FO-B FO-B E - B E - B O H P FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-B FO-BFO-B64.42 0 . 5 251.1 48.8 4 4 . 0 OHPOHP OHP OHP OHPOHPOHPOHP OHP SURVEY BY :APPROVED BY :DESIGNED BY :DRAWN BY :DATE :SHEET NUMBER PROJECT NUMBERREVISIONDATECHECKED BY :Plot Date: 04/10/2017 - 4:59pmDrawing name: U:\193803195\CAD\Dwg\193803195V301.dwgXrefs:, 193803195V302_XSXT DJRSt. Paul Office2335 West Highway 36Saint Paul, MN 55113Phone: 651-636-4600Fax: 651-636-1311Website:www.stantec.com193803195PLACEPLACE - ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTANovember 5, 2015193803195V301 V3.01 LAND DESCRIPTION >>LEGEND OF SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS >GATE VALVE MH MH POWER BOX TELEPHONE BOX CONIFEROUS TREE SHRUB ROAD SIGN MAILBOX LIGHT POLE DECIDUOUS TREE AERIAL UTILITIES EX. CURB & GUTTER EX. SANITARY SEWER BURIED TELEPHONE BURIED ELECTRIC BURIED GAS MAIN CB HYD CO EX. WATER MAIN EX. STORM SEWER BOLLARD LOT LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY CHAIN LINK FENCE CONCRETE CURB STOP llC-B G-B E-B OHP CO HAND HOLEH MAIL E C SS S PARKING METER NOTES 1. The property described hereon is the same as the property described in the title commitments, prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, file no. 61412, with an effective date of April 6, 2015, 7:00 am and issue date of April 29, 2015. 2.The subject property contains ±4.96 acres (±216,263 square feet). 3. The utilities shown hereon are those utilities visible at the time of the survey. 4. The subject property has direct access to Wooddale Avenue South, a dedicated public roadway. 5. The subject property is in Zone X of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 27053C0353E, dated September 2, 2004. 6. Bearing system is assumed. 7. Property is zoned, I-G, General Industrial per City of St. Louis Park zoning map.. 8. There are 19 regular parking stalls and 1 designated handicap parking stall located on subject property. Parcel 1: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. SIGN PYLON SIGN Parcel 2: Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) Parcel 3: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. Parcel 4: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. Parcel 5: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 DOCUMENTS Item 6: Drainage easement(s) over subject premises in favor of State of Minnesota, as created in Document No. A2373673 and reserved in Document No. A2384428. (As to Parcels 1, 3, and 4). Doc No. A2373673 is a blanket easement over all of Block 20, REARRANGEMENT OF ST LOUIS PARK. For Doc. No. A2384428, the line is shown on survey, but the extent of the easement is not readable on easement copy. Item 8: Subject to a right of way and easement for public highway purposes for State Highway No. 7, as shown in Deed Document No. T958827 and recited on the Certificate of Title. (As to Parcel 1). Blanket easement for Highway No. 7 & per Item 6 of said commitment. Item 9: Sanitary sewer easement(s) over part of Parcels 1 and 4 in favor of City of Hopkins, as created in Document No. T1017293 and T1012920. Shown on Survey. Item 12: Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Map No. 5 filed as Document No. T4687398 and A5503257. (As to Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). Item 13: Memorial Plat showing judicial landmarks per District Court File No. 7986 filed July 8, 1947 as Document No. T244584. (As to Parcels 3 and 4). Item 14: Restrictions, covenants, conditions and mineral rights reservations contained in Deed Document No. A4109341, which DO contain a reversion provision. (As to Parcel 2). Item 15: Communications system easement(s) over part of Parcel 5 in favor of Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, as created in Document No. 5721763. Item 16: Terms, conditions, easements and reservations contained in Deed Document No. A4928955. (As to Parcel 5). Item 17: Terms, conditions, and provisions of unrecorded Operating Agreement dated May 1, 1984 by and between Chicago and North Western Transportation Company and Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority as referred to in Deed Document No. A4928955. (As to Parcel 5). ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY PLUG INSCRIBED WITH 43133IRON MONUMENT SET WITH PLASTICDENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND 40 800 Horizontal Scale In Feet To PLACE Launch Equity, LLC, Guaranty Commercial Title, Inc. and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2011 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(b), 7(a), 8, 9, 11(b), and 13 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on April 20, 2015. STANTEC ___________________________________ Daniel J. Roeber, Professional Land Surveyor Minnesota License Number 43133 November 5, 2015 CERTIFICATION VICINITY MAP SITE HIGHW A Y 7 HIGHWAY 100WEST 36TH STREETWO O D D A L E A V E . S D R A F T City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 114 LAND DESCRIPTION Parcel 1: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. Parcel 2: Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) Parcel 3: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. Parcel 4: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. Parcel 5: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) NOTES SCHEDULE B, SECTION 2 DOCUMENTS Item 6: Drainage easement(s) over subject premises in favor of State of Minnesota, as created in Document No. A2373673 and reserved in Document No. A2384428. (As to Parcels 1, 3, and 4). Doc No. A2373673 is a blanket easement over all of Block 20, REARRANGEMENT OF ST LOUIS PARK. For Doc. No. A2384428, the line is shown on survey, but the extent of the easement is not readable on easement copy. Item 8: Subject to a right of way and easement for public highway purposes for State Highway No. 7, as shown in Deed Document No. T958827 and recited on the Certificate of Title. (As to Parcel 1). Blanket easement for Highway No. 7 & per Item 6 of said commitment. Item 9: Sanitary sewer easement(s) over part of Parcels 1 and 4 in favor of City of Hopkins, as created in Document No. T1017293 and T1012920. Shown on Survey. Item 12: Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority Map No. 5 filed as Document No. T4687398 and A5503257. (As to Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). Item 13: Memorial Plat showing judicial landmarks per District Court File No. 7986 filed July 8, 1947 as Document No. T244584. (As to Parcels 3 and 4). Item 14: Restrictions, covenants, conditions and mineral rights reservations contained in Deed Document No. A4109341, which DO contain a reversion provision. (As to Parcel 2). Item 15: Communications system easement(s) over part of Parcel 5 in favor of Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, as created in Document No. 5721763. Item 16: Terms, conditions, easements and reservations contained in Deed Document No. A4928955. (As to Parcel 5). Item 17: Terms, conditions, and provisions of unrecorded Operating Agreement dated May 1, 1984 by and between Chicago and North Western Transportation Company and Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority as referred to in Deed Document No. A4928955. (As to Parcel 5). Item 18: Alley and parking easement(s) over part of Parcel 6 as evidenced by Document No(s). 1163477. Item 19: Subject to maintenance of an encroachment to Tract A of Parcel 7 for as long as said improvements remain standing as shown by Stipulation dated November 17, 1967 and recorded in Torrencs Case 16352, District Court, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as recited on the Certificate of Title. To PLACE E-Generation One, LLC. and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6(a), 7(a), 8, 9, 11, and 13 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on April 20, 2015. STANTEC ___________________________________ Daniel J. Roeber, Professional Land Surveyor Minnesota License Number 43133 February 3, 2017 CERTIFICATION LAND DESCRIPTION Parcel 6: TRACT A: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22, and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30: thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.6 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 20, extended Northerly. TRACT B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Hennepin County, Minnesota Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. Parcel 7: TRACT A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 517068. TRACT B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most southerly corner. Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of Lot 6 and thte East line of the Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Hennepin County, Minnesota Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. Parcel 8: Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence North 00 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds East, 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 183.14 feet; thence North 24 degrees 38 minutes 46 seconds West, 20.57 feet; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence North 39 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds West, 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 17 minutes 59 seconds East, 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence North 01 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds East, 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property)SURVEY BY :APPROVED BY :DESIGNED BY :DRAWN BY :DATE :PAGE NUMBER PROJECT NUMBERREVISIONDATECHECKED BY :Plot Date: 04/10/2017 - 4:59pmDrawing name: U:\193803195\CAD\Dwg\193803195V302.dwgXrefs:, 193803195V302_XSXT DJRSt. Paul Office2335 West Highway 36Saint Paul, MN 55113Phone: 651-636-4600Fax: 651-636-1311Website:www.stantec.com193803195PLACEPLACE - ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTAFebruary 2, 2017193803195V302 V3.01 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS 1. The property described hereon is the same as the property described in the title commitments, prepared by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, File No. 61412, Supplemental No. 2, with an Effective Date of July 31, 2016, 7:00 am and issue date of August 23, 2016. 2. The bearing system of this survey is based on the west line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, which is assumed to bear South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds West. 3. The subject property has direct access to Wooddale Avenue South, 36th Street West, Yosemite Avenue South, 35th Street West, and Minnesota 7 Service Road. 4. Per Item 2 of Table A standards: The property addresses are 5925, 5815, 5725 Highway 7, 3520 Yosemite Ave., 3565, 3575 Wooddale Ave., 5814, 5816 36th Street W., St. Louis Park, MN 55416, per said title commitment. 5. Per Item 3 of Table A standards: The flood zone classification of said property is Zone X of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number 27053C0353E, dated September 2, 2004. 6. Per Item 4 of Table A standards: The areas of subject properties are thus: 6.1.Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 contains ±216,254 square feet (±4.96 acres). 6.2.Parcels 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B2 & 8A contains ±85,842 square feet (±1.97 acres) 6.3.Parcel 8B contains ±19,663 square feet (±0.45 acres). 7. Per Items 6(a) of Table A standards: Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 is currently zoned I-G General Industrial. Parcels 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B2, 8A, and 8B is currently zoned C-2 General Commercial. 8. Per Item 9 of Table A standards: At the time of the survey, there were 90 regular parking stalls and 2 designated handicap parking stall located on subject property. 9. Per Item 11 of Table A standards: The utilities shown were observed in the field and taken from as-built plans provided by the City. 10. Per Item 13 of Table A standards: Adjoining owners of recorded are shown on survey per Hennepin County Parcel Map. 11. Per Item 16 of Table A standards: There was no evidence of any earth moving work or any construction on the site at the time of this survey. 12. Per Item 17 of Table A standards: No information was made available in regards to changes of street right of way and there was no evidence of any recent street or sidewalk construction or repairs at the time of the survey. 13. Per Item No. 18 of Table A standards: No evidence of any field markings for a wetland delineation was observed at the time of the survey. LAND DESCRIPTION City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 115 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISIONI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 PUD EXHIBIT 04080 N 40002 STUART M. KRAHN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 116 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS NICHIHA Large Format High Performance Fiber Cement rain screen cladding system Fiber Cement Products* Brick Panels, Stone Panels, Block Panels, and Kurastone™ For Product Designation as Low VOC-Emitting Products in Accordance with the Following Standards: § LEED EQ Credit: Low-Emitting Materials for Building Design & Construction § Collaborative for High Performance Schools (2014 US-CHPS) EQ 7.1.6 § California Department of Public Health Standard Method V1.1 § Criteria for the MAS Certified Green® Program Fly Ash content Pre consumer 25% Wood Fibers Pre consumer 15% 2012 & 2015 IBC Section 1403.2 Section 1404.10 Section 1405.2 Section 1405.16 Section 1405.17 Architectural Wall Panels meet wind design pressures with installed wind clips. Meets or exceeds 2012 & 2015 IBC wind pressure requirements when tested in accordance with ASTM E 330-02 Architectural Wall Panels have 0 flame spread and 0 Smoke Development. Meets or exceeds ASTM C 1186-08 for Type A Grade II products 26 27 Whether you are an architect, a builder or a contractor, Nichiha wants to ensure that you have all the information you need to make your project go as smoothly as possible. The way we see it, we are partners. Our website offers a EQORTGJGPUKXGEQNNGEVKQPQHVGEJPKECNKPHQTOCVKQPKPUVCNNCVKQPXKFGQU#TEJKVGEVWTCNFGVCKNUKPFGRVJURGEKƂECVKQPU and everything you’ll ever need to know about installing Nichiha products. ƚŚĞƉŽǁĞƌŽĨƉŽƐƐŝďŝůŝƟĞƐTM Djg^c"]djhZiZX]c^XVaiZVb^h]ZgZid assist. If you have questions, comments or XdcXZgch!XVaajhVi&"-++")')"))'&dg email us at technicalservices@nichiha.com. is designed to support panel lateral stability, helping vertical joints stay tightly VÃi`°/ iÌ>LwÌë>Vii>ÃÞ>` is fastened to the Ultimate Clip with «ÀÛ`i`ÃVÀiÜ° No-fuss products. Little ongoing cleaning or regular maintenance needed. You get to bring your vision to life and ensure it looks great for a long time. The look you’re after, the performance we insist on. Never Underestimate the Power ofREALLY GOOD TOOLS. Nichiha installation resources ensure optimal performance… Nichiha products are easy to install… you just need a few basic tools to get started.* CORRSOSIONRESISTANTFLATHEAD SCREWS Take an even deeper dive and download our ^c"YZei]^chiVaaVi^dc\j^YZh# nichiha.com/resources/installation LViX]djg^chiVaaVi^dc^chigjXi^dchXdbZida^[Z¶ check out our installation videos today! nichiha.com/commercial/install Behind our Architectural Wall Panels is someSERIOUS TECHNOLOGY... www.nichiha.com City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 117 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS NICHIHA ARCHITECTURAL BLOCK WOOD SIDING CONCRETE METALLIC STONES BRICK ILLUMINATIONS 18 X 72 18 X 120 18 X 120 18 X 120 18 X 72 18 X 72 TUSCAN BARK EMPIRE BLOCK MOTHER OF PEARL ALEXANDRIA BUFF CRIMSON MOCHA CEDAR INDUSTRIAL BLOCK GUNSMOKE WHITE WASH SHALE BROWNGRAY ANY COLOR 10 11 Get the clean lines you are after with our Modern Series >}`iÀ«ÃÃLiÜÌ Ì i«ÜiÀvwLiÀViiÌ The clean, modular look of Nichiha ArchitecturalBlock is a versatile choice for commercial and residential projects alike. Its cool modern tones and subtle seams are the perfect partner for gleaming glass, stainless steel or even paired with the warmth of wood. ArchitecturalBlock is a handsome, durable and cost-effective solution. The ease of installation and wide variety of corner options make it as popular with contractors as it is with clients. 6WHH$NQEMQHHGTUOCP[QHVJGUCOGHGCVWTGUCU#TEJKVGEVWTCN$NQEMDWVVCMGUOQFGTPVQVJGPGZVNGXGNYKVJKVUVQWIJVGZVWTGFƂPKUJ 6WHH$NQEMTGOCKPUVTWGVQKVUPCOGYKVJCUVTQPIEQPUVTWEVKQPVJCVKUDCEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV6JKURTQFWEVOGCPU DWUKPGUUCPFKUDWKNVVQNCUV6WHH$NQEMKUVJGRGTHGEV#TEJKVGEVWTCN9CNN2CPGNHQTJKIJVTCHƂECTGCUCUKVUVCPFUWRCICKPUVGXGT[FC[ wear and tear. The look you envisioned… the Performance you hoped for ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™ GRAY MOCHA TUSCAN MODERN SERIES www.nichiha.com Modern Design Tip: Add a touch of warmth to your modern design with our Wood Series. Learn more on Page 12! ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | VINTAGEWOOD | ILLUMINATION ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY TUFFBLOCK™ STEEL BAMBOO WALNUT PEWTER ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16’ [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] *APPEARANCE AND TEXTURE MAY VARY BY COLOR TUFFBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] 10 11 Get the clean lines you are after with our Modern Series >}`iÀ«ÃÃLiÜÌ Ì i«ÜiÀvwLiÀViiÌ The clean, modular look of Nichiha ArchitecturalBlock is a versatile choice for commercial and residential projects alike. Its cool modern tones and subtle seams are the perfect partner for gleaming glass, stainless steel or even paired with the warmth of wood. ArchitecturalBlock is a handsome, durable and cost-effective solution. The ease of installation and wide variety of corner options make it as popular with contractors as it is with clients. 6WHH$NQEMQHHGTUOCP[QHVJGUCOGHGCVWTGUCU#TEJKVGEVWTCN$NQEMDWVVCMGUOQFGTPVQVJGPGZVNGXGNYKVJKVUVQWIJVGZVWTGFƂPKUJ 6WHH$NQEMTGOCKPUVTWGVQKVUPCOGYKVJCUVTQPIEQPUVTWEVKQPVJCVKUDCEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV6JKURTQFWEVOGCPU DWUKPGUUCPFKUDWKNVVQNCUV6WHH$NQEMKUVJGRGTHGEV#TEJKVGEVWTCN9CNN2CPGNHQTJKIJVTCHƂECTGCUCUKVUVCPFUWRCICKPUVGXGT[FC[ wear and tear. The look you envisioned… the Performance you hoped for ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™ GRAY MOCHA TUSCAN MODERN SERIES www.nichiha.com Modern Design Tip: Add a touch of warmth to your modern design with our Wood Series. Learn more on Page 12! ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | VINTAGEWOOD | ILLUMINATION ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY TUFFBLOCK™ STEEL BAMBOO WALNUT PEWTER ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16’ [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] *APPEARANCE AND TEXTURE MAY VARY BY COLOR TUFFBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] 10 11 Get the clean lines you are after with our Modern Series >}`iÀ«ÃÃLiÜÌ Ì i«ÜiÀvwLiÀViiÌ The clean, modular look of Nichiha ArchitecturalBlock is a versatile choice for commercial and residential projects alike. Its cool modern tones and subtle seams are the perfect partner for gleaming glass, stainless steel or even paired with the warmth of wood. ArchitecturalBlock is a handsome, durable and cost-effective solution. The ease of installation and wide variety of corner options make it as popular with contractors as it is with clients. 6WHH$NQEMQHHGTUOCP[QHVJGUCOGHGCVWTGUCU#TEJKVGEVWTCN$NQEMDWVVCMGUOQFGTPVQVJGPGZVNGXGNYKVJKVUVQWIJVGZVWTGFƂPKUJ 6WHH$NQEMTGOCKPUVTWGVQKVUPCOGYKVJCUVTQPIEQPUVTWEVKQPVJCVKUDCEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV6JKURTQFWEVOGCPU DWUKPGUUCPFKUDWKNVVQNCUV6WHH$NQEMKUVJGRGTHGEV#TEJKVGEVWTCN9CNN2CPGNHQTJKIJVTCHƂECTGCUCUKVUVCPFUWRCICKPUVGXGT[FC[ wear and tear. The look you envisioned… the Performance you hoped for ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™ GRAY MOCHA TUSCAN MODERN SERIES www.nichiha.com Modern Design Tip: Add a touch of warmth to your modern design with our Wood Series. Learn more on Page 12! ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | VINTAGEWOOD | ILLUMINATION ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY ARCHITECTURALBLOCK | GRAY TUFFBLOCK™ STEEL BAMBOO WALNUT PEWTER ARCHITECTURALBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16’ [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] *APPEARANCE AND TEXTURE MAY VARY BY COLOR TUFFBLOCK™AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] 12 13 WOOD SERIES Get the natural look of wood with the unmatched `ÕÀ>LÌÞvwLiÀViiÌ° Nichiha provides the look of wood without the drawbacks of natural wood cladding. Built to last, our VintageWood and 4QWIJ5CYPQHHGTVJGTKEJVGZVWTGUQHYQQFYJKNGRTQXKFKPIEQNQTUVCDKNKV[CPFYKVJUVCPFKPIGZVTGOGYGCVJGTGNGOGPVU 8KPVCIG9QQFGZWFGUOQFGTPTGƂPGOGPVCPFYQTMUYGNNKPDQVJOQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGFGUKIPU9KVJKVUGCTVJ[CRRGCN 4QWIJ5CYPCFFUTWUVKEUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQCNNV[RGUQHRTQLGEVU$QVJRTQFWEVURCKTRGTHGEVN[YKVJINCUUOGVCNCPF block panels, adding a touch of warmth to the coolness of these materials. 8KPVCIG9QQFCPF4QWIJ5CYPCTGCUXGTUCVKNGCUVJG[CTGFWTCDNG1WTWood Series panels can install both vertically and JQTK\QPVCNN[CPFECPDGWUGFKPKPVGTKQTCPFGZVGTKQTUGVVKPIU*KFFGPHCUVGPGTURTQXKFGCENGCPCPFDGCWVKHWNNQQM %TGCVKPIVJGRGTHGEVOCVEJ0KEJKJCIKXGU[QWVJGDGCWV[QHYQQFDCEMGFD[VJGDTCYPQHƂDGTEGOGPV Warmth, Sophistication, Endurance… What more could you ask for? www.nichiha.com VINTAGEWOOD™ BARK CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] ROUGHSAWN™*AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Warm up your project with our Wood Series ROUGHSAWN™ ESPRESSO TOBACCO SMOKE NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR ROUGHSAWN | TOBACCO 14 15 Want the concrete lookwithout the dimples?Check out ourIndustrialBlock panel. CONCRETE SERIES IndustrialBlock and EmpireBlock put a freshv>Vi`ÕÃÌÀ>V V° $CEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV+PFWUVTKCN$NQEMQHHGTUCFKUVTGUUGFEQPETGVGFGUKIPYKVJCNNVJGKTTGIWNCTKVKGUCPF characteristics of natural concrete. IndustrialBlock can pair with a wide range of products and its fresh approach works in both OQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGUGVVKPIU6JGNKIJVYGKIJVRCPGNUKPUVCNNXGTVKECNN[CPFJQTK\QPVCNN[EQXGTKPIUSWCTGHGGVRGTRCPGN EmpireBlock delivers the look and feel of precast concrete block in a more versatile and easier to use format. Perfect for indoor environments as well as exterior cladding, you will never have to worry about curing times, cracking or color inconsistency. www.nichiha.com FPO EMPIREBLOCK™ INDUSTRIALBLOCK™ EMPIREBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] INDUSTRIALBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] The Concrete Series… Perfectly imperfect in every way NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK 14 15 Want the concrete lookwithout the dimples? Check out our IndustrialBlock panel. CONCRETE SERIES IndustrialBlock and EmpireBlock put a freshv>Vi`ÕÃÌÀ>V V° $CEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV+PFWUVTKCN$NQEMQHHGTUCFKUVTGUUGFEQPETGVGFGUKIPYKVJCNNVJGKTTGIWNCTKVKGUCPF characteristics of natural concrete. IndustrialBlock can pair with a wide range of products and its fresh approach works in both OQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGUGVVKPIU6JGNKIJVYGKIJVRCPGNUKPUVCNNXGTVKECNN[CPFJQTK\QPVCNN[EQXGTKPIUSWCTGHGGVRGTRCPGN EmpireBlock delivers the look and feel of precast concrete block in a more versatile and easier to use format. Perfect for indoor environments as well as exterior cladding, you will never have to worry about curing times, cracking or color inconsistency. www.nichiha.com FPO EMPIREBLOCK™ INDUSTRIALBLOCK™ EMPIREBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] INDUSTRIALBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] The Concrete Series… Perfectly imperfect in every way NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK 14 15 Want the concrete look without the dimples? Check out our IndustrialBlock panel. CONCRETE SERIES IndustrialBlock and EmpireBlock put a freshv>Vi`ÕÃÌÀ>V V° $CEMGFD[VJGRQYGTQHƂDGTEGOGPV+PFWUVTKCN$NQEMQHHGTUCFKUVTGUUGFEQPETGVGFGUKIPYKVJCNNVJGKTTGIWNCTKVKGUCPF characteristics of natural concrete. IndustrialBlock can pair with a wide range of products and its fresh approach works in both OQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGUGVVKPIU6JGNKIJVYGKIJVRCPGNUKPUVCNNXGTVKECNN[CPFJQTK\QPVCNN[EQXGTKPIUSWCTGHGGVRGTRCPGN EmpireBlock delivers the look and feel of precast concrete block in a more versatile and easier to use format. Perfect for indoor environments as well as exterior cladding, you will never have to worry about curing times, cracking or color inconsistency. www.nichiha.com FPO EMPIREBLOCK™ INDUSTRIALBLOCK™ EMPIREBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] INDUSTRIALBLOCK™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM)17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] The Concrete Series… Perfectly imperfect in every way NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK EMPIREBLOCK 12 13 WOOD SERIES Get the natural look of wood with the unmatched `ÕÀ>LÌÞvwLiÀViiÌ° Nichiha provides the look of wood without the drawbacks of natural wood cladding. Built to last, our VintageWood and 4QWIJ5CYPQHHGTVJGTKEJVGZVWTGUQHYQQFYJKNGRTQXKFKPIEQNQTUVCDKNKV[CPFYKVJUVCPFKPIGZVTGOGYGCVJGTGNGOGPVU 8KPVCIG9QQFGZWFGUOQFGTPTGƂPGOGPVCPFYQTMUYGNNKPDQVJOQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGFGUKIPU9KVJKVUGCTVJ[CRRGCN 4QWIJ5CYPCFFUTWUVKEUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQCNNV[RGUQHRTQLGEVU$QVJRTQFWEVURCKTRGTHGEVN[YKVJINCUUOGVCNCPF block panels, adding a touch of warmth to the coolness of these materials. 8KPVCIG9QQFCPF4QWIJ5CYPCTGCUXGTUCVKNGCUVJG[CTGFWTCDNG1WTWood Series panels can install both vertically and JQTK\QPVCNN[CPFECPDGWUGFKPKPVGTKQTCPFGZVGTKQTUGVVKPIU*KFFGPHCUVGPGTURTQXKFGCENGCPCPFDGCWVKHWNNQQM %TGCVKPIVJGRGTHGEVOCVEJ0KEJKJCIKXGU[QWVJGDGCWV[QHYQQFDCEMGFD[VJGDTCYPQHƂDGTEGOGPV Warmth, Sophistication, Endurance… What more could you ask for? www.nichiha.com VINTAGEWOOD™ BARK CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] ROUGHSAWN™*AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Warm up your project with our Wood Series ROUGHSAWN™ ESPRESSO TOBACCO SMOKE NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR ROUGHSAWN | TOBACCO 12 13 WOOD SERIES Get the natural look of wood with the unmatched `ÕÀ>LÌÞvwLiÀViiÌ° Nichiha provides the look of wood without the drawbacks of natural wood cladding. Built to last, our VintageWood and 4QWIJ5CYPQHHGTVJGTKEJVGZVWTGUQHYQQFYJKNGRTQXKFKPIEQNQTUVCDKNKV[CPFYKVJUVCPFKPIGZVTGOGYGCVJGTGNGOGPVU 8KPVCIG9QQFGZWFGUOQFGTPTGƂPGOGPVCPFYQTMUYGNNKPDQVJOQFGTPCPFXKPVCIGFGUKIPU9KVJKVUGCTVJ[CRRGCN 4QWIJ5CYPCFFUTWUVKEUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQCNNV[RGUQHRTQLGEVU$QVJRTQFWEVURCKTRGTHGEVN[YKVJINCUUOGVCNCPF block panels, adding a touch of warmth to the coolness of these materials. 8KPVCIG9QQFCPF4QWIJ5CYPCTGCUXGTUCVKNGCUVJG[CTGFWTCDNG1WTWood Series panels can install both vertically and JQTK\QPVCNN[CPFECPDGWUGFKPKPVGTKQTCPFGZVGTKQTUGVVKPIU*KFFGPHCUVGPGTURTQXKFGCENGCPCPFDGCWVKHWNNQQM %TGCVKPIVJGRGTHGEVOCVEJ0KEJKJCIKXGU[QWVJGDGCWV[QHYQQFDCEMGFD[VJGDTCYPQHƂDGTEGOGPV Warmth, Sophistication, Endurance… What more could you ask for? www.nichiha.com VINTAGEWOOD™ BARK CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD™* AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] ROUGHSAWN™*AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Warm up your project with our Wood Series ROUGHSAWN™ ESPRESSO TOBACCO SMOKE NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR VINTAGEWOOD | CEDAR ROUGHSAWN | TOBACCO 8 9 9KVJKVURTGOKWOOGVCNNKENQQMKPIƂPKUJCPFWPKSWGVGZVWTGQWT4KDDGF2CPGNKUVJGRGTHGEVEQORNGOGPVVQCP[RTQLGEV6JG 4KDDGF2CPGNRTQXKFGUCITGCVUQNWVKQPVQDTGCMWRCURCEGCPFCFFUUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQVJGQXGTCNNFGUKIPCGUVJGVKE+VKURGTHGEVCU an exterior or interior accent and its sleek look pairs well with modern materials such as block panels, glass and metal. The panel HGCVWTGUCFGNWZGƂPKUJVJCVTGƃGEVUNKIJVCPFETGCVGUVJGCRRGCTCPEGQHDTWUJGFRTGEKQWUOGVCNU6JGTKDDGFVGZVWTGCNNQYUVJG RCPGNVQCFFKPVGTGUVCPFXCTKCVKQP6JG4KDDGF2CPGNKUGCUKN[KPUVCNNGFYKVJQWTVKOGUCXKPIENKRKPUVCNNCVKQPU[UVGOCPFJKFFGP fasteners help maintain a clean design. #TG[QWTGCF[VQOCMGCDKIDQNFXKUWCNKORCEVD[WVKNK\KPIVJG&SWCNKVKGUQHVJG4KDDGF2CPGN!+VKUUWTGVQVCMGEGPVGTUVCIGCPF stand out from the crowd. Turn up the volume and drama on your next project. RIBBED™ MOTHER OF PEARL GUNSMOKE METALLIC SERIES RIBBED -NEW AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Heavy metal is not just for the stage… it is also notorious for bringing walls to life NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY Unleash your inner rock star with thethe Rev it up! Add the Ribbed panel to your next focal wall.NOTE:THERE ARE 9 RIBS PER PANEL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE & MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL 18 19 BRICK SERIES Nichiha’s Brick Series offers the look and timeless appeal of traditional brickwork. The slight variations in color, the stately good looks, even the grout lines; it’s all there. Thanks to a proprietary multi-layered coating process, the beauty of Nichiha is built to last. We did leave out two things: the tons of weight and the extra time required to see your project to completion… but we ƂIWTGFVJG[YQWNFPoVDGOKUUGF All the thingsyou love about brick The look you want…without the cost, without the hassle www.nichiha.com CANYONBRICK™ SHALE BROWN CANYONBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] PLYMOUTHBRICK™ CRIMSON PLYMOUTHBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] VINTAGEBRICK™ ALEXANDRIA BUFF WHITE WASH VINTAGEBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 3/4” (18 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 39.6 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 4.4 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] Get the classic look of `^acÃgZYWg^X`l^i] the modern strength of PlymouthBrick panels.PLYMOUTHBRICK | CRIMSON VINTAGEBRICK | ALEXANDRIA BUFF VINTAGEBRICK | WHITE WASH CANYONBRICK | SHALE BROWN 18 19 BRICK SERIES Nichiha’s Brick Series offers the look and timeless appeal of traditional brickwork. The slight variations in color, the stately good looks, even the grout lines; it’s all there. Thanks to a proprietary multi-layered coating process, the beauty of Nichiha is built to last. We did leave out two things: the tons of weight and the extra time required to see your project to completion… but we ƂIWTGFVJG[YQWNFPoVDGOKUUGF All the thingsyou love about brick The look you want…without the cost, without the hassle www.nichiha.com CANYONBRICK™ SHALE BROWN CANYONBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] PLYMOUTHBRICK™ CRIMSON PLYMOUTHBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] VINTAGEBRICK™ ALEXANDRIA BUFF WHITE WASH VINTAGEBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 3/4” (18 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 39.6 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 4.4 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] Get the classic look of `^acÃgZYWg^X`l^i] the modern strength of PlymouthBrick panels.PLYMOUTHBRICK | CRIMSON VINTAGEBRICK | ALEXANDRIA BUFF VINTAGEBRICK | WHITE WASH CANYONBRICK | SHALE BROWN 18 19 BRICK SERIES Nichiha’s Brick Series offers the look and timeless appeal of traditional brickwork. The slight variations in color, the stately good looks, even the grout lines; it’s all there. Thanks to a proprietary multi-layered coating process, the beauty of Nichiha is built to last. We did leave out two things: the tons of weight and the extra time required to see your project to completion… but we ƂIWTGFVJG[YQWNFPoVDGOKUUGF All the thingsyou love about brick The look you want…without the cost, without the hassle www.nichiha.com CANYONBRICK™ SHALE BROWN CANYONBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] PLYMOUTHBRICK™ CRIMSON PLYMOUTHBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] VINTAGEBRICK™ ALEXANDRIA BUFF WHITE WASH VINTAGEBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 3/4” (18 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 39.6 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 4.4 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] Get the classic look of `^acÃgZYWg^X`l^i] the modern strength of PlymouthBrick panels.PLYMOUTHBRICK | CRIMSON VINTAGEBRICK | ALEXANDRIA BUFF VINTAGEBRICK | WHITE WASH CANYONBRICK | SHALE BROWN 18 19 BRICK SERIES Nichiha’s Brick Series offers the look and timeless appeal of traditional brickwork. The slight variations in color, the stately good looks, even the grout lines; it’s all there. Thanks to a proprietary multi-layered coating process, the beauty of Nichiha is built to last. We did leave out two things: the tons of weight and the extra time required to see your project to completion… but we ƂIWTGFVJG[YQWNFPoVDGOKUUGF All the thingsyou love about brick The look you want…without the cost, without the hassle www.nichiha.com CANYONBRICK™ SHALE BROWN CANYONBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] PLYMOUTHBRICK™ CRIMSON PLYMOUTHBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] VINTAGEBRICK™ ALEXANDRIA BUFF WHITE WASH VINTAGEBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 3/4” (18 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 39.6 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 4.4 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] Get the classic look of `^acÃgZYWg^X`l^i] the modern strength of PlymouthBrick panels.PLYMOUTHBRICK | CRIMSON VINTAGEBRICK | ALEXANDRIA BUFF VINTAGEBRICK | WHITE WASH CANYONBRICK | SHALE BROWN 18 19 BRICK SERIES Nichiha’s Brick Series offers the look and timeless appeal of traditional brickwork. The slight variations in color, the stately good looks, even the grout lines; it’s all there. Thanks to a proprietary multi-layered coating process, the beauty of Nichiha is built to last. We did leave out two things: the tons of weight and the extra time required to see your project to completion… but we ƂIWTGFVJG[YQWNFPoVDGOKUUGF All the thingsyou love about brick The look you want…without the cost, without the hassle www.nichiha.com CANYONBRICK™ SHALE BROWN CANYONBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] PLYMOUTHBRICK™ CRIMSON PLYMOUTHBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8” (16 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] VINTAGEBRICK™ ALEXANDRIA BUFF WHITE WASH VINTAGEBRICK™ AWP 1818 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] (455 MM [H] X 1,818 MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 3/4” (18 MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 39.6 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 4.4 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] Get the classic look of `^acÃgZYWg^X`l^i] the modern strength of PlymouthBrick panels.PLYMOUTHBRICK | CRIMSON VINTAGEBRICK | ALEXANDRIA BUFF VINTAGEBRICK | WHITE WASH CANYONBRICK | SHALE BROWN 8 9 9KVJKVURTGOKWOOGVCNNKENQQMKPIƂPKUJCPFWPKSWGVGZVWTGQWT4KDDGF2CPGNKUVJGRGTHGEVEQORNGOGPVVQCP[RTQLGEV6JG 4KDDGF2CPGNRTQXKFGUCITGCVUQNWVKQPVQDTGCMWRCURCEGCPFCFFUUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQVJGQXGTCNNFGUKIPCGUVJGVKE+VKURGTHGEVCU an exterior or interior accent and its sleek look pairs well with modern materials such as block panels, glass and metal. The panel HGCVWTGUCFGNWZGƂPKUJVJCVTGƃGEVUNKIJVCPFETGCVGUVJGCRRGCTCPEGQHDTWUJGFRTGEKQWUOGVCNU6JGTKDDGFVGZVWTGCNNQYUVJG RCPGNVQCFFKPVGTGUVCPFXCTKCVKQP6JG4KDDGF2CPGNKUGCUKN[KPUVCNNGFYKVJQWTVKOGUCXKPIENKRKPUVCNNCVKQPU[UVGOCPFJKFFGP fasteners help maintain a clean design. #TG[QWTGCF[VQOCMGCDKIDQNFXKUWCNKORCEVD[WVKNK\KPIVJG&SWCNKVKGUQHVJG4KDDGF2CPGN!+VKUUWTGVQVCMGEGPVGTUVCIGCPF stand out from the crowd. Turn up the volume and drama on your next project. RIBBED™ MOTHER OF PEARL GUNSMOKE METALLIC SERIES RIBBED -NEW AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Heavy metal is not just for the stage…it is also notorious for bringing walls to life NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY Unleash your inner rock star with thethe Rev it up! Add the Ribbed panel to your next focal wall.NOTE:THERE ARE 9 RIBS PER PANEL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE & MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL 8 9 9KVJKVURTGOKWOOGVCNNKENQQMKPIƂPKUJCPFWPKSWGVGZVWTGQWT4KDDGF2CPGNKUVJGRGTHGEVEQORNGOGPVVQCP[RTQLGEV6JG 4KDDGF2CPGNRTQXKFGUCITGCVUQNWVKQPVQDTGCMWRCURCEGCPFCFFUUQRJKUVKECVKQPVQVJGQXGTCNNFGUKIPCGUVJGVKE+VKURGTHGEVCU an exterior or interior accent and its sleek look pairs well with modern materials such as block panels, glass and metal. The panel HGCVWTGUCFGNWZGƂPKUJVJCVTGƃGEVUNKIJVCPFETGCVGUVJGCRRGCTCPEGQHDTWUJGFRTGEKQWUOGVCNU6JGTKDDGFVGZVWTGCNNQYUVJG RCPGNVQCFFKPVGTGUVCPFXCTKCVKQP6JG4KDDGF2CPGNKUGCUKN[KPUVCNNGFYKVJQWTVKOGUCXKPIENKRKPUVCNNCVKQPU[UVGOCPFJKFFGP fasteners help maintain a clean design. #TG[QWTGCF[VQOCMGCDKIDQNFXKUWCNKORCEVD[WVKNK\KPIVJG&SWCNKVKGUQHVJG4KDDGF2CPGN!+VKUUWTGVQVCMGEGPVGTUVCIGCPF stand out from the crowd. Turn up the volume and drama on your next project. RIBBED™ MOTHER OF PEARL GUNSMOKE METALLIC SERIES RIBBED -NEW AWP 3030 DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L]) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 57.3 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] Heavy metal is not just for the stage… it is also notorious for bringing walls to life NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY Unleash your inner rock star with thethe Rev it up! Add the Ribbed panel to your next focal wall.NOTE:THERE ARE 9 RIBS PER PANEL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE & MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | GUNSMOKE RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL RIBBED | MOTHER OF PEARL 6 7 DESIGNER SERIES Nichiha’s Illumination panels deliver sleek sophistication with ease Sleek, bold, vibrant. These are the words industry professionals are using to describe Nichiha’s Illumination ƂDGTEGOGPVRCPGN+VUUOQQVJUCVKPƂPKUJGCU[KPUVCNNCVKQPCPF virtually limitless color pallet give you a degree of design freedom that most cladding products simply can’t match. Delivering sleek sophistication comes naturally for Illumination. But don’t let the pretty face fool you; there’s more than meets the eye. Its ƂDGTEGOGPVEQPUVTWEVKQPKUDCEMGFD[0KEJKJCoU[GCTYCTTCPV[9JGPEQORCTGFVQ VTCFKVKQPCNCNWOKPWOEQORQUKVGCPFRJGPQNKERCPGNU+NNWOKPCVKQPFGNKXGTUUKIPKƂECPVN[ more bang for far fewer bucks. Illumination panels add a splash of color and style to a wide array of projects: Adding color and style to your projects has never been easier. Nichiha’s Color Xpressions System is a simple 3-step process for Illumination panels that opens up a nearly limitless world of possibilities. %QNQT:RTGUUKQPUKUDCEMGFD[C[GCTNKOKVGF HCEVQT[CRRNKGFƂPKUJYCTTCPV[ ILLUMINATION AWP 1818 AWP 3030 PROFILE LARGE WITHOUT SCORE SMALL WITH MIDPOINT VERTICAL SCORE DIMENSIONS (ACTUAL MM) 17-7/8” [H] X 71-9/16” [L] 17-7/8” [H] X 119-5/16” [L] (455MM [H] X 1,818MM [L]) (455MM [H] X 3,030MM [L] ) THICKNESS (ACTUAL MM) 5/8 (16MM) 5/8 (16MM) WEIGHT (LBS. PER PANEL) 35.2 57.2 WEIGHT (LBS. PER SQ. FT.) 3.9 3.8 EXPOSED COVERAGE (SQ. FT. PER PANEL) 8.88 SQ. FT. 14.81 SQ. FT. PACKAGING (PIECES PER PACK) 2 [17.76 SQ. FT.] 2 [29.62 SQ. FT.] www.nichiha.com5EJQQNU/WNVKHCOKN[/KZGF7UG1HƂEG$WKNFKPI*GCNVJECTG *See Nichiha warranties for detailed information on terms, conditions and limitations. NOTE:CAN BE INSTALLED HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY.HAS A WIDER SOFT,U-SHAPED JOINT PROFILE IN COMPARISON TO THE AWP 1818 PROFILE. Some people see metal, others see masonry… all we see is stunning It’s not what you think, it’s Illumination ILLUMINATION | CUSTOM ILLUMINATION | CUSTOM ILLUMINATION | CUSTOM ILLUMINATION | CUSTOM City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 118 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS ENDURAMAX Integrated Insulation with brick veneer high performance rain screen cladding system Complete integrated wall system approach Increased energy efficiency R13 Moisture management on two sides Sound reduction for acoustical comfort STC of 61db Can be paired with most Oldcastle masonry units including Trenwyth, Quik-Brik and select Artisan Veneers High end aesthetics available Unique design may cut installation time by up to 20% - up to 8 stories Wind Ratings Depending on building parameters, EnduraMax Wall System can withstand wind speeds of up to 140 MPH. Tested in accordance with ASTM E330. Fire resistance: EnduraMax Wall System may be used over any exterior fire resistance rated assembly without changing the assigned hourly rating allowing to meet a 2-hour fire rating. Tested in accordance with ASTM E119. EnduraMax is also NFPA 285 compliant. Code compliance 2015 International Building Code® (IBC) 2012 International Building Code® (IBC) EnduraMax Wall System qualifies for use in Type I, II, III or IV Construction The EnduraMax masonry veneer units shall have an average thickness of 1- 3 /4 to 2 inches (44.4 to 50.8 mm) depending upon product texture. Concrete masonry veneer units comply with ASTM C1634. Clay masonry veneer units comply with ASTM C1088. EPS Boards: Expanded polystyrene (EPS) boards are molded with pre-configured veneer patterns for insertion of match- ing veneer units. Figure 1 of this report shows typical veneer patterns. The EPS boards shall comply with ASTM C578 as Type I, with a minimum density of 0.9 pound per cubic foot (15 kg/m3 ). The EPS boards shall have a flame-spread index not greater than 25 and a smoke developed index not greater than 450 when tested in accordance with ASTM E84. EPS boards shall have a nominal thickness of 2 inches (51 mm) and include gaps and notches in the front molded veneer pattern as well as a vertically corrugated back face for water drainage. 25 year warranty ^ > d t>>dzW ^ ϭϬϬй ŶǀĞůŽƉĞсϮϰйǁŝŶĚŽǁƐнϳϲйtĂůů ϳϲйtĂůůсϱϳйtĂůůdLJƉĞηϮϮн ϭϵйtĂůůdLJƉĞηϮϯ ϮϮ Ϯϯ ŶǀĞůŽƉĞŝƐϭϮйŽĨƉƌŽũĞĐƚďƵĚŐĞƚ .43 &ROG&OLPDWH+LJK3HUIRUPDQFH$IIRUGDEOH+RXVLQJ 0F.QLJKW)RXQGDWLRQ3UHVHQWDWLRQ'HFHPEHU City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 119 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS ENDURAMAX Astra-Glaze-SW+ Glazed Masonry Units Trendstone PlusTrendstone Cordova Stone Franklin Stone Harvard BrikBravissi Lamina Stone Mesastone Techture StoneQuik-Brik Traditional Verastone City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 120 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS VERTICAL PV PANELS Vertically Integrated Photovoltaic panels The panels are installed a few inches from the exterior wall and rather than trans- fer heat onto the building itself, they actually allow air to circulate between the wall and the panel, creating a shading and insulating element. Modules Used: PS-A opaque, PS-C transparent Double Glazed Unit (DGU) Features of Polysolar’s Crystalline Silicon BIPV Module •Laminated for compliance with overhead and safety glass •Thermal properties similar to K glass. •High conversion rate of up to 15% •Rigorous quality of control standards and a worldwide certifica tion program •Product warranty 15 years •Power warranty 30 years Clear panels Features of Polysolar’s Micromorph Module •Advanced thin-film technology •High Power •Sleek and stylish aesthetics •Sustained performance in high ambient temperatures •Laminated for compliance with overhead and safety glass •Thermal properties similar to K glass. •High conversion rate of up to 8% •Rigorous quality of control standards and a worldwide certifica tion program •Product warranty 5 years •Power warranty 20 years City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 121 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS Pella Impervia Fiberglass Windows Windows comply with 2012 and 2015 IBC Extruded fiberglass frame in multiple colors – no uv or color degradation Frame and glass expand and contract at same rate – long seal life 4 sided LowE coatings Integral insulation in frame – enhanced performance U value performance up to 0.23 - 24% better than Energy Star N requirements 12 year payback over baseline Triple pane glass is up to 0.17 but 3 times more money – takes up to 87 years pay- back 10 Year frame warranty 20 Year glass warranty City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 122 PLACE - ENVELOPE PROPOSALS EXTERIOR BALCONIES Endurable Balconies Prefabricated Exterior Balconies Endurable powder coated aluminum balconies Alumilast products are ultra low maintenance Fully engineered designed products Low thermal bridging - minimized to knife plates only Non combustible construction 50 year structural product warranty City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 123 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS EGENERATION = Solar PV + Wind + Anaerobic Digestion + Cogeneration + Greenhouse Anaerobic Digestion Energy Food waste from the residents, hotel and commercial will be con- verted into energy through the process of anaerobic digestion. A neighborhood-scaled anaerobic digestion system specifically designed by SEaB to be incorporated into communities will break down food waste using microbes whose methane output will be converted into energy. The byproducts of this process will be used as soil amend- ment and heat for the onsite greenhouse. This process will be en- tirely contained within the digester equipment and the E-Generation facility. Cogeneration Energy Optimizing the amount of energy generated onsite, the cogeneration process will convert methane from the grid into energy and heat. By combining cogeneration with solar, wind and anaerobic digestion re- newable energy sources, the residents and tenants will have access to affordable, reliable energy and hot water while decreasing the burden on the area’s electrical grid. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 124 The Beauty of Expediency. It’s a piece of art work. And yet it’s a func- tioning wind turbine producing electrical power. Some see DNA in its form. Some likens the movement of the turbine to the gracefulness of a ballerina pirouetting. Whatever the comparison is, all seem to be in accord that the whole unit is a beautiful addition to the building and the environment. Windside WS-4 has been developed for de- manding professional use as are the other Windside Wind Turbine family members. With this uncompromised quality, Windside is a safe and workable solution both in de- manding remote areas and in urban envi- ronment. Guaranteed Realiability. Quality Without Compromise. ® Environmental art work ”Wind Images” by artist Tarja Ervasti. Arabianranta, Helsinki, Finland. Photo by Ilkka Volanen. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 125 Windside® WS‑4—Beauty and efficiency OY WINDSIDE PRODUCTION LTD Keskitie 4 * FIN‑44500 Viitasaari, Finland * Tel. +358‑208‑350 700 * E‑mail: finland@windside.com* ® windside.com Like the other Windside models, WS‑4 has been built to last a lifetime. Only the highest grades of materials are used, and each individual will go through a careful finishing and inspection. Already the weight of the product is a proof of quality: ma‑ terials and durability have not been compromised. Besides safety, quality means also the ease of use. Windside turbines have been designed function as autonomous units with minimum need of service. Just install the turbine and leave it to work. The only maintenance needed is the lubrication of the bearings which can also be taken care of by an au‑ tomatic lubrication system. A 10 year limited warranty available. The WS‑4 model is available in all wind endurance classes (B– and A‑models). Please, check our web site www.windside.com and contact your nearest distributor. More information can be obtained also from the manufacturer: OY WINDSIDE PRODUCTION LTD Keskitie 4, FIN‑4400 Viitasaari Tel. +358‑208 350 700, fax +358‑208‑350 701 E‑mail: finland@windside.com You can easily run into a Windside WS‑4 wind turbine anywhere, since its usage purposes are innumerable. Wherever you need energy and there is no grid connection availabe, Windside WS‑4 will be at your service. They have been favoured in artistic installations and buildings, and at the same time they’ve been tested and used by Finnish Army as well as many other professional bodies. Windside WS‑4B / WS‑4A: ‑ Weight: 800 kg (B) / 1200 kg (A) ‑ Swept area: 4 m2 ‑ Generator: 50 A in delta, 28 A in star connection ‑ Voltage: 1‑200 V in delta, 1‑400 V in star connection ‑ WS‑4B and WS‑4A models max. 1000 rpm ‑ WS‑4B stands continuous winds of 40 m/s, and WS‑4A 60 m/s. Materials: ‑ Vanes: fibre glass ‑ Fastenings: aluminium ‑ Generator and end plates: steel and aluminium ‑ All bolts stainless steel or galvanized (A4, A2 or Zn) Assets of Windside wind turbines: ‑ No need to stop or secure during storms ‑ Produces max. amount of energy in storms ‑ Produces at low winds, below 3 m/s ‑ No need to be turned according to the wind direction ‑ Soundless (less than 5 dB, background noise always when measured) ‑ Stands snow, frost, heat, humidity and corrosion ‑ Allowed to be mounted on residential buildings ‑ Long lifespan ‑ Minimum need of maintenance, only lubrication City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 126 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 127 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS SOLAR CANOPY SKYLINE SOLAR OF AZ - PV PANEL SKYPORT - CANOPY STRUCTURE DUAL CANTILEVER 5,905 SF 9,260 SF MODEL ‘L-6-L’ PARTIAL CANTILEVER SkyPort Specifications Columns and Beams: (sized per site load conditions) Wide Flange Beam: ASTM A992 Gr. 50 Spacing: 18ft to 27ft O.C. Finish: One coat tinted water base rust inhibitive primer Optional: Hot Dip Galvanized ASTM A123 SkyPurlin Cold Formed #14ga. Steel ASTM A570 Gr. 55 Typical Size: 10” x 3-1/2” x 1-1/2” Finish: ASTM A653 G90 Galvanized Trim-Channel Cold Formed #14ga. Steel ASTM A570 Gr. 55 Typical Size: 10-1/8” x 2” Finish: ASTM A653 G90 Galvanized SkyBite Grounding Clamp: #14 ga. Stainless Steel 5/16” S/S Set screw, #12-14 Self Drilling Screw The project will maximize the amount of clean, solar energy generated within the development and photovoltaic panels will be located throughout the site. These panels will be visible and interwoven thoughtfully into the design to celebrate the communi- ty’s renewable energy capacity. On the roof, solar panels will coordinate with the green roof since research has shown these two systems perform even better together in a somewhat symbiotic relationship. A canopy of solar panels will cover the surface lot adjacent to the E-Generation facility, providing the additional benefits of keeping cars cool in the summer for less energy spent on air conditioning and keeping the lot clear of most snow in the winter to reduce emissions expelled while plowing. Solar panels will also be incorporated into the facade of the residential buildings, and placed to follow and absorb the maximum amount of sunlight. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property ofStantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property ofStantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date C102 SITE PLAN - NORTHWEST C104 SEE SH E E T C103SEE SHEET0 20 40 N DSA-PC Solar Carport-Single Cantilever ‘L’–Shared Purlin -5 or 6 Modules in LandscapeSingle cantilever column and beam structures with shared purlins are offered in two design models;L-5-L: Full Cantilever ‘L’,5 module rows in Landscape @ 17’-0” max. beam length, 7 or 10 degree tilt angleL-6-L:Partial Cantilever ‘L’,6 module rows in Landscape @ 20’-6” max. beam length, 7 or 10 degree tilt angleThe ‘Shared Purlin’ design consists of (East/West) parallel purlins evenly spaced, below the length of the PV module in landscape.Adjacent PV module rows share the purlin and ‘middle clamps’, which are positioned along the ‘long side’of the PV module frame.Design limits based on 5 or 6 PV modules 39” W x 65” L (approx.).Designs are choice of Tapered or Straight Beams,either Wide-Flange (W beam) or Hollow Structural Steel (HSS).The ‘W Beam’attachment to the column is by stiffener plates welded to the HSS column and bolting the W Beam to the stiffener plates in the field. Option to Full-Pen. weld stiffener plates to the W beam and field weld to the HSS column.HSS beams are field welded to the HSS columns with a ’saddle’stiffener plate between.Beams can be positive or negative tilt, positive shown below. Columns HSS Steel Tubing: ASTM A500, Grade B, Fy = 46 KSI Spacing:20ft. or 27ft O.C.(see table) Finish: Hot Dip Galvanized ASTM A123 Beams W Beam: ASTM A992 or A572, Fy = 50 KSI HSS Beam: ASTM A500, Grade B, Fy = 46 KSI Finish:Hot Dip Galvanized ASTM A123 Cee Purlins Cold Formed #14GA.(or #12GA.)Steel ASTM A653, A1003 or A1011-04,Fy = 55 KSI Size: 10” x 3-1/2” Finish: ASTM A653 G90 Galvanized Trim Purlin End Caps: Cold Formed Steel #14GA. ASTM A653, A1003 or A1011-04, Fy = 55 KSI Size:1000T125-43 Track Finish: ASTM A653 G90 Galvanized PV Module Mounting to Purlin SSI Top Clamps: W/2 Self Drilling Screws-#12 Option: SkyGrip Top Clamps-Self Grounding Beam Tilt Bay Spacing (Max) Wind Speed Snow Load Purlin Gauge 10-Degree 27'-0"115 MPH 0 PSF # 12 10-Degree 27'-0"110 MPH 0 PSF # 14 10-Degree 20'-0"115 MPH 20 PSF # 14 7-Degree 27'-0"115 MPH 0 PSF # 14 7-Degree 20'-0"115 MPH 20 PSF # 14 Model ‘L-5-L’ Full Cantilever Model ‘L-6-L’ Partial Cantilever Shared Cee Purlin W or HSS Beam HSS Column 5 Module Rows in Landscape 631 W. Commerce Avenue -Gilbert, AZ. 85233 Tel: 480-926-0122 / Fax: 480-926-9178 www.skylinesolaraz.com /info@solarcarportsaz.com City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 128 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS SOLAR PANELS AT eGEN SKYLINE SOLAR OF AZ - PV PANEL Egen facility roof plan 3978 SF The project will maximize the amount of clean, solar energy generated within the development and photovoltaic panels will be located throughout the site. These panels will be visible and interwoven thoughtfully into the design to celebrate the communi- ty’s renewable energy capacity. On the roof, solar panels will coordinate with the green roof since research has shown these two systems perform even better together in a somewhat symbiotic relationship. 226 solar panels will cover the roof of the E-Generation facility. This is an addi- tional total of 3978 sf of capacity or Solar panels will also be incorporated into the facade and rooftops of the residential buildings, and placed to follow and absorb the maximum amount of sunlight. Flat plate system mounted to slope of roof following profile of roof City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 129 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS PV ROOF TEN K SOLAR - REFLECT PV SYSTEM Ten K Solar | 9231 Penn Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55431 | Toll free: 877-432-1010 | www.tenKsolar.com PRODUCT DATA SHEETPRODUCT DATA SHEETREFLECT™PV SySTEm 70.87(1800)30.12(765)53.1 9(135 1 ) 45°26°29.15(740.30)77.87(1978)27.02(686.21)BackFrontSide 24.99(634.76)30.49(774.52)42.13(1070)84.38(2143.13) 28˚33˚ REFLECT 28 REFLECT 26 53.1 9(135 1 ) 77.87(1978) 77.87(1978) 77.87(1978) COMMERCIAL GROUND MOUNT STORAGE READY Mechanical SpecificationS Reflect 26 Reflect 28 Configuration Wave Module Tilt 26°28° Reflector Tilt 45°33° Module Compatibility Ten K Titan Series Inverter Compatability Ten K Redundant Inverter Bus Power Density 11.5 Wp /ft2 9.6 Wp /ft2 Base System Weight 2.8 lb/ft2 2.4 lb/ft2 Reflector Materials Tempered Glass, 3M™ Cool Mirror Film Racking Material Structural-grade aluminum alloys Roofpad Material Polymer Blend Wind Resistance‡Up to 120 mph Power Warranty‡‡25 Years Product Warranty‡‡25 Years Ten K Solar | 9231 Penn Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55431 | Toll free: 877-432-1010 | www.tenKsolar.com PRODUCT DATA SHEETPRODUCT DATA SHEETREFLECT™PV SySTEm 70.87(1800)30.12(765)53.1 9(135 1 ) 45°26°29.15(740.30)77.87(1978)27.02(686.21)BackFrontSide 24.99(634.76)30.49(774.52)42.13(1070)84.38(2143.13) 28˚33˚ REFLECT 28 REFLECT 26 53.1 9(135 1 ) 77.87(1978) 77.87(1978) 77.87(1978) COMMERCIAL GROUND MOUNT STORAGE READY Mechanical SpecificationS Reflect 26 Reflect 28 Configuration Wave Module Tilt 26°28° Reflector Tilt 45°33° Module Compatibility Ten K Titan Series Inverter Compatability Ten K Redundant Inverter Bus Power Density 11.5 Wp /ft2 9.6 Wp /ft2 Base System Weight 2.8 lb/ft2 2.4 lb/ft2 Reflector Materials Tempered Glass, 3M™ Cool Mirror Film Racking Material Structural-grade aluminum alloys Roofpad Material Polymer Blend Wind Resistance‡Up to 120 mph Power Warranty‡‡25 Years Product Warranty‡‡25 Years TEN K SOLAR - REFLECT PV SYSTEM mounted on north building with green roof areas. TEN K SOLAR - REFLECT PV SYSTEM mounted on south buildings with green roof areas. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 130 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS PV VERTICAL SOLAR Polysolar Curtain Walling System Future Business Centre - Cambridge 2013 Objective:Generate renewable energy whilst utilising a weatherproof and artistic façade.Overall building requirement to achieve BREEAM Excellent. Solution:Building integrated PV curtain wall and bonded rainscreen façade Size:4.6 kW Module used:PS-A (100 watts) opaque, PS-C901 Transparent (90 Watts) double glazed (DGU) Project:The Future Business Centre (FBC) in Cambridge is a purpose built incubation centre for social and environmental enterprises, the first of its kind. Polysolar was requested to provide the PV glazing for the stairwell curtain wall and the decorative rainsceen cladding. Dortech were selected by prime contractors Interserve to supply the curtain wall system. Close liaison with Polysolar saw the first truly transparent curtain wall elements employed within the UK. Result:The installation uses Polysolar argon filled double-glazed PS-C series transparent units mounted in Reynaers curtain wall system. The PS-A-Series opaque units and the N-velope mounting frame provide an efficient bonded rainscreen façade. The cladding combines the benefits of a highlythermalefficientbuildingcladding material with renewable energy technology in one. It is designed to keep the cold out and the heat in during the winter and vice versa in summer. Polysolar's thin-film solar photovoltaic glass,whenfittedasadoubleglazedunit, offer U-values of 1.2 W/m 2K and G-values of 0.42. These figures are fundamental in driving the building into the highly coveted BREEAM category of Future Business Centre - Cambridge 2013 The sleek aesthetics and low cost of the Polysolar’s PV glazing makes it ideal for awide variety of applications. This enables customers to showcase CSR and carboncommitments, meet planning and building regulations (BREEAM) and offer thecustomer an ability to differentiate their design while reducing their buildingoperation costs. Reduction in energy consumption Aesthetic solution that also limits overheating and excessive sunlight Regulation of interior temperature, less need for A/C Reduction in CO2 emissions Environmental credentials For For For more information on Polysolar and its ground-breaking energy producingbuilding materials please email info@polysolar.co.uk www.polysolar.comTel: 01223 911534 PolysolarLimited,HauserForum,CharlesBabbageRd,Cambridge,CB30GT POLYSOLAR - CURTAIN WALLING SYSTEM • Reduction in energy consumption • Aesthetic solution that also limits overheating and excessive sunlight • Regulation of interior temperature, less need for A/C • Reduction in CO2 emissions • Environmental credentials The sleek aesthetics and low cost of the Polysolar’s PV glazing makes it ideal for a wide variety of applications. This enables cus- tomers to showcase CSR and carbon commitments, meet plan- ning and building regulations (BREEAM) and offer the customer an ability to differentiate their design while reducing their building operation costs. The panels are installed a few inches from the exterior wall and rather than transfer heat onto the building itself, they actually allow air to circulate between the wall and the panel, creating a shading and insulating element. Modules Used: PS-A opaque, PS-C transparent Double Glazed Unit (DGU) Features of Polysolar’s Crystalline Silicon BIPV Module • Laminated for compliance with overhead and safety glass • Thermal properties similar to K glass. •High conversion rate of up to 15% • Rigorous quality of control standards and a worldwide certification program • Product warranty 15 years • Power warranty 30 years City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 131 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS GREENROOF LIVEROOF - HYBRID GREEN ROOF SYSTEM City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 132 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS PV PANEL & GREENROOF SIZESPV systems for Place St. Louis Park 21‐Feb‐17 Location Type Vendor size number of units Watts per unit Total size Total Watts Notes North Building Array A rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 9 500 342 sf 4500 reflect Array B rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 24 500 912 sf 12000 reflect Array C rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 76 500 2888 sf 38000 reflect Array D rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 69 500 2622 sf 34500 reflect Array E rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 68 500 2584 sf 34000 reflect Array F rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 78 500 2964 sf 39000 reflect sub total 324 12312 sf 162000 Upper North Roof size 36230 sf Upper North Green roof 15907 sf Upper Mechanical areas 8011 sf Lower North roof 6368 sf Roof deck 735 sf Lower North green roof 972 sf Total north Green roof 16879 sf Total North roof 42598 sf North Elevations BIPV array A 15.4 sf 198 220 3059 sf 43560 BIPV array B 15.4 sf 70 220 1078 sf 15400 BIPV array C 15.4 sf 40 220 620 sf 8800 Subtotal 15.4 sf 308 220 4757 sf 67760 North Canopy Car canopy Solarcity AZ 17.6 sf 863 270 15198 sf 233010 Egen building Solarcity AZ 17.6 sf 226 270 3978 sf 61020 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 133 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS PV PANEL & GREENROOF SIZES South Hotel Building Array G rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 47 500 1786 sf 23500 reflect Green Roof 5381 sf 7167 sf Hotel Mechanical areas 3085 sf Total Hotel roof 10252 sf Hotel BIPV Elevation 15.4 sf 198 220 3059 sf 43560 South Residential Building Array H rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 59 500 2242 sf 29500 reflect Array I rooftop tenksolar 38 sf 56 500 2128 sf 28000 reflect Green Roof 9291 sf 13661 sf Hotel Mechanical areas 3661 sf Total Hotel roof 17322 sf Residential BIPV Elevation 15.4 sf 198 220 1152 sf 43560 Total Project Green roof 31551 sf Total Egen solar Solarcity AZ 17.6 sf 226 270 3978 sf 61020 Total Rooftop solar tenksolar 38 sf 486 500 18468 sf 243000 reflect system Total Car Canopy solar SolarCityAZ 17.6 sf 863 270 15198 sf 233010 includes structure Total BIPV polysolar 15.4 sf 704 220 8968 sf 154880 colored system Total Solar capacity 46612 sf 691910 Total Roof area 70172 sf City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 134 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS 4 A502 4 A502 5 A502 5 A502 A210 1 A210 2 A210 3 A2104 A2114 UP UP MECH SOUND PROOF ROOM 1 250 SF SOUND PROOF ROOM 2 500 SF EXCERCISE 400 SF REC BASEMENT FLOOR GROSS 8,120 SF STORAGE 5,438 SF -13 -5.67 7 5 12 12 7 18 BICYCLE PARKING AT EACH STALL MOUNTED TO WALL TOTAL COUNT = 62 in lower level of parking BICYCLE STORAGE ROOM 1500 sf STEADY RACK SYSTEM = capacity for 140 in storage 1-3 Features and Advantages 4 The Steadyrack Advantage 5-6 Spacing Guide 7 Mounting Heights 8 Care and Maintenance Contents SOUTH INTERIOR BICYCLE PARKING PROPOSAL City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 135 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY PROPOSALS NORTH INTERIORBICYCLE PARKING PROPOSAL EXERCISE 894 SF SOUND PROOF ROOM 606 SF STORAGE 6639 SF BIKE STORAGE 2650 SF 15 10 23 29 14 8 MECH 486 SF 1 A502 1 A502 A106 1 A106 2 A106 4 A106 6 A106 3 A106 5 VAN ELEC CAR CHARGING STATION (TYP) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BICYCLE PARKING AT EACH STALL MOUNTED TO WALL TOTAL COUNT = 94 BICYCLE STORAGE ROOM 2650 sf STEADY RACK SYSTEM = capacity for 247 1-3 Features and Advantages4The Steadyrack Advantage 5-6 Spacing Guide 7 Mounting Heights 8 Care and Maintenance ContentsCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 136 St. Louis Park – PLACE December 8, 2016 Ms. Jennifer Monson, AICP Planner City of St. Louis Park 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Re: PLACE Parking Plan St. Louis Park, MN Dear Jennifer: Thank you for the opportunity to have Walker Parking Consultants perform a peer review of the proposed PLACE development at Wooddale Ave. S. and W. 36th St., in St. Louis Park. Our scope of work includes a review of the developer’s parking projections with a comparison to Walker’s recommendations in a Transit Oriented Development (TOD). We will also review the developer’s parking management plan for transportation demand and provide a summary of our assessment. PLACE-PROVIDED DATA The developer (PLACE) is planning two buildings with 300 residential units, a 110 room hotel, retail space including a bike shop, maker’s space, co-working space, café, and coffee house with 443 proposed parking spaces. They also are proposing an urban forest along the bike trail, as well as a greenhouse and an e-Generation station to supply alternative energy to the project. PLACE development has based the required parking needs on the attached Table-1 which was taken from their mobility plan. They have estimated their peak parking needs to be 428 spaces between 5 pm and 9 pm. This is allowing for one space per apartment, while removing 90 spaces for the “car-free living household” contracts that PLACE has included in their proposal. This also assumes 30% vacancy for the hotel patrons, no hotel employee parking, and a 50% vacancy for the retail parking requirements. There are many incentives to lower car dependency in their plan including: car share, bike share, hired driver services, a hotel shuttle, and the coming light rail station (with a residential shuttle until the station is in service). 1660 South Highway 100, Suite 545 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Office: 952.595.9116 Fax: 888.502.5726 www.walkerparking.com City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 137 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 2 Table 1: PLACE Parking Table ST. LOUIS PARK-PROVIDED DATA St. Louis Park Planning (SLP) has provided the attached Table-2 with its estimated parking requirements. SLP has separated the total residential unit count into the individual unit bedroom counts. This allows for a more precise estimate of parking requirements per the City’s Code. The estimated parking requirements per city code totals 838. The proposed 443 spaces planned is only 53% of this requirement. The St. Louis Park City Code requirements can be found at: https://www.stlouispark.org/webfiles/file/zoning-code/Zoning-Code- 20161007/article_v_special_provisions_(updated_12-15).pdf When considering the shared use and mobility plan that PLACE has proposed, the SLP adjusted parking needs are indicated to be 542 spaces. The proposed parking of 443 spaces is only 82% of the SLP-adjusted estimate of 542 spaces. The City is allowing in their discounted estimate one parking space per one bedroom/studio units, and two parking spaces for 2+ bedroom units. This differs from the code requirement which is one space per bedroom. Also, considering 45 1-bedroom and 45 2-bedroom units are designated as “Car-Free Living Households”, the City estimates that the required spaces for residents is 307. Dwelling units Parking Spaces Needed Percent Vacated 9a-5p Parking Needs 9a-5p Percent Vacated 5p-9p Parking Needs 5p-9p Percent Vacated 9p-9a Parking Needs 9p-9a Affordable Residential 200 140 30%140 0%200 0%200 Affordable Visitors 20 20 25%15 0%20 0%20 Market-Rate Residential 100 100 40%60 0%100 0%100 Market-Rate Visitors 20 20 35%13 0%20 Hotel 110 110 42%63.8 30%77 32%74.8 Hotel Visitors 20 20 0%20 0%20 30%6 Café 1 50 0%50 50%25 100%0 Coffee House 1 50 0%50 50%25 100%0 Co-Working 1 20 0%20 50%10 100%0 Bike Shop 1 10 0%10 50%5 100%0 Maker Space 1 10 0%10 0%10 80%2 E-Generation 1 2 0%2 100%0 100%0 Car Sharing Vehicles 10 10 60%10 40%6 0%10 Car-Free Living Households 90 -90 -90 -90 -90 Total 472 373.8 428 322.8 SOURCE: PLACE Mobility Plan City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 138 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 3 The City has provided data from area hotels indicating that a single parking space per room should be sufficient at a hotel located at this light rail station. Taking this into consideration, they estimate the total hotel spaces required is 110. The city also provided a local case study: The Hamline Station Apartments. This is a 108 unit, 178-bedroom mixed-use development with 13,000 sq. ft. of ground floor retail. With only 95 parking spaces, and nearly full occupancy of the rental units, there remain on average 25% of the parking spaces available. This is an excellent example of lower parking requirements in a mixed-use residential TOD location. Table 2: St. Louis Park Required Parking and Adjusted Estimate WALKER-PROVIDED DATA Utilizing the existing data without a market study, Walker’s shared parking model has produced the data presented in Table-3. The Walker model showed 10pm as the peak demand hour for both weekday and weekend. Walker entered the data as provided by SLP planning removing 30 of each 1 bed and 2 bed on the North Side and 15 of each 1 bed and 2 bed on the South Side dedicated as “car free” living spaces. With this data, it is evident that during the week, there are sufficient spaces, and on the weekend, the capacity is a 1 vehicle deficit. North Site Site Specifics SLP Parking Required Discounts Site Specifics 198 units 102 units 34 - Studios 1 per bed 34 1 per unit 34 28 - Studios 1 per bed 28 1 per unit 28 74 - 1 bed 1 per bed 74 74-30=44 units for car free living @ 1 per unit 44 22 - 1 bed 1 per bed 22 22-15=7 units for car free living @ 1 per unit 7 44 - 2 bed 1 per bed 88 44-30=14 units for car free living @ 2 per unit 28 26 - 2 bed 1 per bed 52 26-15=11 units for car free living @ 2 per unit 22 38 - 3 bed 1 per bed 114 2 spaces per unit 76 22 - 3 bed 1 per bed 66 2 spaces per unit 44 8 - 4 bed 1 per bed 32 2 spaces per unit 16 4 - 4 bed 1 per bed 16 2 spaces per unit 8 Total 342 198 Total 184 109 % discount for transit pass? % discount for transit pass on res. spaces? 1,500 sf bikeshop 1 per 250 6 % discount for shared parking?*6 110 room hotel 1.5 per room 165 1 per room 110 3,000 makers space1 per 250 12 % discount for shared parking?*12 4,693 café 1 per 60 78 % discount for shared parking?*78 7,500 digester Per ZA 2 none 2 1,759 coffee 1 per 200 9 % discount for shared parking?*9 10,000 greenhouse NA 0 none 0 3,000 coworking 1 per 400 8 % discount for shared parking?*8 plus 5 car share spaces 5 plus 5 car share spaces 5 Total Req. North 394 with discounts 223 Total Req. South 444 319 Proposed Parking 182 182 Proposed Parking 261 261 Percent of Reqmt 46%82%Percent of Reqmt 59%82% Total Required 838 Adjusted Requirement 542 Total Proposed 443 Total Proposed 443 Percent of Reqmt 53%Percent of Reqmt 82% South Site SLP Parking Required Discounts SOURCE: St. Louis Park - Parking Analysis Worksheet City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 139 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 4 Table-3: Walker Shared Parking Model Data Per City Code, further reductions may in some cases be available. Per the City’s Zoning Code Section 36-361: (d) Reductions. The following off-street parking reductions may be utilized jointly or separately except as indicated otherwise: (1) Transit Service. Parking may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one-quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. Regular transit service shall operate at least twice hourly between 7:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and once hourly after 6:30 p.m. Regular transit service shall operate on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. Based on the above data, the City should allow an additional reduction. Transit Service is an additional 10% (or 54 spaces). The new adjusted requirement would be 488 spaces. Weekday 10pm Weekend 10pm North South Total North South Total Bike Shop 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coffee Shop 0 0 0 0 0 0 Café 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coworking and makers space 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residents 210 107 317 210 107 317 Resident Guests 15 15 30 30 15 45 Hotel 0 69 69 0 72 72 Hotel Employees 0 5 5 0 8 8 Total Parking Spaces Required 225 196 421 242 202 444 Planned Supply 182 261 443 182 261 443 Surplus (+)/Deficit (-)-43 65 22 -60 59 -1 SOURCE: Walker Parking Shared Parking Model City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 140 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 5 Also in the City’s zoning code is a reference to Shared Parking: (f) Shared Parking. Shared off-street parking facilities are allowed to collectively provide parking in any district for more than one structure or use, subject to the following conditions: (1) The uses must have their highest peak demand for parking at substantially different times of the day or week, or an adequate amount of parking shall be available for both uses during shared hours of peak demand. A parking plan shall address the hours, size and mode of operation of the respective uses. (2) The minimum spaces required under a shared parking agreement shall be based on the number of spaces required for the use that requires the most parking. (3)Shared parking facilities shall be protected by an irrevocable covenant running with the land and recorded with the County in a form approved by the City Attorney. A certified copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator within 60 days after approval of the agreement by the City Council. Section 1 above states that the shared parking must have their highest peak demand at, “substantially different times of the day or week.” Per the PLACE provided model the hotel and the residential components both have their peak demand between 5pm and 9pm; therefore, this shared parking reduction does not apply to the largest demand segments. COMPARABLE CITY TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISCOUNTS Walker researched similar Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Zoning Codes as they apply to parking requirements at Light Rail Station Developments in other Cities. The cities were chosen because they have expanding Light Rail Systems, are in Northern Climates, and promote biking, car sharing, and other alternatives to vehicle ownership. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 141 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 6 MINNEAPOLIS, MN Code of Ordinances 541.170 – Off-street parking requirements 1 space per Residential dwelling 1 space per 3 Hotel Rooms 1 per 500 sf Retail (bike shop) 1 per 500 sf coffee shop 1 per 500 sf up to 2000 then 1 per 300 sf Café 1 per 1,000 sf Office 50% reduction for 51 dwelling units or more in a TOD Zone Table 541-4.5 https://www.municode.com/library/mn/minneapolis/codes/code_of_ordinance s?nodeId=MICOOR_TIT20ZOCO_CH541OREPALO DENVER, CO Zoning – Off-Street requirements Sec. 59-316 1 space per studio/1 bedroom 1.5 spaces per 2 bedroom 2 spaces per 3+ bedroom 1 Space per Hotel Room 1 per 300 sf Retail, Coffee shop, and café 1 per 500 sf Office Per section 59-316 1.5) (a)Within a TOD District an area wide reduction of 25% in required spaces. (b)An additional 25% if served by more than 1 RTD Rail Line (c)An additional 25% if …trip reduction strategy… approved by city council and neighborhood organization (d)Maximum reduction shall not exceed more than 75%. https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/646/documents/Z oning/DZC/Former_Chapter_59/d15%20Mixed%20Use%20from%20Article%20IV%2 0Zone%20Districts%20of%20Former%20Chapter%2059_62510-4.pdf City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 142 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 7 PORTLAND, OR Title 33, Planning and Zoning - Chapter 33.266.110 D. Minimum Transit Sites 1.Where there are 51 or more units, the minimum is 0.33 spaces per unit 2.All other uses. No parking is required for all the other uses. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/53320 Based on the above criteria, the City of Minneapolis would require 363 spaces, but with the TOD reduction of 150 residential spaces, the total would be 213. The City of Denver would require 587 spaces, but with the TOD reductions of sections a) and c), of 50%, the total would be 294. The City of Portland would require 136 spaces for the Residential and Hotel only. In summary, all three cities TOD calculations come in below the 443 spaces requested by PLACE. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THE BROWNSTONE, ST. PAUL, MN Located along the Green Line in St. Paul, the Brownstone is an affordable, mixed-use development which broke ground on June 1, 2016. Although there are only 35 housing units, there is 20,000 sq. ft. of retail and office space, along with 7,000 sq. ft. of outdoor area dedicated to green space. There are 26 (.74 per unit) underground spaces reserved for residents, and 15 surface spaces for commercial use. 2700 UNIVERSITY, ST. PAUL, MN Also located along the Green Line in St. Paul, 2700 University is a Mixed-use development with 248 units and 3,000 sq. ft. of retail, a coffee house, outdoor living space, a self-serve bike repair area, and underground parking. 50 of the units will be ded icated to affordable housing based on 50% of AMI. There are 221 parking spaces which is less than 1 per unit. The current “Walkability” Score for the Elmwood Neighborhood (the proposed PLACE location) of St. Louis Park is currently a 51 which is considered “Somewhat Walkable”. This will surely increase once the Light Rail is functional and additional development is completed in the area. For example, the walkability score for the neighborhood surrounding The Brownstone is a 77 “Very Walkable” and the neighborhood surrounding 2700 University is a 72, also “Very Walkable”. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 143 St. Louis Park – PLACE Review December 8, 2016 Page 8 CONCLUSION The parking space requirements assume that the parking supply will all be reserved or time-limited to prevent unauthorized light rail parking. It should be noted as a co ncern that there will be no public light-rail parking associated with the construction of the new station. Also, during the winter months, some additional spaces may be lost due to snow coverage and plowed snow pile accumulation on the surface lot and on-street parking. The PLACE proposal has taken into consideration many aspects of, “Car-Free Living” and combined them into a centralized location at the future Light Rail Stop. However, given the aggressive nature of the project’s parking reductions and even with the agreement between PLACE and the hotel management firm to hire from the resident pool, the coming light rail station, the increased popularity of hired driver services, and the bike and car share availability; there is some risk that 443 spaces would not be sufficient. Based only on current on St. Louis Park zoning regulations, the City would not typically accept the proposal from PLACE as a satisfactory option for improved lifestyle and car- free living without revisions to parking supply or demand. The potential consequence is that there will be constrained parking at times, perhaps causing overflow to nearby areas, and causing dissatisfaction by affected patrons or neighbors. However, there is supporting evidence that if the City of St. Louis Park did approve the PLACE development, it could serve as a trial for future TOD Development. There have been multiple developments along the Green Line from Minneapolis to St. Paul to support that St. Louis Park could be successful with this development. With the caveats noted herein, and with all mitigations in place, the data compiled with the Walker Shared Parking Model suggest that the parking and development by PLACE could supply sufficient parking. Sincerely Yours, WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS Geoff Posluszny Brian McGann Parking Consultant Parking Consultant City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 144 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO NOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to Stantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C101 SITE PLAN - OVERALL 0 80 160 N WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property ofStantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C101 SITE PLAN - OVERALL 0 80 160 N PROOF OF PARKING B = 12-15 SPACES NORTH SIDE D = RAMP 55 SPACES PER LEVEL A = 20 SPACES NORTH & SOUTH SIDES E-GEN STRUCTURED PARKING ALTERNATIVE C = 40 SPACES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 145 WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DO NOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported to Stantec without delay. The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C101 SITE PLAN - OVERALL 0 80 160 N WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSEDUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. The Contractor shall verify and be responsible for all dimensions. DONOT scale the drawing - any errors or omissions shall be reported toStantec without delay.The Copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property ofStantec. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than thatauthorized by Stantec is forbidden. DescriptionNo.Date PRINT NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE LIC. NO. SUBMITTED FOR CITY APPROVALS FEB 6, 2017 C101 SITE PLAN - OVERALL 0 80 160 N PROOF OF PARKING B = 12-15 SPACES NORTH SIDE D = RAMP 55 SPACES PER LEVEL A = 20 SPACES NORTH & SOUTH SIDES E-GEN STRUCTURED PARKING ALTERNATIVE NOTE: Discussions with City Staff have identified a number of under-utilized surface parking lots in the area of the PLACE St. Louis Park project. One such potential location, adjacent to the Hoigaard’s Pond, is shown (C). C = 40 SPACES City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 146 PROOF OF PARKING - E-GEN SITE - STRUCTURED PARKING City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 147 PLACE Parking Requirements PLACE: North Site Site Specifics SLP Parking Required Before Discounts Discount SLP Parking Required After Discounts Reductions 218 Dwelling Units 84 – Studios 1 per bed 84 1 per unit 84 0 74 – 1 bedrooms 1 per bed 74 74-35=39 units for car free living @ 1 per unit 39 -35 35 – 2 bedrooms 1 per bed 70 35-25=10 units for car free living @ 2 per unit 20 -50 23 – 3 bedrooms 1 per bed 69 2 spaces per unit 46 -23 2 – 4 bedrooms 1 per bed 8 2 spaces per unit 4 -4 Total 305 Total 193 -144 2,570 bikeshop 1 per 250 10.28 50% discount for rail/trail adjacency and shared parking 5.14 -5.14 2,529 makers space 1 per 250 10.12 100 % discount for shared parking 0 -10.12 7,500 digester Per ZA 2 none 2 0 2472 greenhouse NA 0 none 0 0 5 car share spaces 5 0 Total Required North 327.4 Total Required North with Discounts 205 -159 Proposed Parking 216 Proposed Parking 216 Percent of Requirement 66% Percent of Requirement 105% PLACE: South Site Site Specifics SLP Parking Required Before Discounts Discount SLP Parking Required After Discounts Reductions 81 Dwelling Units 48 – Studios 1 per bed 48 48-15=33 units for car free living @ 1 per unit 33 -15 16 – 1 bedrooms 1 per bed 16 16-5=11 units for car free living @ 1 per unit 11 -5 13 – 2 bedrooms 1 per bed 26 13-10=3 units for car free living @ 2 per unit 6 -20 4 – 3 bedrooms 1 per bed 12 2 spaces per unit 8 -4 0 – 4 bedrooms 1 per bed 0 2 spaces per unit 0 0 Total 102 Total 58 -44 110 room hotel 1.5 per room 165 1 per room 110 -55 4,644 café 1 per 60 77 25% discount for rail/trail/shared parking 57.75 -20 1,360 coffee 1 per 200 7 50% discount for rail/trail/shared parking 3.5 -3 3,854 co-working 1 per 400 10 25% discount for rail/trail/shared parking 7.2 -2 5 car share spaces 5 0 Total Required South 361 Total Required South 241 -124 Proposed Parking 231 Proposed Parking 231 Percent of Requirement 64% Percent of Requirement 96% Total Required 688 Total Required 447 Total Proposed 447 Total Proposed 447 Percent of Requirement 65% Percent of Requirement 100% City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 148 Page 1 SLP MOBILITY PLAN At the heart of PLACE’s transit- oriented development (TOD) lies the opportunity to decrease dependence on the car. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 149 Page 2 SLP MOBILITY PLAN CAR-FREE LIVING PLACE will actively recruit forty households to sign a car-free living contract. SHARED BIKES PLACE will offer shared bikes on site for people who cannot afford to own their own bike CYCLING Cycling is a healthy form of mobility perfect for our site due to the Cedar Lake Trail system. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Light rail will provide a main feature of our transit- oriented development. Cars for hourly shared use will be provided in special hubs by HourCar and Car2Go. CARS Cars can be for personal use or for carpooling or part-time income from Uber-like service. SHUTTLE PLACE will operate a shuttle to take community members to key locations. BUS TRANSIT There are three bus stops within a quarter mile of the site. SHARED CARS PLACE St. Louis Park is a mixed-income, mixed-use, transit-oriented development aimed at residents seeking a more affordable and sustainable lifestyle. Strategy One is to reduce the need for mobility through smart location and design that places people where they want to be through the creation of on-site jobs, live/work space, art and culture, green space, and food production. Strategy Two is to provide a mix of mobility options that work for people of different ages, abilities and incomes and maximize family time. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 150 CAR-FREE LIVING What does it mean to live car free? For some, it means poverty, disability or age. For an increasing number, it is a choice to ditch the cost and the hassle of personal car ownership. PLACE promotes car-free living because it impacts communities in so many positive ways, including: •Reduces traffic and vehicle miles traveled •Improves health •Makes for more affordable living •Lowers the carbon footprint of cities •Increases productive and family time For our PLACE St. Louis Park project, we will create a package of incentives to encourage people to choose alternatives to car ownership. Page 3 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 “ ” MINNESOTANS NOW AVERAGE MORE VEHICLE MILES THAN MOST OF THE COUNTRY, MORE THAN EVEN CALIFORNIANS DRIVE. — TRANSPORTATION.GOV City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 151 STRATEGY ONE Reduce the baseline need for transportation within the community. LIVE/WORK SPACE When people have access to well-designed live/work space, there need for mobility goes down. One third of our apartments will be live/work suites. ON-SITE JOB CREATION PLACE St. Louis Park will create over one hundred jobs on site. Our hotel will have a preference for hiring from the community. Other jobs will be created in the cafe, coffee house, E-Generation and live/work space for creatives. MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT Through a smart development mix, people can already be where they want to be, reducing the need to drive. Community members can walk to work, food, recreation, public space, and to experience art and culture. INTER-GENERATION LIVING People need to drive to visit family members less often when they can easily live in the same community without barriers to aging in place. Page 4 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 152 PARKING IN A MIXED- USE DEVELOPMENT Mixed-use development allows residential parking to share parking with commercial. Page 8 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 153 STRATEGY TWO Provide a mix of mobility options combined with a mix of incentives. MOBILITY OPTIONS •Bus •Light rail •Shared car •Cycling •Shuttle •Shared bike •Car service (Uber) INCENTIVES •Car-Free Perks Payment •Metro Pass •Shared Bike Access •Parking Savings •Car-ownership savings Page 5 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 154 PARKING ENCOURAGES DRIVING There are 800 million parking spaces in America taking up over ten percent of our land. PLACE’s purpose in creating transit-oriented development is to significantly reduce traffic and dependence on the personal automobile. Getting people out of their cars has been shown to improve health, strengthen local economies, increase disposable income, increase public safety, and more. However, policies that increase parking—especially where parking is free —actually encourage more driving. In a 2016 study, McCahill et al demonstrated actual causality between the availability of parking and increased driving. Parking requirements make it much more difficult to encourage use of transit, walking, cycling and other alternatives to the car. PLACE will go further than any development yet to develop and incentivize alternatives to the car. We have an opportunity to truly change the habits of our community members if we are not forced to pay for and subsidize parking for the automobile. Please consider eliminating all minimum parking requirements, if not for all new developments, at least for PLACE as a pilot project. Page 9 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 155 REFERENCES The following references are provided as support for our mobility assumptions. Page 6 SLP MOBILITY PLAN | PLACE | 2016 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 156 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY SOLAR SHADING STUDY March 21st September 21st December 21stJune 21st 9am 12pm 3pm N City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 157 PLACE - SUSTAINABILITY SOLAR SHADING STUDY All developments shall consider the effect of sun angles and shade patterns on other buildings. All new multiple-family and nonresidential buildings and additions thereto shall be located so that the structure does not cast a shadow that covers more than 50 percent of another building wall for a period greater than two hours between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. for more than 60 days of the year. This section will not prohibit shading of buildings in an industrial use district, or as approved for buildings covered by the same PUD, CUP, or Special Permit. Shading of existing public spaces and outdoor employee break areas shall be minimized to the extent reasonable and possible. Proposed south residential building shades adjacent property west wall more than 50% from 1pm to 3pm from Sept 21st to March 21st which is a total of 180 days. March 21st September 21st December 21stJune 21st 1pm 3pm N City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 158 Zoning Compliance Table. Factor Required Proposed Total Proposed A. E-gen Proposed B. North Proposed C. Hotel Proposed D. South Met? Use Office/Commercial/ Industrial Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Yes Lot Area 2.0 acres 5.25 1.19 2.28 1.78 Yes Height None with PUD 1 story: 33ft Flute: 40ft Turbine: 75ft 5 stories: 61ft 6 stories: 76ft 6 stories: 79ft Yes Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials 94.0% 81.9% 97.7% 98.0% 87.1% Yes Dwelling Units 299 0 218 81 Yes Hotel Rooms 110 110 Yes Density 50 units/acre, or more with PUD 57 0 95.6 45.6 Yes Floor Area Ratio None with PUD 2.11 0.2 2.3 3.2 Yes Ground Floor Area Ratio N/A 0.39 0.18 0.43 0.48 Yes Off-Street Parking Residential: 251 spaces 90 car free units (none required) Studios & 1 bedroom: 1 per unit 2, 3, & 4 bedroom: 2 per unit Commercial: 281.4 spaces Hotel: 1 per room Restaurant: 1 per 80sf Coffee shop: 1 per 400sf Co-working: 1 per 500sf Makers Space: none required Retail: 1 per 500sf E-gen/greenhouse: 2 spaces Car Share: 10 spaces 1 per car Total: 447 spaces required 447 Electric Car Charging Stations: 3% E-gen: 2 Total: 2 Electric Car Charging Stations: 3% Residential: 206 Commercial:7 Car Share: 5 Total 218 Electric Car Charging Stations: 3% Hotel: 110 spaces Residential: 58 Commercial: 54 Car Share:5 Total: 227 Electric Car Charging Stations: 3% Yes Bicycle Parking 1 per dwelling unit plus one per ten automobile spaces: 494 8 327 159 Yes City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 159 10% of commercial spaces Total: 344 required Factor Required Proposed Total Proposed A. E-gen Proposed B. North Proposed C. Hotel Proposed D. South Met? Open Area/DORA No specific percentage with PUD 16.4% Yes Landscaping See Landscaping section Yes Setbacks None with PUD 36th Street Streetscape = ~10 North: 0’ South: 5’ East: 35’ West: 4’ to 31’ North: 10’ South: 29’ East: 10’ West: 5’ North: 5’ South: 10’ East: 0’ West: 5’ North: 40’ South: 10’ East: 10’ West: 0’ Yes Mechanical Equipment Full screening required Provided: Any proposed rooftop equipment shall be screened by parapet so as not visible from off-site. Yes Sidewalks Required along all street frontages Provided along all street frontages Yes Refuse handling Full screening required Provided: Garbage, Organics, & Recycling Yes Transit service None required Future SWLRT Wooddale Station & Greenline Metro Transit Route: 615 Yes Stormwater Management None required >1 Acre: Stormwater will be retained on site & developer will contribute money to the Hoigaard Detention Pond Yes City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Title: PLACE – Preliminary and Final Plat; Second Reading of the PUD Page 160 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the conveyance of property from the City of St. Louis Park to the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority pursuant to the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-Generation One, LLC. POLICY CONSIDERATION: This action is consistent with the business terms reviewed by the Council for the redevelopment contract with PLACE. SUMMARY: PLACE E-Generation One, LLC (“PLACE”) proposes to purchase nine properties from the EDA and construct a major mixed-use redevelopment at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. The proposed redevelopment site requires the assemblage of nine parcels. Of these, the City owns the following: •5815 Highway 7 PID 1611721310079 •3575 Wooddale PID 1611721340024 •5816 36th Street PID 1611721340041 •5814 36th Street PID 1611721340042 The proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE includes the conveyance of certain property owned by the EDA and City. The City Council is being asked to convey the four City-owned properties listed above to the EDA so that the EDA may subsequently sell them to PLACE pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Contract. Under the City Charter, conveyance by the City of real property must be approved by resolution or ordinance. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Under the proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE, PLACE agrees to acquire the assembled redevelopment site from the EDA for $6,245,000. To safeguard the EDA/City’s interests, closing on the site will not occur until PLACE provides evidence that financing for the entire project has been fully secured. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 2 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF CITY PROPERTY TO THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ("Council") of the City of St. Louis Park (the "City") as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) administers Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, as amended, to promote economic redevelopment opportunities and to promote the development of land which is underutilized within the City. 1.02. Pursuant to the Act, the Authority is authorized to acquire real property, or interests therein, and to undertake certain activities to facilitate the development or redevelopment of real property by private enterprise. 1.03. The Authority is considering an offer to enter into a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Agreement”) between the Authority and PLACE E-Generation One LLC (the “Redeveloper”), under which among other things the Authority will convey certain property located within the Project and described as attached in Exhibit A (the “Redevelopment Property”) to the Redeveloper to facilitate the development of the Redevelopment Property. 1.04. The City currently owns the portion of the Redevelopment Property identified as the “City Parcels” in Exhibit A. 1.05. The City is authorized to convey real property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 465.035 to any governmental subdivision for a nominal consideration, or pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.64 to any other political subdivision of the State. 1.06. The Authority is a political subdivision of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 469.091, Subdivision 2. 1.07. The City finds and determines that conveyance of the City Parcels to the Authority, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, is for a public purpose and is in the public interest because it will further the objectives of the Project. 1.08. The City finds and determines that conveyance by the Authority of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, is for a public purpose and is in the public interest because it will further the objectives of the Project. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 3 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Section 2. Authorization. 2.01. The Council approves the conveyance of the City Parcels to the Authority by quit claim deed for reconveyance to the Redeveloper, subject to approval by the Authority of the Agreement and satisfaction of the conditions for closing provided therein, and authorizes and directs city staff and officials to execute the deed and related documents necessary to facilitate the transaction referenced herein and contemplated herein, with all such actions to be in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Resolution and in the Agreement. 2.02. City staff and officials are authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jacob Spano, Mayor Attest Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 4 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC EXHIBIT A Redevelopment Property Authority Parcels: That part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park; also of Lots 11 to 15 inclusive, Block 23, Lots 19 to 28 inclusive, Block 23, Lot 5, Block 24 and of Block 20 vacated in "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and also of Zarthon Avenue (formerly Earle Street), Walker Street (formerly Broadway), St. Louis Avenue and of alley in Block 23, said Rearrangement and of any vacated portion of said Rearrangement included in the following described lines: Beginning at a point on Northerly right of way line of The Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the Southbound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), said point being 600 feet Southwesterly from intersection of said right of way with Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles to said right of way 29 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986; thence continuing Northwesterly on the last described course a distance of 166.5 feet to a Judicial Landmark established in Torrens Case No. 7986, the point of beginning of Line A to be described, thence Southwesterly on an extension of a line drawn between the last described Judicial Landmark and another Judicial Landmark to an intersection of said extended line with the Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park, the termination of said Line A, the second Judicial Landmark above described being located as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision No. 249, Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwesterly 29 feet, measured at right angles from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the South-bound main track of said Railway Company as there now located), thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line and the same extended 168.4 feet to the Judicial Landmark being described; thence Southerly along said Westerly line of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park to the Southwest corner of said Lot; thence Southerly to the most Westerly corner of Block 20 vacated, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence Southeasterly along Southwesterly line of said vacated Block 20 to the Northwesterly line of said right of way; thence Northeasterly along said right of way line to point of beginning; Except that part of Lot 6, Block 23, St. Louis Park and that part of Lots 19 to 25 inclusive, Block 23, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" which lies Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of said Lot 6 distant 35 feet South of the termination of said Line "A" to a point in said Line "A" distant 194 feet Northeasterly of the West line of said Lot 6. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1132767. AND Those parts of Government Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8 in Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Northeasterly line of Wood Dale (or Pleasant Avenue), distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (now the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company), as said main track center line was originally located and established across said Section 16; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line to a point distant 14 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from the center line of Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company) spur track ICC No. 253, as said spur track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said spur track center line to a point distant 30 feet Northwesterly, City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 5 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC measured at right angles, from the center line of the main track of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company (formerly the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, as said main track is now located; thence Southwesterly parallel with said last described main track center line to a point on the Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of said Wood Dale Avenue; thence Northwesterly along said Northeasterly line, or the Southeasterly extension thereof, of Wood Dale Avenue, to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract Property) AND That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Except that part which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355391. City Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County , Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point in the Southwesterly boundary line of Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, according to the duly recorded plat thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said point being distant Northwestwardly 29 feet measured at right angles thereto from the Northerly right of way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company (which right of way line is parallel with and distant 50 feet at right angles from the center line of the southbound main track of said railway company as there now located), which point of beginning is marked by a judicial City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 6 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC landmark marking the Southeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southwestwardly parallel with said right of way line 600 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Southwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northwestwardly at right angles 166.5 feet to a judicial landmark marking the Northwesterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Northeastwardly at approximately right angles, 600 feet to a point on the Northwesterly extension of the Southwesterly boundary line of said Auditor's Subdivision Two Hundred Forty Nine (249) to said Government Lot 5, which point is marked with a judicial landmark marking the Northeasterly corner of the tract herein described; thence Southeastwardly upon and along said Southwesterly boundary line, as extended, 168.4 feet to the point of beginning. Which lies westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most northerly corner of the above described property; thence southwesterly along the northwesterly line of said described property a distance of 273.44 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence southwesterly deflecting to the left 10 degrees 51 minutes 16 seconds, 131.79 feet; thence southerly 122.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the east having a radius of 120.00 feet and a central angle of 58 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds; thence southerly, tangent to said curve, 30.99 feet; thence southwesterly 218.40 feet along a tangential curve concave to the west having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 69 degrees 31 minutes 00 seconds and said line there terminating. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1355392. AND Tract A: Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No, 517068. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Tract B: Parcel 1: That part of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park", lying South of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. Together with that part of the West 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 7 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Parcel 2: Lots 6 and 7, including that part of the adjoining vacated alley lying South of the center line thereof and between the extensions North to said center line of the West line of Lot 6 and the East line of Lot 7, all in Block 29, "St. Louis Park". Together with that part of the East 1/2 of all that part of vacated Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the "Plat of St. Louis Park", lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, "Plat of St. Louis Park", which would accrue thereto by reason of the vacation thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 525746. County Parcels: That part of Government Lot 5, Section 16, Township 117, Range 21, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Auditor's Subdivision 249, distant 50 feet Northwesterly, measured at right angles, from said original main track center line; thence Southwesterly parallel with said center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles to the last described course a distance of 29 feet; thence Northeasterly parallel with said original main track center line a distance of 600 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles a distance of 29 feet to the point of beginning. Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) AND Tract A: That part of the following described property: That part of Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and that part of the adjoining vacated alleys, all described as commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course a distance of 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at a right angle 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Northeasterly along the last described course to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the East line of said Lots 20, 21, 22 and 23; thence South along said center line and its extension to the center line of the vacated alley adjoining the South line of said Lot 20, thence West along the last described center line to its intersection with the extension South of a line drawn from the actual point of beginning to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from the Southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence North to the actual point of beginning; Which lies Westerly of the East line of Lot 7 of said Block 29, extended Northerly. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 8 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Tract B: Lots 3, 4, 9, 10 and part of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and part of Lots 20 to 23, both inclusive, Block 29, ''Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", and that part of vacated Zarthan Avenue, all being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 86.47 feet; thence Southerly a distance of 89.59 feet, more or less, to the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park", said point being 79 feet East of the Southwest corner of Lot 20 in said Block 29; thence Westerly along the North line of said alley and the same extended to the West line of Zarthan Avenue; thence South along the West line of Zarthan Avenue to the Southerly corner of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park"; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot 4 to the Southeasterly corner of Lot 9 in said Block 30; thence Southwesterly along the Southeasterly line of said Lot 9 to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 9; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 to the place of beginning; Except that part of said Lot 4, Block 30, lying South of a line described as: Commencing at a point in the Southwest line of said Lot 4, distant 26 feet Northwest of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4, thence Northeast to a point in the East line of said Lot 4, distant 29 feet North of the most Southerly corner. That part of Zarthan Avenue and that part of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" lying South of the North line of the alley in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" and the same extended West to the West line of said Zarthan Avenue, and Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4, Block 30, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 38.72 feet Northerly from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 4 to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" distant 6.7 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 20. That part of the vacated East-West alley dedicated in Block 29, "Rearrangement Of St. Louis Park" which lies North of the center line of said alley and between the Southerly extensions of the West line of Lot 20, said Block and Addition, and the following described line: Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of said Block 30 distant 2.4 feet Southerly, measured along said Southwesterly line, from the Northwesterly corner of said Block 30; thence Northeasterly in a straight line to a point on the East line of said Block 30 distant 6.67 feet South, measured along said East line, from the Northeasterly corner of said Block 30; thence continue Northeasterly along said last described course 56.97 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles 20.57 feet; thence Northeasterly at a right angle 86.47 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South to a point on the South line of said Lot 20 distant 79 feet East from Southwest corner of said Lot 20. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1124712. AND City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 9 Title: Conveyance of Property from the City to the EDA - PLACE E-Generation One, LLC Tract A: Lot 11; those parts of Lots 12, 13, 14, 21, 22 and 23, Block 29; those parts of Lots 2 and 11, Block 30; that part of the adjoining vacated north-south alley lying in Block 29, and vacated Zarthan Avenue, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad, shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway on said plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 955.17 feet to the east line of said Lot 12 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 162.71 feet to the southerly line of said Lot 14; thence North 88 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West, 18.23 feet along said southerly line and its westerly extension to the centerline of said alley; thence North 00 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds East, 4.17 feet along said centerline; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 183.14 feet; thence North 24 degrees 38 minutes 46 seconds West, 20.57 feet; thence South 65 degrees 21 minutes 14 seconds West, 252.73 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 11, Block 30; thence North 39 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds West, 2.40 feet along said southwesterly line to the said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 17 minutes 59 seconds East, 451.50 feet along said southerly right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 185.28 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 11, Block 29; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 11 and 12 to the point of beginning. Tract B: Lot 6 and those parts of Lots 7, 8, and 11 thru 21, Block 25, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" described as follows: Commencing at the west quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the 4th Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the west line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 6 a distance of 492.57 feet to the southerly right of way line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad shown as the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway in the plat of "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park"; thence continuing South 00 degrees 14 minutes 49 seconds East along said west line 80.00 feet; thence South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 526.90 feet to the east line of said Lot 7 and the point of beginning of the parcel to be described; thence continuing South 65 degrees 52 minutes 15 seconds West, 361.97 feet to the west line of said Lot 21; thence North 01 degrees 03 minutes 00 seconds East, 54.70 feet along said west lot line to said southerly railroad right of way line; thence North 64 degrees 21 minutes 45 seconds East, 366.58 feet along said southerly right of way line to the east line of said Lot 6; thence southerly along the east line of said Lots 6 and 7 to the point of beginning. (Abstract Property) The Redevelopment Property will be replatted as Lot 1, Blocks 1, 2 and 3, and Outlots A, B, and C, PLACE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance establishing a Planned Unit Development for the Shoppes at Knollwood and the construction of a Chick-fil-A restaurant, and to set the second reading for May 15, 2017. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to amend the City Code to establish the Shoppes at Knollwood PUD which will include the redevelopment of the former TCF bank building into a Chick-fil-A restaurant including a drive-thru? SUMMARY: Chick-fil-A (CFA) submitted an application for a Preliminary and Final PUD for the Shoppes at Knollwood site. The purpose of the PUD is two-fold: 1.Convert the existing Knollwood Mall PUD to the current PUD format which requires creation of a new PUD zoning district that is specific to the Shoppes at Knollwood development. Converting the old PUD to the new PUD will require a rezoning of the property from C-2 General Commercial to the new PUD zoning district. If approved, the new PUD district will be called “PUD 10” on the zoning map, and known as “Shoppes at Knollwood”. 2.Redevelop the former TCF bank building with in-vehicle service (drive-thru) into a proposed CFA restaurant with a drive-thru. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted on February 22, 2017. Over 20 people attended the meeting. While support was expressed for the CFA some concerns were expressed regarding focusing traffic on Texas Ave, and lighting levels at the mall. Concerns were also expressed about CFA as a company, siting comments made by the CEO regarding LGBT matters. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 8, 2017. Comments were received from residents referring to themselves as the Allies of St. Louis Park. They presented a letter, which is attached. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a 4-0 vote. The minutes of the meeting are attached. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Draft PUD Ordinance Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Allies of SLP Letter Submitted to Public Hearing PUD Development Plans Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 2 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The current Knollwood PUD was approved on February 7, 2000 as an overlay to the C-2 General Commercial district. Prior to that, Knollwood Mall approval was granted under a special permit. The last amendment to the PUD was in 2013 when the PUD was amended to: 1. Replace the mall with 25,000 sf of “junior box” retail spaces. 2. Construct an 11,500 sf building at the Highway 7/Aquila Ave intersection. 3. Renovate the parking lot. 4. Bring the property into compliance with stormwater regulations. The new retail building, mall renovation and parking lot renovation are complete. The stormwater improvements will be constructed during the summer of 2017. The TCF Bank building was vacated in 2014 when the new TCF building was constructed north of Super Target at the corner of 36th Street and Boone Avenue. Site Area: 37.64 acres Current Zoning: C2-General Commercial Proposed Zoning: PUD-Planned Unit Development Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Current Use: Shopping Center Surrounding Zoning Districts: North: R-2 Single-Family Residence East: R-3 Two-Family Residence and C-2 General Commercial South: C-2 General Commercial and RC High-Density Multiple-Family Residence West: C-2 General Commercial and POS Park and Open Space City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 3 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for commercial use. The proposed PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses and dimensional standards that are unique to this site and the proposed site and building plans. Staff finds that this site is suitable for the existing and proposed uses and meets many of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The site provides a mixture of commercial uses and opportunities for the neighborhood and for the region. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant requests approval of a preliminary and final PUD. A PUD is a rezoning and zoning text amendment that establishes the regulations for a specific property. The PUD is separated into three main components. The following is a description of the existing PUD and the proposed changes. West of Aquila Ave. This section of the PUD consists of a fast food restaurant and a bank. Both uses include a drive-thru. These two buildings have existed since the early 1980s for the most part unchanged. Shops at Knollwood. This shopping center has changed in many ways since it was first constructed in 1955. The shopping center consists of large to small retailers including Kohl’s, Cub Foods and others. The shopping center also consists of a small three tenant building at the corner of Highway 7 and Aquila Avenue that was constructed in 2014. TCF site. The TCF site is located at the corner of Highway 7 and Texas Ave. It consists of a single free-standing building with a drive-thru. The building was constructed in 1973. The building has been vacant since the TCF Bank relocated to its new building in 2014. There are no changes proposed for the area west of Aquila Ave. The Shoppes at Knollwood shopping center will remain unchanged with the exception of some alterations of the parking lot between the TCF site and the shopping center. The intent of these changes are to accommodate the new CFA, and to improve vehicular and pedestrian movement from Texas Ave to the shopping center. Therefore, staff is proposing that all the exhibits approved under the 2013 PUD be carried forward and approved with this PUD request with the conditions and modifications detailed within this report. Proposed Chick-fil-A (CFA). The proposed CFA will be constructed where the existing TCF Bank building is currently located. The two-story TCF building is approximately 12,000 square feet in area, and will be replaced with a one-story fast food restaurant that is approximately 5,000 square feet in area. Drive-Thru. Both the TCF and CFA have a drive-thru facility. The CFA drive-thru will wrap around the east and north side of the building in the same manner as the TCF drive-thru currently does. The most notable difference between the two is that the entrance to the CFA drive-thru will be located approximately 200 feet from Texas Ave. This is an improvement over the current TCF design where the entrance to the drive-thru is located 40 feet from Texas Ave. CFA made this change at the request of the City Engineering Department with the intent of improving safety and traffic flow at the right-in only shopping center entrance located at Texas Ave. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 4 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Traffic. The City Engineering Department reviewed the proposed CFA development and had the following comments regarding traffic counts and traffic flow. The traffic for the existing and the proposed development was estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation ITE traffic manual. As shown below, the proposed development reduces the estimated daily trips generated by this site by 477, and reduces the trips in the PM peak hour by 411. The road system surrounding the site has adequate capacity for the trips from this development. Traffic generation for the 11,971 gross square foot (GSF) TCF bank (Drive-in Bank) 2,957 trips daily. (247 per 1,000 GSF) 646 trips during the PM peak. (54 per 1,000 GSF) Traffic generation for the proposed development, a 5,000 GSF drive-thru restaurant: 2,480 trips daily. (496 per 1,000 GSF) 235 trips during PM peak. (47 per 1,000 GSF) In addition to the estimated reduction in traffic resulting from the CFA restaurant, changes were made to the site plan with the intent of improving vehicular and pedestrian movements. 1.The entrance to the CFA drive-thru is proposed to be 200 feet away from the Texas Ave shopping center entrance. The existing entrance to the TCF drive-thru is located 40 feet from Texas Ave. 2.A sidewalk will be installed from Texas Ave along the south side of the CFA site. The sidewalk will complete a pedestrian connection from Texas Ave to the shopping center. This connection, along with the pedestrian improvements made in 2014, makes it possible for pedestrians to walk across the PUD from Texas Ave to Aquila Ave entirely on ADA compliant sidewalks. Parking: The parking calculations below were calculated for the entire PUD. The shopping center category includes all buildings within the PUD located east of Aquila. By code, the only exception calculated separately from the shopping center is restaurants with full wait staff. Applebee’s is the only restaurant in the PUD that is required to be calculated separately. Burger King and Midwest Bank are calculated separately because they are located on separate parcels that are not adjacent to the shopping center parcel. The table below shows the minimum number of spaces required per use within the PUD, and the total proposed for the entire PUD after the CFA is constructed. As shown, the site will have 528 spaces more than required by code. There is sufficient parking for the PUD as proposed. Land Use Minimum Required Spaces Proposed Spaces Difference Shopping Center 1,692 spaces Restaurant with wait staff 117 spaces Burger King 49 Midwest Bank 25 Total 1,883 Transit Discount (10%) -188 TOTAL 1,695 2,223 +528 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 5 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) CFA proposes to install eight bicycle parking spaces on-site, which is the minimum required by code. Stormwater: The PUD was required to come into compliance with current stormwater requirements when the PUD was amended in 2013. Construction of the required stormwater improvements are required to be completed by October 1, 2017. The stormwater improvements consist of lift stations and an infiltration pond located at the northwest corner of the site (Aquila Ave and 36th Street). The proposed plans include the TCF site, so there are no additional stormwater requirements resulting from the proposed CFA. Landscaping: The PUD received substantial landscaping improvements as a result of the 2013 PUD amendment. The PUD, however, did not address the TCF site as it was anticipated to be redeveloped soon. The CFA landscaping plan will be added to the shopping center landscaping plan and incorporated into the new PUD. CFA originally proposed to remove 15 mature trees (marked with an “X” below). Seven of the trees are located within the construction limits of the proposed CFA. These trees are required to be removed to facilitate the new building, drive-thru and parking lot. They will be replaced as required by city code. The remaining eight trees are located elsewhere in the southeast corner of the PUD. Four of them are located in the MNDOT right-of-way, three in the landscaped islands between the CFA and Highway 7, and one located northeast of the CFA at the corner of Texas Ave and the shopping center entrance. Following the Planning Commission meeting, staff met on-site with representatives from CFA, Shoppes at Knollwood and MNDOT to discuss the proposed tree removal with the goal of reducing the proposed tree removal. CFA and Knollwood agreed to reduce the number of trees to be removed. Two of the MNDOT trees shown circled in green will be preserved, and the city has agreed to the removal of the two MNDOT trees circled in red. (See exhibit below.) The City Environmental Coordinator agreed that the two MNDOT trees are distressed, and should be removed, however, the remaining trees are in good shape, and could be pruned to improve visibility to the site and the health of the trees. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 6 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Additionally, a tree replacement calculation was provided. As a result of tree removal, CFA and Knollwood are required to plant at least 163 caliper inches of trees. The landscaping plan shows that they will be planting 227 caliper inches of trees, which is more than the replacement requirement. The additional trees are required for meeting general landscaping requirements on the Knollwood Mall property. The additional trees will be planted in the southeast portion of the mall facing Hwy 7 and Texas Ave. The landscaping will be consistent with the landscaping completed as a result of the redevelopment of the central portion of the mall. The landscaping plan brings the mall into substantial compliance with landscaping. The city will work with Cub Foods over the summer to bring them into compliance by landscaping their islands which currently do not have trees. TCF Bank Texas Avenue State Highway 7 Remove Preserve City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 7 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Tree Replacement: Caliper inches required as a result of tree removal: 163 caliper inches Caliper inches planted on CFA and Knollwood Mall: 227 caliper inches Lighting: City code requires the average lighting levels in parking lots to fall between 0.4 and 1.0 foot candles (fc). CFA has modified their lighting plan to comply with these levels. The average lighting for the CFA as proposed is 0.9 fc. This was accomplished by removing three proposed light poles from the CFA lighting plan. Illumination of the CFA site will be met by existing Knollwood Mall lights, existing city lights in the Texas right-of-way, and one new pole to be installed in the CFA parking lot. Signage: The Shoppes at Knollwood currently meets the maximum amount of signage allowed for a shopping center of this size. Therefore, CFA can have wall signage as allowed for shopping centers, which includes separate buildings on the same parcel, but there is not enough available signage for another freestanding sign within the PUD. Staff believes that given the large size of the Shoppes at Knollwood PUD, a second multi-tenant sign is reasonable. The PUD has only one sign, which is located at the Highway 7 and Aquila intersection. Staff recommends that a second multi-tenant sign be allowed at the Highway 7 and Texas Ave intersection. The second sign is proposed to be 120 square feet per side, which is the same size as the existing sign. The proposed PUD ordinance includes a provision allowing for the second sign. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Shoppes at Knollwood preliminary and final planned unit development subject to the following conditions, which will be incorporated into the development agreement. 1.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. 2.The on-site storm water management system shall incorporate the revisions required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the city through the permitting process. 3.All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. 4.Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a.Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant and property owner. b.A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and City representatives. c. All necessary permits shall be obtained. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 8 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) d.A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, street lights, landscaping, etc.) and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met: a.The developer shall sign the City's Assent Form and the Official Exhibits. b.A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the property owner and City that addresses, at a minimum: i.The conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate. ii.The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to: sidewalks and boulevard improvements and the execution of any necessary agreements related to the maintenance of such improvements. iii.Easements related to electronic communication and fiber infrastructure. iv.A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 1.25 times of the costs of all public improvements (sidewalks and boulevards), and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. v.The developer shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final PUD approval. vi.The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute said Planning Development Contract. c.Final construction plans for all public improvements and private stormwater system shall be signed by a registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 6. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: d.All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Friday, and between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays. e.The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. f.Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. g.The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public street. h.Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the City Engineer (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 9 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) ORDINANCE NO. ___-17 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 10 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8332 HIGHWAY 7 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-08-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as C-2 General Commercial. Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from C- 2 General Commercial to PUD 10: See Exhibit A Sec. 4. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-08-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new PUD Zoning District. Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD 10. (a) Development Plan. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: (1)Site Plans (2)Landscaping Plans (3)Lighting Plans (4)Grading Plans (5)Building Plans (6)Storm Water Plans (7)Utility Plans (8)Survey (9)The site shall also conform to the following requirements: a.A minimum of 1,695 parking spaces shall be provided on-site. b.The maximum building height shall be 40 feet. (b) Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted uses in PUD 10. (1)Shopping Center. The shopping center shall be limited to the following uses: City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 10 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) a. Office. b.Medical or dental office. c. Adult day care. d. Group day care/nursery school. e.Bank. f.Food service. g.Private entertainment (indoor). h.Retail. i.Liquor store. j.Service. k. Showroom. l.Studios. m. Restaurants with or without intoxicating liquor. n. Museum. o.Police service substation. p.Post office. (c) Accessory Uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in PUD 10. (1)Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and does not exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. (2)Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. (3)Food service. (4)Outdoor seating and service of food and beverages with the following conditions: a.No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use. b.Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet of a residential use. c.Additional parking will not be required if the outdoor seating area does not exceed 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross floor area of the principal use, whichever is less. Parking will be required at the same rate as the principal use for that portion of outdoor seating area in excess of 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross building area, whichever is less. (5)In-vehicle sales or service, limited to restaurants, banks, and pharmacies. a.Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of 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, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from the lot in an R district by a building wall. b.Stacking shall be provided for six cars per customer service point and shall comply with all yard requirements. c.This use shall only be permitted when it can be demonstrated that the operation will not have a significant adverse effect on the existing level of service on adjacent streets and intersections. d.The drive-through facility shall be designed so it does not impede traffic or impair vehicular and pedestrian traffic movement, or exacerbate the potential for pedestrian or vehicular conflicts. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 11 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) e. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. f.Any canopy constructed as part of this use shall be compatible with the architectural design and materials of the principal structure. g.The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. (d) Special Performance Standards (1)All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2)Signage shall be subject to the regulations found in Section 36-362 pertaining to signs. PUD 10 shall be subject to the C-2 regulations with the following clarifications and modifications: a.The maximum sign area shall be increased by 240 square feet with the condition that the additional signage be used in its entirety for a free-standing sign located at the corner of Highway 7 and Texas Ave S. The sign shall be double sided, and not exceed 120 square feet per side. (3)Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. Backlit awnings are prohibited. Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-08-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing March 8, 2017 First Reading May 1, 2017 Second Reading May 15, 2017 Date of Publication May 25, 2017 Date Ordinance takes effect June 9, 2017 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 12 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) EXCERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MARCH 8, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Torrey Kanne, Richard Person STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther OTHERS PRESENT: Soren Mattick, City Attorney 3.Public Hearings A.Knollwood Mall Preliminary and Final PUD Location: 8332 Highway 7 Applicant: Chick-fil-A Inc. Case No.: 17-08-PUD Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained that the PUD request is two-fold to convert the existing Knollwood Mall PUD to the current PUD format and to redevelop the existing TCF bank building with in-vehicle service (drive-thru) into a proposed Chick-fil-A (CFA) restaurant with a drive-thru. Mr. Morrison presented drive-thru and traffic flow comparisons for the TCF site and the proposed CFA development. Mr. Morrison reviewed parking, stormwater, landscaping, lighting, signage and architecture. Mr. Morrison stated that a neighborhood meeting was held on February 22, 2017. Concerns included traffic levels on Texas Ave., lighting levels affecting residents east of Texas Ave., and concerns about CFA as a company. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about access on Texas, remarking that it was a quick right turn. Mr. Morrison showed the access. Commissioner Robertson asked if the boundary on the new PUD is the same as the existing PUD boundary. Mr. Morrison replied that the boundary is the same. Commissioner Rickert asked about the drive-thru lanes, order stations, parking lot and footprint. Mr. Morrison showed the drawings and the proposed new footprint. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 13 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Commissioner Tatalovich asked about the expectation for traffic flow coming west on Hwy. 7 to the property. Mr. Morrison responded that it will probably be a split between the main Knollwood entrance and the Texas entrance. Mr. Morrison described the drive-thru double stacking lane that accommodates several cars and would eliminate back up into the parking lot. Jason Hill, development consultant for CFA, and Joe Vavrina, HR Green, introduced themselves. Mr. Hill provided background on the company and its locations. He noted that CFA allows one franchise per person. Joe Vavrina, HR Green, discussed conditions No. 7. Lighting and No. 8 Landscaping. He said the lighting they’ve requested is paramount for safety. He said their request is to work with staff to be flexible and allow lighting in excess of city code. He added that the lighting will be LED. Regarding landscaping, Mr. Vavrina said CFA wants to remove trees which MnDOT recommended removing based on quality of the tree. MnDOT identified two other trees in declining health and at risk to the right-of-way. He circulated photographs of trees which CFA would like to remove under the advice of their arborist and MnDOT. Mr. Vavrina said MnDOT has agreed to allow trees to be replanted in the right-of-way to compensate for trees removed. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. Ellen Dischinger, Stacey Aldrich, Susan Niz and Marc Berg presented a letter with 105 signatures, dated March 8, 2017, to Commissioners and the applicant, on behalf of Allies of St. Louis Park. Ellen Dischinger, 3266 Blackstone Ave. S. read their letter to CFA which stated Allies of St. Louis Park’s mission is to stand up for groups and individuals who feel threatened in the current climate, including the LGBTQIA community. Susan Niz, 2800 Alabama Ave. S., asked if CFA would consider a gender-neutral restroom or restrooms in the restaurant. She stated that voluntarily adding them to the restaurant would be a proactive way for a new business to show support to the LGBTQIA community. Stacey Aldrich, 2757 Alabama Ave. S., read the city’s Resolution Supporting and Standing with all Members of the St. Louis Park Community. Ms. Aldrich asked if CFA would evaluate hiring practices to ensure they are free of institutional racism, homophobia, transphobia and sexism. She asked if CFA would reach out to disabled workers and to immigrants. Ms. Aldrich asked if CFA would make accommodations to support the religious practices of employees. She asked if CFA can share some examples of how they will actively address those issues. Marc Berg, 2913 Webster Ave. S., said he expected to hear about technical issues from the applicant. He said what he heard right away was about what a wonderful company Chick-fil-A is. He stated that paragraph one of the City Charter preamble addresses the city’s strong position and tradition with respect to human rights, anti-discrimination, tolerance, diversity and inclusion. He said the Allies group wants to emphasize that St. Louis Park takes human rights seriously. He said St. Louis Park is a community in which businesses tend to be engaged with the community. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 14 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Mr. Berg asked if CFA would work towards a more inclusive community, one that denounces bigotry, hatred and intolerance. He asked if CFA would share how its profits are invested and what charitable contributions it will make. Zaylore Stout, 2957 Vernon Ave. S., stated that he is a labor and employment law attorney. He said there have been lawsuits against CFA franchises in regards to requiring prayer at some employee meetings and at some management level meetings. He asked if this is going to be a practice in St. Louis Park as well. He asked if Muslims will be welcome as employees and to grow within the organization into management positions; and in management and corporate training would they also be required to pray Christian prayers. He asked if they will be penalized or terminated if they choose not to. Mr. Stout said he subscribes and believes in the comments made by the Allies of St. Louis Park in regards to the LGBTQIA community. Karl Gamradt, 3347 Virginia Ave. S., said it seems there is no agreement on the lighting or landscape plan. He commented that there already are issues with existing lighting and this was discussed at the neighborhood meeting. The new plans include more lighting than the city wants. The sign would also be lit. He said that’s a lot of lighting going up when there are already lighting issues. Mr. Gamradt spoke about traffic concerns entering and exiting the site; and the uncontrolled intersection at the northeast corner. He said given the nature of fast food traffic the traffic flow seems like a big problem with a lot of opportunity for accidents. Mr. Gamradt stated one has to be careful about separating oneself from the corporation in terms of the immediate franchisee. The local hiring practices may be fine but institutional racism is almost impossible to detect even when it exists. In terms of charitable giving, Mr. Gamradt said he appreciates the applicant showing what CFA has done in the past. He said the applicant has said CFA can’t guarantee what the franchisee will support in charitable giving. Chair Peilen closed the public hearing. Mr. Hill stated that CFA is a restaurant company dedicated to making good food and making remarkable service for all customers. He said the company is represented by more than 80,000 people, at over 2100 locations, who have diverse opinions, backgrounds and beliefs. He said as a representative of CFA he doesn’t have answers for all the questions asked. He said he will get the contact information of the public hearing speakers so he is able to provide as many answers as he can. He added that there are 10-12 CFA restaurants in the Twin Cities. Chair Peilen commented that the recommended conditions regarding lighting and landscaping as presented by staff are quite clear to the Commission. The applicant may not be in full agreement with staff. She added that traffic analysis was also an important part of the work which has been completed by staff. Mr. Morrison responded that considerable traffic changes were made to the original site plan in the name of traffic and safety. He said staff believes that the site plan now is more than adequate to handle traffic at the site. The U-turns are safe. Commissioner Robertson said he wanted lighting and landscaping plans to meet city requirements. He said the Planning Commission looks at zoning. Discussion and comments made at the public hearing will be in the record and reviewed by City Council. He said most of the other issues raised City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 15 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) need to be addressed by someone other than a volunteer Planning Commission. He said he would recommend approval with great respect for the worries that have been expressed at the public hearing. Commissioner Tatalovich said he agreed with Commissioner Robertson. He said he agrees with comments made in the public hearing. CFA could have a very successful franchise in the city but it will never be fully embraced unless they do things as laid out by the Allies. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she agrees with Commissioners Robertson and Tatalovich. Regarding traffic, she said there is a similar situation at McDonalds near Miracle Mile. She said the proposed traffic flow at CFA is much better than McDonalds. She said that drivers do learn how to yield and turn at drive-thru facilities. It does work at McDonalds which is much more congested. She thanked everyone for their participation in the public hearing. Chair Peilen said she agreed with the comments made by commissioners. She thanked the Allies of St. Louis Park for their commitment and said it is important for a company to succeed in St. Louis Park to be aware of concerns. She said there’s no basis for the Planning Commission to make a decision on the plan based on a company’s philosophy. She added that the Allies have done a great service by their presence. Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary and Final Shoppes at Knollwood PUD subject to conditions, and rezoning the Knollwood PUD properties to the Shoppes at Knollwood PUD. Commissioner Johnston-Madison requested a friendly amendment that any diseased trees be removed and replaced, and not just staff’s recommendations to keep all but one tree. Commissioner Robertson accepted the friendly amendment and Chair Peilen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 16 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Allies of SLP Letter Submitted to Public Hearing Presented by Ellen (105 signatures) March 8, 2017 To Chick-fil-A Representatives, We are here today to tell you about the Allies of St. Louis Park and what we stand for. We are a community group with 850 members—and growing—whose mission is to stand up for groups and individuals who feel threatened in our current climate. One of the groups the Allies of St. Louis Park represents--in allyship and in membership--is the LGBTQIA community. Regardless of the personal views of the Chick-fil-A management proposing to move into the Knollwood location in St. Louis Park, the anti-LGBTQIA reputation of your company precedes you. We are here to let you know that we will not tolerate discriminatory practices in our community, that we will ask for accountability, and that we will ask for your participation in our efforts. We would like your hiring and employment practices to be transparent, lawful, and fair. Not only for the LGBTQIA community, but inclusive of all faiths, races, and backgrounds. Will you evaluate your hiring practices to ensure they are free of institutional racism, homophobia, transphobia, and sexism? Will you reach out to disabled workers? To immigrants? Will you make accommodations to support the religious practices of your employees? We would like to know that you support anti-hate efforts, which our community has been facing firsthand. We would like to know how your profits are invested and what type of charitable contributions you will make. Will you work with us towards a more inclusive community, one that denounces bigotry, hatred, and intolerance? We want to see your business as an asset, not a detriment, to our beloved diverse community. Will you consider a gender-neutral restroom or restrooms in your restaurant? At a time when the rights of transgender people are being stripped from them, this is a concrete way to demonstrate that you value them, not only as customers, but as humans. When transgender people are denied safe access to a public restroom, they are excluded from spaces, marginalized, and left out. Working cooperatively, we can create a better future for all in our community. This is an opportunity for you to improve the reputation that has come before you, as we are all working to improve who we are, what we stand for, and to take bold actions against racism and discrimination in all forms. If an organization is neutral, it is on the side of the oppressor. We believe that all of us— individuals, organizations and businesses—must actively work together toward acceptance, equal human rights and the equitable treatment of all. As members of Allies of St. Louis Park, we are exercising our civic responsibility to hold all businesses, including yours, to a higher standard of accountability. We hope that you will work with us towards these goals. We will not stand for less and we will not tolerate hate, discrimination, or even a neutral stance on these issues. Thank you, The Allies of St. Louis Park Kirsten Brekke Albright Meredith Johnson Susan Niz City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 17 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) Andréa Alvarez Martha Bigelow Erica Driver Rebecca Davis Melanie Dawson Katie Bacon Mary Berry Maddy Settle Matt Flory Abbey Hallin Gilda Houck-Markovits Luke Healy Adrienne Rochat Nicole Delorme Lee Neitge Antonio Rivera Daniel Cronn-Mills Marc Berg Julia Berg Brenna Healy Carol Bungert Maura Murphy Lindsay Pierre Erica Driver Patty Burley Kourtney Zvanovec Allena Catchings Jaime Chismar Seebacher Pete Heiligenthal Dan Richardson Roni Falck Katherine Butler Elizabeth Jo Davis Stacey Aldrich Megan Patterson Pamela Juve Brianna Heiligenthal Laura Sedransky Philbrook Ellen Dischinger Mackenzie Hanson Katie Kelly Karin Miller Liz Snyder Sara Bleske Elizabeth Stroder Linda Swanson Karen Hoeschen Jeffery Blackwell Annetta Wilson Cheryl Gallagher Watson Rebecca Weinbeck Alex Moen Tanya Teske Paula Ann Johnson Cathryn Kasic Sarah Schwab Joseph DeCamillis Kristin Krithivasan Dave Lilak Molly Harrington Andrew Heimbuch Joni Kneeskern-Voigt Sandra Obermiller Rob Machalek Carly Gaeth Danneka Halverson Valerie Dhital Anna Vournakis Denise Konen Barbara Spencer Morales Sarah Reuben Raechael Beyer Judy Steele Kim Carden Michaela Hackey Nicole Epp Paula Evensen Matthew Jorgensen Agata Wang Madeleine Spalding Greta Hanson Mary Pat Shaffer Mary Wagner Jessica Sumpter Melanie Becker Katie Lukas Sarah Hogan Schwabel Edvin Niz Quinten Reuben Jessica Phillips Beth Wolslegel Cate Mahoney Tracy Gardner Anderson Jennifer Brisson Julia Wolfe Skalman Lauri Kraft Kim Opitz Leslie Anne Olson Sue Cornelius Naomi Rockler Lisa Ruff Loveless Karen Johnson Susan 1. Will you consider a gender-neutral restroom or restrooms in your restaurant? Stacey City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 18 Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD) The City of St. Louis Park’s Resolution Supporting and Standing with All Members of the St. Louis Park Community states: “St. Louis Park City Council supports and stands with all members of the St. Louis Park community. The City Council rejects division, bigotry, hate, and fear. The City Council will fight for the rights, freedoms and interests of all of the members of the community, no matter the color of their skin, their gender, the way they worship, where they were born, their age, their disability, their status regarding public assistance, their marital or familial status, their sexual orientation, or any other identity.” 2. Will you evaluate your hiring practices to ensure they are free of institutional racism, homophobia, transphobia, and sexism? Will you reach out to disabled workers? To immigrants? 3. Will you make accommodations to support the religious practices of your employees? Marc 4. Will you work with us towards a more inclusive community, one that denounces bigotry, hatred, and intolerance? 5. Will you share how your profits are invested and what charitable contributions you will make? SCHEMATIC DESIGN PACKAGE KNOLLWOOD FSU 8020 HWY 7, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 SOUTHWEST PERSPECTIVE COVERSHEET 03600, KNOLLWOOD FSU, 8020 HWY 7, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 STORE NUMBER 03600 PROTOTYPE P12 _ SE LRG VERSION V1 TIER 2 GROSS BUILDING AREA 5000 SF NET CONDITIONED AREA 4867 SF UNCONDITIONED AREA N/A SEAT COUNT 112 SEATING TYPE STANDARD REGISTERS 4 DRIVE-THRU YES LEED N/A LANDSCAPING STANDARD OPTIONS: RESTROOM TWO (2) FIXTURE WATER FILTRATION TYPE 1 PLAYGROUND STANDARD KITCHEN LAYOUT CENTERLINE ., .. 2017/02/02 �-�� City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 19 EC-I ---- SC.1,>---+-- WEST ELEVATION 114·.1·-o· EC-I . �T/HIGHPLATE WEST ELEVATION: Class 1: 73.10 % Class 2 & 3: 26.90% Class 4: 0.0% _____ !!_S� -----------------------------------------------�r---"'---------------------------.-----------""'1-------,---------------i--p-----t--_ --_ --___ Tll���:. & EAST ELEVATION 114·.1·-o· EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 03600, KNOLLWOOD FSU, 8020 HWY 7, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 --� EAST ELEVATION: Class 1: 79.63% Class 2 & 3: 20.47% Class 4: 0.0% ____ TIS�:. & 2017/02/02 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 20 EC-1 ------------1-�����������������������-�-------------.--------------�------TIL���� sc,,,----I-- SOUTH ELEVATION 1(4°-1·-0· EC-1 EC-1 ------�IB����� SOUTH ELEVATION: Class 1: 69.28% Class 2 & 3: 30.72% Class 4: 0.0% ______ TJ\'J�ER TA�; � _ _ _ T/S�:. (; ---� ,...a .. -----------------------.------------------aollll!�-i--....._--__=-'-:-...=-::aa-=..;-a.==f---=-...--...--...._-;;;..;;..._= ... -:a..::;aat-- ----_ T�O\���: � NORTH ELEVATION 114· .. 1·--0· 03600, KNOLLWOOD FSU, 8020 HWY 7, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 ______ Tl!�� NORTH ELEVATION: Class 1: 69.08% Class 2 & 3: 30.92% Class 4: 0.0% - - - - - _r,w� TERTA:.� � _ _ _ T/S�-0� (; EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR FINISHES SC-1 STUCCO SYSTEM COLOR: WHITE FINISH: SAND MEDIUM BR-3 BRICK VENEER COLOR: CITADE L SIZE: MODULAR MORTAR: ARGOS SAN TAN EC-1 PREFINISHED METAL COPING COLOR: DARK BRONZE PT-9 EXTERIOR PAINT COLOR: DARK BRONZE FINISH: SEMI-GLOSS ST-1 STOREFRONT COLOR: DARK BRONZE 2017/02/02 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 21 DINING PATIO SEATING SCHEDULE Mark Name Count Manufacturer Model Material 1 Dining Chair 14 Benchmark Design Group BAJA SIDE STACK {2012) Aluminum -1" X 1.5" Tubing 2 Table -Two Top (W/0 Umbrella Hole) 1 Benchmark Design Group TAB3055-2424-AAL-WJ-BDT Aluminum, Anodized Dark Bronze 3 Table -Four Top (W/ Umbrella Hole) 2 Benchmark Design Group TAB3055-3636-AAL-WJ-UH-BDT Aluminum, Anodized Dark Bronze 4 Table -ADA Four Top (W/ Umbrella Hole) 1 Benchmark Design Group TAB3055-3644-AAL-WJ-UH-BDT Aluminum, Anodized Dark Bronze 5 Trash Receptacle 1 Benchmark Design Group CFA-AL-2444 Aluminum, Anodized Dark Bronze I Q _ DINING PATIO PLAN DINING PATIO PERSPECTIVE 1/-4"•1'-0" PATIO PLAN 03600, KNOLLWOOD FSU, 8020 HWY 7, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 2017/02/02 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 22 ) -:0:- EXISTING CURB ISIANDS � TO BE EXPIWDED AND \ l'IITH SIDEWALK ADDED -- (BY orn[RS) \ \ \ \ \ C)l.i_� m O N N .,_,-a:: sj-" N wr--:L,j VJ� ��� w "1-o:5 2:'. "-� :::JW . u, () � LL tx0 ' � PROPOS !R/\SH EN .LOSlJRE tu 0:: D (/] (/] 0 ... (/] ·o w '" u 0 ... u -'6-<( .. ACCESS DRIVE N 89'04' 4.9" W .. S. LINE OF N. 499.55' OF SE1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SEC. 18, T. 117, R. 21 .\ 196.54 \ \ \ \ in 0 0 '" 0 z -0�- w =, z w (/] <( X L,J I- D ,- - ,o· BAR IS ONE INCH ON OFFICIAL DRAl'/lNGS ' ,· IF NOT ONE INCH ADJUST SCALE ACCORDINGLY FOR REVIEW 5200 Buffington Rd. A\lonto Georgia, 30349-2998 E 8 g II STORE 03600 ST. LOUIS PAflK, MN KNOLLWOOD SHOPPING CFNTER ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 SHEET TITlE OVERALL SITE PLAN Job No. : 86160343 Slore : 3500 Dote : 10.27.16 Drown By . _____M_B_L Checked By:_____.lf_Y__ Sheet C-1.1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 23 11 � � ]I ; L ? i2 � eo:: :::, II 01 � �� Z O oo w 15 c58 18 ;§: �� �� � �� �:� �Do Z c5!§ ';ji oD D <o o ;i , � a !1 i� i !I � � I t' ,� JI -"o>, I ..... e I "e, "'->� ________ .. ;;."eJ·.,e .. II 0'-@jiii I / �, rt"' '.Jt�' I-.._:. #,'l,9 �� ·1 C � d �� _o 111;ijg :! 8:;g�;�:�; (/)�;::I<� w�� ii' ::it.> W"-l::iww<'(o._<"-�o !- " - ' : ' ; e:= t:lw --' [Jl D>--'� S8�� s�� � �� u. "' Sz '-'"'"' w�S��""����� ,1:;@gS������"'� z �'-'"'CQ{/]itJ,,.,�5 � ��g���t��� D 8iil�rn�5°';::"2:o:-:,.,ozul:;:�:::;,-.::d[2��=:;'=��S'!l w"""-"' �§;::,::, '-'O: 0a:[1>:�:§;<5\:!;,§t::i z viE\,.,wo:f;::i=;::'!l;, !ll!ii:i;;:�'!l�"'ti"'5�gJ2�� g���g�:s��� '-'w <=0 ;;,w'.:;lul/)1;'; i���iU:j��8 8;€f:5F8:,;:,!�8Ft;! " ueeJE)l::IH z � "o!ae e nl 111 I '-"' "-tj-cc, , > � ;z: ti n0-:oc'-'-Q �: 8 ����.-:. vs � 0 z ".'. ·· -:-. i:ri' n � �-o· � fi�J��, ��� g ,g g �� .-..�5S;o -----I :�9 SNOISV\3!, T":31¥QIW WOO'U99JE)l::IH -���s�s�t:;§ a.. � � g . cri'-o I o v, .:= 0 z -z O w :S es �::L, .... <J:: <I" cag 2 � Q.) g � ., u _Jf-....JN I.Cl 0:::_J 05 .DO-' 0 <U <t> �t;S,...:�B'ic.,o._ �� �v'i806 65 �(/}cf") I �' oi �� ail ,e "8 �� �;!: �:;; i"i:; iE f§� �� ��i� I� ll/� gs :; n oS �� 00 ' � Q ! s 0 i --!J r ...J � 0 "' z0 � "' 0 :S II <( ;-� w If)� � bl () ::,"' I fl w >°' 0 -1'7 ...J ->-3nN3fll SIIX31-· I I � )�'� I -, / ;;:TC I 11 I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1Y-?Ji'' ' w ?:a::u /(!) • U) w u Si i'.:51:;:w �d °" �� :=6R g�o ""--�� � ��§l� � iii�� ;f;:��5 "'-w:::,-'c::, t;jn._�� <:,� {{} <::,� {}, -¥ \, •. -;s,?6' \, >}.,('°'<'a ,, \, "';,6'"'c> ,, -*-\;,� w= � "'°?;. ____ G:'. 0-- \;,7.{?i, ----"' -a .... ", u -----':i ---- \;,7,9<', --", \, -•., 96'- "2 0 QIJ> •• :;; ] .� 1_ "" !i� :a8:1s '.;;!� z ow 3:: �g oB w L,. zv, -�1$ 0 "=tn Gj rn � 0:: @ I.. e If) (/) d w w w w f- "'"' E b ·� !! ;uIr 0, ,,s '.5 �!Q !g�� ·a:: �� ,e� � �\,!§ �t!'f 0 �@5: g.,c: U ii'.'33 3z,;, ��� ��� a:: 2 I �,� � "i� ON 3/\lffiJ !¥ ,c�c o,<',:,.,,'!'"'o,'"',..,t"" <)' "'' SS3JJII ... 1 3/\ltJO ���o:�: t1!� z0��§-� w�5?"'w 51::?�:i"':S� �f§S�;S 5§�6��8 �t:;8�1rr t;�o<w�i:;i� .wi':l °'D wg,�6:i��ll/,-gnr� ll/� :�a��i��ll/ll/ 2� �:����oi3 ::::�::2""��"-··<l�!;j:Z�m!:;l"' �"'a�!:S""f:!�3gi� "':2 ��;c;';'iiiii85'!':l�� �!!::�::�!��·� i�§§��w<:�:3§5 s.:e--=n.;:);,!!a:�-rn5Ul>- :rs�8��.j�o.�3� g� ��;:�:�����-��!�1n!t�iUH�Ct:W <.>CI'.::,o::Sgi!=w ;: 1ta';ic:;j:':e "'l55"'0 �o 1i1i��§��8[;:l;@:� <oc..:<rn;;; re�� �::e� :i! ;�� 5�� ��§ ii! i�� &�;co�Ei*S�;�� ;i�i,;8 o ;::J oBi t��:?,;�.in �Iii "' z 0 i:2 0 0 'ii w� a::: w ::, � If) u a� ...J () zwI ss:� f- -1�- ,_ 8:o "' y >-" � ���� ':i!gsg:2� ,-5':i!]-;,'::Je': ��:k�� zo:;i�:2@ w<.>§:W.,,--o: :iii�i 2>-���t5w:;;_iJ::,�oc������ >-2c, u O u;11i :;J"'���--, ��t']cc@� "'(/]"'E"'-'$ 2iE!::ig;:::�i���� �:i!;� �8=!;:i':/$ • ��g ::! �g� �iii Q 2�6 ��� fc'�� "'o g �1: "'"'>;;; �::d� :;;@;.! ;;;�: -12" �§� cli;i� )Sj,-'r-��: ��(/) e"w rEgF >c �5� " � ;;; ��!��8 �� (/)-2: ., i:ci:: l!i�;���i1:i ��� ��:i:: 1:5 :a::� �ii 0(/)9 i�� ' , � 1':i��� �j@°:i�8 !!l!l a.u")_J ,L'l �di�8 ��58ci �:5l�"-3 ci;;s'.3zi:: §58��5 �ls�"-� �ii:, 5§ -t:l c:,u[f a.a, a:z:""�ir ,cg5zw 20 '-'°F i@g�>-0:(llz:::efrl Oz5;zu.. �8,.:,�� !i�/§"'a: ,:l�w 1:.ic5i'5 DD Woo i'.:io:\> >< :l/>--o :g �3: � ���0 �cS (/) ... i;::w -� �;�>-;!to "' 8 §;B� ��� ';;, ci�:;i Sl 81(/)� � a�� : ::� z -&o o o '-'� 6 �c:;� 0:: o_:;&:c;; 5 @:lie.. z p._<(0 • ,,;, ,, ' ��"":,d: !i8� �� �g 5� os �8 §�E� 9;� ,"< ��8 �g� w-w o,c wS o ;2a.;;; '-'�� �oi;:: • 0 .w @�j§ <Co <ll;;io ��a ��i "'�'-' !:� <<c �B� ��[,': aui� b/'5'1:, 8h s:§s ��< ��i ��� '"'ooa n:"""' �ii ��§ , i i i8 " � � I i � C � !i � �-':! zo "z w w °"i'; � �� ::, '::"�c,�� (li::;! � ,w 0 �� � � i 80 ,, "a "" �� co E5� <o �j " e � zl:' a. � �� j �� "" �al �� �:;: ; 0 8� � !; � f;:O U "'o � �z vi Ii w8 �g �� i � i� ;i �gi: "i � g I� ��5 �>-3 "" i;i�i hisa �?"' ��� ::;!:,;'3 �!iZi7i �5� ;�8 �g�-o• :1� §1§ I g � z � ! a g � a ' !�z< c 0 g � 3 I�'� 0 • i � < �:i w5 �� oo e ! w � I•� i ' 0 � �a � ! : I� e; I § ; � 3 �' ,; e � � I I : a � , � !;� ;;; Ii 8 l@ "'5� � "' Cl; g §o._ � ! i � 1�: � � w � 05� o :,,; "' "zI $' °' � 8 ii:i"' i �; ! i; ii� ,_ u O o.. � $ uow ; 1'i : � a. oi g�F i � i 8 � � ���� � � 5 � � §�� � 8 � i 8: g�� i I : ; I i :11 -� � -� _g_ ci � -�--- '�::i �;�* �-�� i; ��ZD ii 08 as a, o" o' Gz ci!2 �� �8 � e a ,� 8� "2 Ji 8� :5ee �� SC ow _,,;: *�e� �e� g�� �"'I;: wf:io ��i OD> ci8 "' c;'.<lll'l ��� " I , j §�'" �� 8:3 w> oo '" �� :;U �� <l!i=' !ti ·,106.\01 ;qo1 1nii.<01 '(�"P'UOl�-bui.,,,,D-£1'£09199\:J\•6MQ\0�:J\£>£09Ci,la\O\OP\OOu4w0,4\ \):Oiij"''''""5 ·:0�6ow1 "6o1p·ouo110,nqoL -�>,09 l9S ,o,.p·;i���ri:ld-�l-l:D9!9H'6"P':l ons1oi: rSH'6Mp"u600 -o�.-1;1-1:0919e:6"P"lJOa-si:x1-i-��,��-1&• :o,>JX "UJ051::01 -lWl: "90 oo;:po1101d "!;Oouo�s 0•1101d City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 24 :!.� .. -=-=�-l,=.= .. ,c1= ---] -- -•,; rr \ rr---, __ I'.: ----+-'_,_-,- 1 ' Ii C--.---+-� 1:, ll 11 If ------·-· -.- ' ' I I -------- > ---..,,, "---.;�----/. --- 20 SCALE KNOLLWOOD CHICK-Fil-A, ST. LOUIS PARK. MN February 6, 2017 MATERIALS SCHEDULE QTY KEY BOTANICAL NAME/ITEM I COMMONNMIE SIZE DEC IDUOUS TREES 3 "" ACER X FRE.EPl�ll 'ARMSTRONG' ARl.!STRONG MAPLE 2.s-cAL 3 GT GLEDITSIA TRIACANTiiOS 'DRAVES' STREET KEEPER HONEYLOCUST 2.S-CAJ..... 2 cs IMLUS 'SELECT A FIRE BIRD' CR/1.BN'PLE 1.5'CAL. DECIDUOUS SHRUBS 27 HM HYDR/\NGEAt.tACROPHYLLA 'BLUSHING BRIDE' ENDLESS SUl.1MER HYDRANGEA #5 "RA RHUS AROMATICA 'GROW-LOW SUMAC #5 EVERGREEU SHRUBS 78 JC JUNIPER CHINEN SIS 'GOlD LACE' JUNIPER '5 14 TO THUJA OCCIDENTN..IS 'BAILJOll/11' TECHNITOAABORVITAE ,.. PERENNIALS, GAASSESA GROUNDCOVER 123 CA CALN,IAGROSTIS X ACUTIFLORA 'KARL FOERSTER' FEATHER REED GRASS #\ 33 CN CALM11NTHA NEPETA LESS ER CALM11NT "' 159 GG GAJLLARDIA X GRANOIFLORA 'ARIZONA SUN' BLANKET FLOWER #I .. HE HEUCHERA 'PALACE PURPLE' COR.ALBELLS #\ 145 HF HEM EROCALLIS 'FRAGRANT RETURNS' DAYLILY #\ 45 HP HOSTA 'FRANCEE' HOSTA #\ 173 LS LIRIOPE SPICATA CREEEPING LILYTURF 1 CELL 56 SH SPOROBOI.US HETEROLEPIS PRAIRIE OROPSEED #\ MISCELLANEOUS 32'1 SOD SEE NOTE BELOW SY 39 MULCH 3" DEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD !.\ULCH CY 8 ROCK 3' DEEP 1-3" DIAMETER RIVER ROCK MULCH CY GENERAL NOTES: CO.'lD B&B a•a I••• CONT. CONT, !CONT. CONT. CONT. CONT. CONT. CONT. CONT, CONT. 10 FlAT CONT. PROP. EOP NID BOC (TYP.) EXIST. £OP AND fJOC (TYP.) / I \ / ' ' ,·;?' ACCESS PROP. 6UILO!NG ZONED C-2 / \\ \ \ 1\, l,) I) I .1, , '// \ I/ I I I t �-.I r, ,· I 111 I' I I f f i· .<' ,/ / .. 1 / 1' I I I I I I .I I CROUNDCOV[R LEGEND I I � SOD ROCK MULCH \ \ '\ \ \ \ \ . \ \ EXIST. PARKIIIG LOT \ \ ,_ / \ 1, \/ ) ZOtlEO R-C �:--�--I /I /, / J \ / \I I I --t-'· / \ REMARKS MATURE SIZE CENlHAL LEADER; MATCHED J0-40'H X 12-1S'W CENTRAL LEADER; MATCHED 45'HX 16W CENTRAL LEADER; MATCtlEO 501fX25W 3' O.C.; I.IATCHED 3-4'1iX3-4Y/ 3' O.C.; MATCHED 34'HX6-8YI 14' O.C.; MATCHED J.4'HX4-6'W 3' 0.C.; l,1ATCHEO 6-Sli X 24 -36 'Y'I 24" O.C.; MATCHED 4.-ti'll X 24-36-W 18" O.C.; MATCHED 18·24'H X 18 -24-W 12" O.C.: MATCHED S.-l2'HX-�M2"W 1a·o.c.; flATCHED 12-18"HX 1M8-VV 1a·o.c.; MATCHED 18-24" H X 18-24-W 24" O.C.: MATCHED 18-24'HX2<1-36"W 12" O.C.; MATCHED 6-12'HX8-12'VI 24" o.c.; MATCHED 24-36"H X 24·36'W SOf CAI CULATlONS ZONING: C-2 TOTAL SIT[ AREA: ±J0.504 SF. ±.70 AC. �IUMBER or RECULAR PARK(t,'C STALLS: 79 NUt.'.BER or IIANDICAP PARKlt,'C STALLS: 4 TOT.AJ... NUMBER OF STALLS: 83 {19 ON-Sllf. / 61 OFF-St1C) �f \AJ,0$CAPf REOUJR(Mf_NTS SHf. LMIDSCAPING NON-RESIDENHAJ.. USES SHALL REQtJIR£ AT A MINIMUM THE GR[AT(R OF: ONE (1) CANOPY OR (V(RGREEN TREE PCR 1,000 SQUAHE FTET OF GROSS BUILDING fLOOR /\REA OR, ONE ( 1) CANOPY OR EV£RGRE(N TR[[ Pl::R 50 LINEAL FEET OF SIT[ PERIMETER 703.5 LF OF SIT[ PERIMETER / 50 LF -14.07 � 14 • \ "" 14 CANOPY/£'1ERGR((N TREES REOUJREO UP TO lWWTY-FIVE PERCENT (257.) or THE REOUIR(O NUMBER OF CA.NOPY OR EVERGREEN TREES MAY BE SU8STITUTCD WITH ORnA\l[NfAl TREES AT A RATIO OF nvo (2) ORNA\\WTM. TREES TO ONE (1) CAHOPY OR EVERGR[(N TREE. SHRUBS SHALL OE REQUIRED AT A MINIMUM THE GREATER OF TIIE FOLLOY/1NG: S!X (6) SHRUBS PER 1,000 SQUARE n:n OF GROSS BUILOlNG FLOOR AREA OR, S!X (6) SHRUBS Prn 50 Lil-ff/IL F[ET or SHE PERIMCTER 703.5 Lf OF SITE PERIMEIER / 50 Lf -14.07 � 14 • 6 • 84 SHRUBS REQUIRED MA1£RIAL CANOPY/LVERGREEN TR((S SHRUBS RfOUIREO " 84 PRQVIQEQ 6 CANOPY TREES ANO 2 ORtlAIAENTAl TR((S (INSUrFlCl[NT SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL TREES) 161 SCRE(NING LANDSCAPING REFUSE HANDLING SHALL BE SCH(ENED 1007. FROM All OFF-SH( VIEWS YEAA ROUND. IN ADDITION TO LANDSCAPING, EXTERIOR REruSE HANOUNG S1lAll BE SCREENED WITH A SIX rQOT WN...l OR PRIVACY FWCE. REF'USf. tWIDUNG HAS BEEN SCR((N(O BY A WAll A.ND EVfRGRHN Pl.ANT t,JATERIAL TO ACHJ[VE YEAR ROUND SCR[(fl tiG. orr srnu:r PARKING AREAS LOCAT[O WllHIN 30 FEET OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHAll PROVIDE SCREENING BET\V[[U lHF. PARKING LOT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY, [XCEPT AT ACCESS POIIHS. SUCH THE SCREENING SHALL OE AT LEAST 36 INCHES AND NO MORE THAil 42 mCHES IN HEIGIIT. A souo HEDGE ROW l,tA1NTAINEO AT J6-42·· IN H[IGHT HAS BErn PROVIDED Al.ONG lHE DRIVE nmu LME. OFF STREET PARKING AREAS LANDSCAPING A MINIMWA or TWO CANOPY lREES OF TH( SAME SPECIES MUST BE PROVIDCO PER ISLAND. I ISLANDS • 2 - 2 CANOPY TREES REQUIRED SHRU(JS, PERENNIALS OR ORNAM(NlAL GRASS MUST BE INCORPORATED IN EACH L.ANOSCAf>E:0 ISL.AHO. MATfRIAl CANOPY TREES RE 1,1tSCEll.ANEOU5 REQU1RD.l£U1S PROVIDE STRONGLY ROOTED SOO, NOT LESS Tt-W-12 YEARS OLD A.ND FHEE OF WEEDS ANO UtlOESIRABLE NATIVE GHASSES. PROVIDE ONLY SOD CAPABLE OF GRO'tfTH A.ND 1. DEVELOPMENT WHE!� PlAIHED (VIABLE, rlOT DORMANT). PROVIDE SOD COUPOSED PRJNCIPAlLY OF NI APPROVED KEUTUCKY BLUE GRASS Bl END CONTAJNING/\ I.\INII.\UM OF TI-IE COUPlEt.iENT Of TREES REQUIR£0 SHAI..L BE AT LEAST 25,:; DECIDUOUS ANO AT LEAST 25,:; CONIFEROUS. HOT MORE ltw-1 307. OF THE R(OUIRf;O NUMBER Of TREES SHAI..L DE COMPOS£D Of ONE SPECIES. FOUR IMPROVED VNUEllES. 100% OF TREES ON THE SITE ARE DECIDUOUS mo o,:; OF TREES ON THE SITE ARE CONIFEROUS DUE TO INSUrnc1ENr SPACE roR CONlrf.ROUS TREES. ,, 0 /.,.>• 0."� 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 � I� I m STORE #3600 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN KNOLLl'IOOD SHOPPING CENlER ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426 SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE PLAN DWG EDITION CONC[PT REVISION Job No. : 86160343 Store : 3600 Dole : 10.27.16 Drown By : ...SKQ__ Checked By: MAR Sheet FOR REVIEW L-1.0 -- City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 25 GU'f ABOVE FIRST BfWICH � WITH WOVEN STRAP. SET TOP OF ROOTOAlL SO ..-�-..::,,. THAT TRUNK FLARE IS VISIBLE, PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNE'XCAVAl (D OR TA l,IPEO SOIL. TAMP SOlL AROurm ROOT BALL B<\SE nRMLY Wl TH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT RO OTBALL DOES NOT SHIFT. R[UOVE AIR POCKCTS. PlANTltiC MIX (SEE SPECS.) UNDISTIJRB[O SOIL. NOT(: 1. HOLE TO BE TWICE HIE SIZE OF THE RO MULCH AS D[nNEO IN THE L.NmSCAP( NO TES SHH T t.-1.l. HOLD MULCH 4� fROt.l TREE TRUIIK. 2. DO NOT HEAVILY PRUNE TH( TREE AT PLA/fflNG. PRUNE OHLY CROSSOVER LIMBS A/10 BROKEN OR Of.AO BRANCHES; rmrc?�E��·i���� Wft>.!i-:fu Nll°1.$t�l�[\��� EXTEND TO THE EDGE Of THE CROWN. PRUNE UP TO }S OF 3. EACH TREE MUST 0( Pl.ANlEO SUCH THAT THE TRUNK Fl.ARE IS VISIBLE Al THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL TREES WHERE THE TRUNK FLARE IS NOT V!S!BLE S.w.L BE REJECTED. DO NOT COVER TIIE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL Wlllf SOIL OR MULCH. 1 TREE STAK ING DETAIL SCALE: NTS 3 5 \ E.dge of Bed A • ROW SPACIUG 1 r IA!N. " - 00 ··� '"'"" � SPACE PLANTS IN A TRtANGULAR A O PATIE RN AS SHOWN, SPACED EQUALLY A FROM EACH OTI1(R AT SPACING INDICAl[O ON THE PLANT UST MULCH AS DEnNEO Ir� TiiE LANDSCAPE NOTES SHEET L-1.1. DO NOT PLACE MULCH DiR(CTLY AGAINST PLANT STEl.1. PREPARE CROUNDCOV[R BED BY TILLING ENTIRE BED AREA. PROVIDE SOll M!X AS OEFINEO IN THE LAN DSCAPE SPECIFICATIONS. [.)(!STING SUBGRADE. �£,".Ji,_'p._'_-'!f�,/!"'�PNJ"'$"'---''AL' -r�:s,•rn;»l!.>J P'i""-( 12· o.c. 10.•· 12 15· o.c. uo· , 1a· o.c. 15.7" � GROUNDCOVER PLANTING DETAIL SCALE: NTS CREATE B£Rl,I AT 1 • !!GT. roR [VERY 1' OF LANDSCAPE ISLAND IVIOTH. (9' WIDE ISLAND = 9" BERM). MULCH AS DEFINED IN TH[ LANDSCAPE NOTES ON SHEET l-1.1. CURB & GUTIER TYP. SUBGRAOE. ENTIRE IS�D SHALL BE PREPARED TO A OEPlH OF 5' WITH CLEAN SOIL AND SHALL BE IMPROVED TO ENSURE /IDEQUATE DRAINAGE, NUlRIEUT ANO 1.10IST URE-RE1Elllt0N LEVELS FOR PI.NITINCS PER CrTY STANDARDS PARKING ISLAND DETAIL SCALE: NTS 1' OF WIDTH UMIT PRUNING 10 DEAD AND BROKEN BRANCHES. MULCH AS Dtf1NED !U THE LANDSCAPE tJOTES SHEET l-1.1. TA PER MULCH TO TRUNK. DO /IOT PLACE MULCH DIRECTLY AGAINST TRUNK. AS 1ND1CAT£D I -1-2· -o· i s��cf� -,('- ADO 4• OF PLANTING MIX ANO ROTOTILL TO A DEPTH Of 12·. Pl.ANTlllG MIX (SEE SPECS.) 2 SHRUB BED PLANTI NG DETAIL SCAl£: NTS ----lURf SIDE PlANTING BED SID( ----- 4� ��ULCH AS DEFINED IH TIIE LANDSCAPE SP[ClflCATIONS SHEET l-3.0. PA RT 2. HOLD MULCH 4• rROM TRUNK. SHOVEL CUT BED EOCE AT 45 OtcRE( ANGLE, 5• DEEP. 4 "V'' TRENCH BED EDGING SCALE: NTS REMOVE COtlTAINER OR TOP lHIRD or BURLAP \YR/IP FROM B&B SttRUBS & REMOVE All TWINE FRmi ROOT BALL PRUNE OMJ AGEO OR OESICCAlEO RODIS. SET ROOTBALL OU COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRAOE. GENERAL NOl[S 1. BASE UAP !NFORIAATION IS ACCURAT[ AS Of THE DAi E PRINlEO 011 THIS PACKAGE. 2. THE 1.ANDSCAPE PLANS CONTAlt�[D HEREIN ILLUSTRATE APPROXIVAT[ LOCATIONS Of All SITE CONDrTIONS. RffER TD SURVEY. ARCHITECTUAAL. CML (NGH�(ERH/G, smvctuRAL. ELEClRIC/11..., IRRIGATION ANO All OTH[R DRAWINGS. IF AVAJLAOLE, FOR ADDm0� DETAIL ED INFORMAT ION. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSlBL[ fOR 6E.C0t,11NG /\WM[ Of AND FIELD VERlmNG All RELATED EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDIT10NS, UTIUTIES. PIPES ANO STRUCTURES, ETC. PRIOR TO 610DlNG Arm CONSTRUCTION. me COUTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE fOR CONTAC TING GOPHER STATE ONE CALL. TI--1E COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS OEPARTMWT, THE MUNICIPALITY NlD ANY OlHER PUBLIC OR PRIVAT E AGEUC1£S NECESSARY FOR UTIUlY L0CAT1DU PR!OR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHAl.l NOTIFY THE OWNER'S R(Pf�[SENTATIVE or APPARENT CONFUCTS VIIIH CONSTRUCTION AND UllUTI[S so THAT AOJUSTME/fTS CAN DE: PLANNED PRIOR TO ltlSTALLATION. If nELD ADJUSTMENTS AA( NECESSARY DUE TO EXISTING UTIUTY LOCATIONS TIIEY MUST BE APPROVED 8'1' lHE OWNER'S R[PRESEtlTATIVE. THE CONmACfOR SHALL TAK[ SOLE R[SPONS101UTY fOR MY MD All COSTS OR OlHER LIAB IUTIES INCURRED DUE TO DAtt.AGE or SAID UllUllES/STRUCTUR(S/ETC. '1. THE CONTRAClDR SHAU. COMPLY WrTH /\LL CODES APPLICABLE. TO ll1JS WORK. 5. Tri£ CONTRACTOR SHAU. BE R(SPONS!BLE FOR COO�OINATION WITH SUBCONTRACTORS AND Oltt[R CONTRACTORS or RELATED TRADES. AS REOUIREO. TO ACCOMPLISH IHE PLANTING AND RELAT£0 OPERATI ONS. 6. !HE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE !NSlALLATIOH Of ALL PLANT 1/.AT ERlAl. WITH lHE INSTN.lATION Of OIHER IMPROVU.IEtnS SUCH AS HIIRDSCAPE ELEMENTS /\ND RELATED STRUCTURES. l>J{'( DAMAGE TO EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS IS lHE RESPONS!BILITY Of TH[ COUTRACTOR. 7. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONS10L( TO RESTORE All AREAS or THE SITE, OR ADJACENT AREAS, WH[R[ DISTURBED BY OPERAI IONS or OR R[lATCO JO THE CONTRACTOR'S WORK. 8. All SURfAC E DRAINAGE SI-W..L OE DIVERTED AVIAY rROM STRUCTURES ANO UOTEO SITE FEATURES IN ALL AREAS AT A l,mllMUl.1 Of 2� SLOP( DR PS SHOWN ON THE CNIL ENGltl[ERING PtANS. All AR EAS SHALL POSITNELY OR/IIN ANO ALL ISlANDS SHAU BE" CROWNED 1· IN HEIGIIT PER 1' IN ISL.ANO WIDTH. 9. THE CONTRACTOR Stw..l.. STI\KE Al.l TREE LOCATIONS ANO THE PERIMETER Of SHH.UB/PERENHIAL BEDS PRIOR TO INSTAllATKlH ANO CONTACT THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR APPROVAL FINAL LOCATION AND STAKING Of All Pt.ANT !.'.AT [RLA.l.S SHAll BE ACCEPTED BY THf. OWNER'S R[PRE.SE.NfAT!VE IN I\DVANCE OF Pl.ANTING. 10. If CONFLICTS ARISE BE!\'IEEN THE S17.[ OF' AREAS AND PLAHS, THE CONTRACTOR I'S ff fQ U!R[D TO CONTACT THE owurn·s REPRESENTATIVE FOR R[SOLU110N PRIOR 10 lt4STAUATION. 11. WH[RE PRO\IIDEO, AREA TAKEOFFS AND Pl.AflT OUMITCTY ESTit.lATES ltl THE Pl.ANT LIST ARE FOR lNFOR t.'A TIOll ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPOtlSIOI.E TO DO THEIR OWN OUNH1TY TAK E-OFFS fOR Jill PLAUT MAT (RIALS AND S!ZES SHOWN OH PLANS. IN CASE OF NN DISCREPANCIES. P�S TAX[ PR(CCOENCE OVER CAl L-OUTS ANO/OR THE PLANT UST(S). 12. PLANTS ME TO DE lYPtCAI.. IN SHAPE AllD SIZE FOR SPECIES. PLANTS PlANTEO lN ROWS OR CROUPS SHALL BE MAT ClltD !N FORM. PLANTS SHAll NOT BE ROOT�BCUND OR LOOSE Ill nmR CONT.6JNERS. liAN DLE All PLANTS YlrTH CAAE ltl 1RANSPOOTlNG, PLAWING AND ,.WNlEUAUCE UUTIL INSPECTION AND FlllAL ACC[PrAIICE. nELO COLLEClED l.'AlffilAL SHALL I/OT BE USED UNL[SS J\PPROV[O BY TII[ OWl�ER'S R(PRF.SCNTATNE. 13. SHREDDED HAADWOOD MULCH. rERTIUZlUG, AS SPECIFIED, STIIXINC, WATERING AND ONE (1) YEAR Pt.ANT WANRANlY FOR INSTA LLEO PLANT tlATERIAL, SHALL BE CQtjSIDERED !rlC!OENTAl TO THE PLANT ITEMS. 14. MUSllROOtA COMPOST SHALL BE FlNELY SCR[(NE.0, HDMOG[NOUS. DECOMPOSED ORGANIC 1/ATERtAL SUITABLE fOR HORTICULTURAL USE AS AVN LABL£ rROM MIOWEST TRAO!HG HORTICULTURAL SUPPLIES. INC. ST. CHARLES, lL 60174 (630) 36 5-1990 OR APPROVED EQUAL. MIX THOROUGHLY IH PLANT BED BEFORE INSTA LLING PLANTS. lAtlOSCAPE tlOTES 1. CON"TRACTOR RESPONSIBL( FOR LOCATING ANO PROTECTING ALL UNDERGROUND UT!UTIES PRIOR TO OICGING. 2. CONTRACTOR RESPONS18LE roR PROlECTING EXISTING TREES rno1.1 OA1AAGE DURING CONsmucnoN. 3. All SHRUBS BEDS {(X!STil�G AND t{EW} TO BE MULCHED Vllllt A 3 INCH MINIMUM LAYER OF DOUBLE SltR(DOED HARDWOOD /.\ULCH. 4. All ANNUAL AND PERENNIAL BEDS TO OE TILLED lO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12 INCHES ANO AMENDED wmt 4 INCHE:S OF ORGANIC MAlERIAI... MULCII PLAN TED AUNUAL AND P[RENNtAL BEDS WI TH 2 INCH OEPlH OF MINI NUGGCTS. 5. Pl.ANTING ttOLES ro BE DUG A MINIMUM OF n'IICE THf. l'IIDTH Of THE SIZE Of THE ROOT E3ALL or BOTH SHRUB AND TREE. BACK TO B( A MIX OF ,t PARTS TOPSOIL ANO I PARf ORGANIC SOIL CONDfTIONER (IE. NA TURE'S HELPER OR PRO t.llX). �C KflU. AND TA'/.P BOTIOIA OF HOLE PRIOR ro PLANTlNG so TOP OF ROOT BALL DOES tlOT $ETTL[ BELO\'/ SURROUtlOING GRADE. 6. EXISTING GRASS n, PROPOSED PLANTltlG AREAS TO BE KILLED AND REMOVED ANO fl.REA TO OE HANO Rftl<ED TO R[t.10V( Al.l ROCKS ANO ornRtS LARGER Tl� 1 INCH IN DV\.\'CTER PRIOR TO PLANHtlG SHRUBS. 7. ANY EXISTING GRASS DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO BE FULLY RELIOVE:0, REGIW>ED ANO REPlACED. ALL TIRE !.lARKS AllD INDENTIONS TO B( RE.PAIRED. 8. SO!l TO BE TESTED TO OETERMlrff f(Rl!LIZER AND LIME REQUIREMENTS AND DISTRIBUTED PRIOR TO LAYING SOD. 9. SOD TO BE D(LIVEREO FRESH (CUT LESS TIW� 24 HOURS PRIOR TO ARRMNG ON SrTE), lAID IW,IED1Af[LY, ROLLED, AND i'IA TER£D THOROUGHLY 11.1.ME:DIATflY AFTER PLANTING. EDGE or SOD IS TO BE ·y TRENCHED. 10. All OWIGES 10 DESIGN OR PLANl SUBST11UTIONS ARE TO BE AVT IIORIZCO BY THE LAIIOSCAPE ARC HITECT. 11. All l.NIOSCAPING SIW..l 8[ INSTAl..l[D IN CONFORMANCE \'{llH ANSI Z60.1 TH( 'AMERICAN STli-.NDARD roR �lURSERY STOCK' AIID TH( I\CCEPTED STANDARDS or THE AM[RICAN ASSOCIATION Of NURSERYMEN. 12. TH( lANDSCAP[ CONTRACTOR SHALL GUARANTEE All PLANTS INSTAUED FOR ONE FULL YEAR FROM DATE OF ACCEPTANCE BY TH[ owNrn. All PlANTS SIW.l BE AUVE. AND AT A VIGOROUS RAT E or GRO\'fTH AT THE END Of lHE GUARANTEE PERIOD. lHE LANDSCAP[ CONT RACTOR SHAt.L NOT BE RE.SPONSIBLE roR AC1S OF GOO OR VNlDAUSt.1. 13. ANY PL.ANT THAT IS Q[T[RMINEO DEAD, IH m UNHEALTHY OR UtlS.CHTLY CONDmON, LOST ITS SHAP E DUE TO Of.AD BRAN CHES OR OntER sYMPTmis Of POOR, NON-VIGOROUS GROl'n� SHALL BE REPlACEO BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR . 14. GENERAL CDNTR/ICTOR IS RESPONStBlE roR ADDING A MIN Of 4• OF Clf.AN FRW3LE: TOPSOIL IN ALL PLANTING B£0S AND All GRASSEO AHEA5. GRADEO AREAS TO BE HELO OOWN Tii[ APPROPRIATE ELEVATIOtl TO ACCOUNT fOR TOPSOIL SEE SPEClflCATIONS FOR REOUIR[O TOPSOIL CtW<ACT ERISTICS. 1:}, GENERAL COHTRAClOR TO I.IOUND All PARKING ISLmDS s· -10· l'I/T CLEAN fRlABLE TOPSOIL 16. PRIOR TO BEGI/JNING WORK, THE �DSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL IHSPl::CT THE SUBGRAD[. GErffRAL SITE CONDITIONS, VtRlfY EL EVATI ONS, UTIUlY LOCATIONS, IRRIGl\flON, APPROVE TOPSOIL PROV\DED BY GENERAL COlflRACTOR AUD OBSERVE Tli[ SITE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE WORK IS TO BE DONE. rmnrr G[NEfW. CONTRACTOR or �y UNSATISFAClORY CONDITIONS. mo WORK SHALL NOT PROCEED UflTIL SUCH CONDrTIONS IIAI/E BEEJl CORRECT(O AND ARE ACCEPTABLE TO lH[ LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 17. STAKE All EVERGREEN AUD OEC!DUOUS TREES AS SHOWN IH THE OCTA/LS THIS SHED. 18. REMOVE All STAKES /J.10 GlJYlNG fROI.I ALL TREES AffER ONE YEAR FROM PtANllNG. 19. \'/ATER THOROUGttLY TWICE IN FlRST 24 HOURS AND APPLY MULCH lt.lMEOt,\T(LY. 20. sm: TO BE IOO� IRRtGATEO IN All PLANTING BEDS AND GRASS AREA BY AN AUTOl.'.Al 1C UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SYS TEM. SEE IRRIGA!ION Pl/IN L-2.0 roR OlSIGN. 21. All TREE PROTECTION OEVlC[S TO BE INSTALLW PRIOR TO TH[ STAJH Of LAND DISTURBANCE, AAD l,WNTi\tNED UNTIL FINAL wmsCAPING. 22. ALL TREE PROTECTION AR[AS lO BE PROTECTED rROM SEO!IJENTATlON. 23. All TREE PROf[CTION FENCING ro BE lNSPECTEO DAILY, AND REPAJREO OR HEPt.ACEO AS NEEDED. 24. NO PAAKING, STORAGE OR OTHER CONSIRUCTION AClMTl[S ARE TO OCCUR \'11THIN 1REE PROTECTION A.RfAS. FOR REVI EW .,,,,,... ............ l "JJ� {?Jr .L-� 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 I( u, � z �I-� �" I� E I I� � � I STORE #3600 ST. LOUIS PARK, I.IN KNOLL WOOD SHOPPING CENTER ST. LOUIS PARK. MN 55426 SHEET TITI.E LA NDSCAPE DETAILS DWG EDITION C��CEPT REv1SION Job No. : 86160343 Store : .,NQQ__ Dote : 10.27.16 Drown By : SKD Checked By: MAR Sheet L-1 1'--- City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 26 w is �ii:iii�w w � � � ;l � w C z s !i1 ! iw I :i ! i t lll l li · l . •• Ii !l l I ' I u tl 11 H -{ 1.,Ul ,, ' f l "j :! ; ' l 1 h i l l f i-11ti � p ,l!j,i• I ,!ihiiil � !i l,..;o ."' � o:o:S ,_., i -'N ol �" �· "0 J }!� ':; .3 � "c� ��� ITT . ' ' ,, '; ' ' '' ,1� .,,!I t:.oi�"' .:::� � ��'ii �):'§ _s·� I: i:li ; i '!,:2.--.2:"'. •H'l h '-�ir. i i$; h { i j °i:S i;�i � .2-: i g :Ii.� S! � � � ! H§ ,,,:,,"i hn �i i i Hi i!°' PH ·1'§·� 1Hi o1 _H ;hi t,, .!l }/ "*i "'�� ""'"jj: � • � 'i '! ,.: 'Jf. 11• . ' ':, ! ,.,�' .., �.l! � � ,,l!"( �-�� hlf !�'8 r I . ' iii '·1 l'l . . t1 .. ,.�� �� I -� i ! !'•: ,i i ill! 1l! l i t� t� § p-H l!._g-"' � !§l H ;; ;,.J:e � t1�! : U ,-• "l '"' i· . -· ,11 li, '"! -!' l 't l.! h! !l i}! lil j i' �;:� x,,i ·l r� 1�-@ e it 11! ll l lr.j !I i •J �fi 1�f.t!i H�. .15.�! 'l;l ,ii 1s 2� f!:; 'a��;; lh: l ;i i'i! !i i' 11 ••1 l_'l ' h ,., 11•! , rri, ,,, , i. I !j i Jil. I ,ll ,j l jl ! li {! � � H i � £h-z E ei � !( 'll 1. m ti € �} ., ' ' ,1 l ;, ' ' ' is � �! ! I _2 i !i l!i l Ji � iH § -? 'HD � ."] -. {l �i U99J8i::I H z � � I Ul � z z 9- :;:E 0 wo::r uaaJ 8i::IH -el[ D� D� ls · 1 :i:: "" w-v, � 0.. � § a.. w <C U g (l'.'.5 g 8 �ii �1 ii �1 � �m 0nI _J ·�Dlldl��53q SN01Sll\3l:I ''1 · �'"IW I • , ! ·1 , 1· , i 1 , ,1 l ' ! ,, �-. ' ,, l ! . t . ; f 111, 11 i,i ,1 ·!l' , , I 1 1 1�10 j¥ is�! �] ]:.. .. J � J-1 .. _ (ll z B .. � i 1 H 11 1 1,_1 'il iHJ'i 1 l, f � 1 ! Ji? I§-s.§ �-� ] l ":.i!l � ! n . a:i l , , i Hii ll l�" 1'_, 1.1');! ! r1 ; � ! ,! H�j ft P l!l-,; l l � li < .z � ;_;., s.'i� � ti 1 t.g :�� il .. b n � r.1i i !ii i !HI ,i ill ti Jl!ii l H ! � 1 lH! Hi! U ll! !l ,jllj li 1l l :e \! _J-1·� l fj'l '' lH t, ,,!•, 11 ' w· • 'j l t 1 d ,d, !t hlH � :cz I � i ht:-�lh p �p i� h�l� : �' � .., Z " j llHl Hn ii hi il nUi l 1i 1 1r Ih I ti i . d!I:_ir�} 1 1 u� h !11 ;1i 1 � • ti ? � �"2 "' .'S f i!Jf?l :si l h1 a: .. �§ l1'l��li.; l Jl 1 1 1h a 1 1� ! r.i1t �11!'!i'1'l.:!e �;;:t �E -l!:ii ] � 'l il t.I to 'li'li •,11 1 il l ji l Ull li 1i1}l Ii I li I I Jtih � ,1·i I li!1i tri l'll •1 • il '' i• ,•·,j 'l 'll ! t ,, •• � 1 ! !!, ,!t,j ', ! 1•!' ,,, ,111. •,' ' ,, , .... <_I,!_""" I= &,;_ ,L.,, �ai ,=°U g� )! !F j :I: :i: �� i', � t"" :!J if i� /!�� i ' -; ,g i' ' 'z� � � ii l ! l! i• !H �f 1 'il � 'll 11 � ! ! !·1 ,! '! ',!.j, l, t t ;! il • ii �$ z i,, h ]:, 2't! ' ' r ,, ,. •1,1'1i l' � �.!·�111 'i;� I �i�ti [! i ,! e::l iii n� ;!n '.' �s w o �� �12 :::J '"-'O co ,-O U o Z --'N w z W �tst;;��::i� ci ro "2 z f:: Cl) � t; .D O...., 0 <ll O � 0 '-- ..C ''"J j i l ' • ' " l ii !• ! ; ' 11 ' • l; i·zi I ,,.,, j ' ! j ,f l ; 'I ,i l,,,1 ' • ; I[ ! ' � , . ,1 ' l. ! , , f ! l I, '" l ;1ei •·l�'l "lli I 1j!i !,! , 1 i l Jl l ; ,. ;1 !1ip1'i, l i ! ; 1' f ' 'i i -h � �;; � "E -"�5 � i S 1 l'!•·i·i 11i,,1 ,1 ,111 <I j 6£ 1 [ .; :I= 1� ft .... t i •••• ,-1 1 •• , 11 : , '1 u�i !li1j l1 l 1 . l l ;l ,1'1!;1 1 tr 1111 - � �11 � .�t6 � t . : .• l 1 1 l[H H l jill[i:11, !' I! :!lt 11 1 li 1h!1 H lJflllilII ii B HhihlM!i1 :i ll"l iHH lhi1 l ii!lj!l. 2 ruh11 i1] 1l�l-!�r Jl "'"jh»1 �·-i-�l � 1 1 111ml.li . jip1l !liHr11!H0!'!Hl!ll n �.-" � �h� .. � � ·� H d ,, � N � -' "' ol o,' ' ' � c.n DD U IC/J � � "'"'0 u_ ' l! ! ' ! . ! 1 1 1 l 1 , 1· l ! l ., ; ! ' ' i' ! ; il!ill 1 .i , l i L l :1 1 1 l H IJ !i i •l ,!!·i} ijl,1r1 ,,P 1 t i i i· l ij,! ! l! 'r i •• 1 i 1i ·11 , ., � i; Jltf ! ; i� i = i ��ij j ) 1h1 w -j� ] �lH1 { � f!l r1·lS"t.1 ,.a s !;Ii' ,u,.!1 !:l :. .i• Hh ! I !11 1a ,J 1l1''' z ·11 .J,;,!, • Ji.·Hl!l 11!! � 111 hj1lif1 ! -!!ll 11!!1111;Hl � ! !lH!!1l1H11 i lh!i '1 1 hi :;; ' F'W• it . ! !lilH,ilini � I J!liiilmtl I lH,; � ��d� � �. � � ����.; d ��� 0 ' ' lr n,t :ii; l Ii l }J .; '.l'l5 ! h i�. ; ... :a } !i jl i'-l ir�j � '' ,, ' 1! !' ,! H."' f ! 2 l � i ,g ,,, .-• ' l " !!! �t! �; � -� � -� ii �� . � r• .1 l, , i •H ,, · 1 l Ii(,; �! i !g i .. : i; u I! ! i,t ljtl ! ' ,.i. 'l 'l' l '�n t�Ii i] ii ! H� hl i � L n fl.,'"••?! a, ll i "l; U Ul h �=t H !1� " "'ft HiI � l.l_ ! i � �-,j � � h j i ii l j ,� R � ·w i d i!1 � h !I !J; !HlH� i�h!Hi I��ii i !i Hlil '! ,, ' �� �g �. l� �� � �: �s L:l'{ H H i � lii i�n , i h n I' 1: ��1 f"' � ii � -a i!' eli ., i l l! 1l ii Hi ' . !·1 · < l1l 1 lIii I l 8 'le ": l= e $ :l ' ., lit 8J i ,,. IH:�f � � 8� � SiJ� � t�t� i_ H;, l l ��i � ti is"' t� w 'l:�" �,'!:"' i£i• iii .:z<a !}t H w. z j _g�i -�m] �.r [d ;s:! .n·1 1 . HI i,•, ;, •" ,,u ,, . 'l n1 iHi 1i �ri; U!i iif � ii !!• 'i'l, >l<i!! 1,,I ,;:. l H l , ' ·•r •, .,.,,.,; ' ., ,, -�]'�lg j�,,:i.ii fl'l �?(���� � :� :,'ll, l' ,1, d i�'o i:� H! ii ,,, I � l � 1ll :� � n s i �� ,.ii: 1! ;:� l I ·' 1• ' Ji l l 1'' ,. '"J; ,, .. ; . ,J • t l " ! l Ji li ! i! · ' · i· 1·· B ! [! & � .::� l· �ii .,, ;, 'r:;;�i ! j J l H !Ill! 2 u H I .,,� 9,i 51.: U -:� ijl ",!li' �rii n 11 1 11�!1< m�� ";.!i�i1 �1 !i �1 �� b t i;. [;s .?ii fl1 l 1·,·•l' ., :1 .,: i �� ii !"ii l ' ·<, ' ! !; • ll'l l ! ' ., . l Ii . l j ii i,_ ,.,, cll :!a -f i .§ i1 JJ !H i� E � i�} u .U <> g H 1 :i :.E ; 0 §i .s ,.5 -it CUJ {-li 1!�1g11..,1:!l,i'� � !'l,j l,,• hj ,•J •'••1'l'l i l n ,. Hi � .. �ts_ ·th � JI!! h !!�i�Hj f2.1�1j�ri !iHj"'h i H :Lf i :]nt m 'il li·!f:§hi =.li i ;'l ] ! ti .!! �·�! :a · ,; Jl ..... 5 q � i · ij h ii·� J �fj 1 , . :� i :J i f .b s l!-t!-.; 1li u1·h 2 �z "& .. .liJ 3-� ""'ii ,$ I-i lil ii i lj i iu HH�i :�.iBtEj) i� fa �h.t li Ii ;l ,! I! H !• �.i' lj '!!! � � n jii H � ! f 1i :�ft p ' " , !l '_-,i' 1! ,!, i ! j [f 1 j -11 i t ; . ·' � r� I i1 Hli j i'l h ' ! § . �'c §: -�� a i: s I'i �P l ;l ,i . il·,11 ! a h i � �Un s ffi ht <>II_ ��t fl) �p � i 2 j 0::: .1,m !h�ul.i !h ��une�i1! I :t '••11 t ���s 1(1c � •• ��J .. S. a� l1� •• :i,,J1e••,0 s<1,!_Wj, , h '''j [H i���:Jilei ��°'�"[ i r ""' l· ., i •. i'!u· H ·i �?! ::ir Hi ::i� ¥,:: I l'l !:§ si� iiiih i .l ! Hl !}! }! ! ljj , li 1 • !1l jl � hi ! 1 1 j ; !1·�i � H] � !i it � id s -"'Ii 1 i i: :1 !• ! ! • '! jg, l ' a � '� e " l l� � ;�g, l� 1 � � �� ii � "3 l ; ' ' '! ,,; 1, l i I 11 jtl ii 11 � .§' ,§E' ;;�i ... � s ... ia i ii i(� r; .)1 , , ., l i,,· I ,, B -II ?.. :tf\ "'a 1 � �a 1;1 ; "it e s ·h Hi .s ! g JI 11 i i� i?1 : ! I I l H ili It l l ' ,, ],• >! ., ; � �! 1,� i� lj li 8 q� h� 'll §� {, l, ,,1 •,1 ii il 'll\1 11 hj iii .!l -a� s.l l� � Ii ih Hh }! H u I it �21 .i Ji!i n� n Jl� "' h ! ) wo:H ii:h £i �l� .. !'li"j o:{!lf" �uJL ' l' ·,".<t .< E.� ,,,,. � � "a .!a�,,, j . •i '!' ., •. i� � e; H � IH !i H 1=.., g, "' ,:..� 8-i K " � � £ Ii "' '! C i L g � �f ii� * ?i � u I I 8� ih � f: .. �" z §. ft� ii � �i§., � i '.;.("l a -!iH i ! l ih l .i;i £ th �tih : ii h r � 1 d l � � I 1 r� l Hjf l l l H I i.I 1. I , tlj !l l ;f i i��! i h R} l!i t j . li �h H i h 1 ; tr�� i 11 i � IH '" r� � � � i I f u t] r i Ji1·t .l! -1-�f � 11:., il �'2 g, 1 s,.� V ::i ).. --:.] Ol<i l , l •11_,,, ! n ,. !•,• . l.1'1 1 : i•j r;, ! , :i • 11 e l 11 ·is r � -i "'i fl!i � ., � ! l t lit l i ] ii it 1 ll l l!t l i it, ,i: l! i ii � t! -.ll� ] 'l! ] ., : ii -tij � w t. --a i� � !j f i !l tUt t i ii ld Ill d in l ! ·1;ll tu Ii ! tf i =1• 1 1 ii!! 1 i •1 1 h• :·1,i l! iu, ! Hi· JI ri,i 11 1 11 i ,t; a -s. �.. 'i £ i: 2''" ;i H � 8.] E.i 1 ] ; E .;: '1 l i l 1h! l 1 '1 1.11! hi 11 Hh i Hu lli ih i} H l! . , ; ; f!•l 1: II ', i;! !l. i,!l ! i'!i i•l ·it j! !I '! i i t I f§h � � �ii ;!� iEi ii ]jii i 1th d� Jsi��i ii !-... tr � l ! tHf ii U! Hif���Hh11 �i i HH t�l jhiJ� i! 1 !1!; l., • , i1,i I• 1!· ";.i ltr i,th J ''l' . it' ,'H1l 1• i1 •l1. l l j I H•! ! 11 i;! l1 i,.l 'i·''i , !l 1• > p ! l!!Hh li O hi i& ... .l! :s -&J?·j ,:J/ .�.i �-2'L<"' '"···< . � ,-"z;:S "' ,.H m[«!i:,H.::];"' 't:�2 , 1 1 , � t\iii ,,_ F1 , •-· - • t , '1 .. · 1 !•'t 1,0 •• • l ''!' ; Ii: o l'i � ���8� �I! .,,U � � cf:. ) r-aI :a� ti ! ; � tii w· !.1ttl i ;:r�a:: 1il :,§'.l, f--0. :?1: HL,!!Jl 1!H,idH� !Hi I1 •11 i!i!ffJ,��oS< � ����s :i� � �i "' .... .,; '" "' "'"' � f a! l l l !!1 ,n -� i l � 1! i i s � ii f-! .� § :, i �! i !1 i i i I Jt�i IH-iii� i H i�i fi! H I t ". ·] i � " _, :.,: � � Ji=l -8J � i : z .,"l! ·! itl! "" ;: i J� j .; 1.;: ti l! � t .ll I � � i j" E � i :,. §, j "' -I j �H� l\d ; ! I ! �-� If It )i_2 ! � � ti 1, 11 i ! !.1i1 il!H HH1il i 1 n _I; i ili tl ! l .;� :l! ":! ;; 1.1 �;!!fl �iHtU t f ii .�·i ,; �/� 1� t :-j !ii I i til il:_:,1.1· it111Ht1 It i i:1 h i I f H ih i ,1' 1 1 11 •11 i ' '" 111 'n lfl U ' ! , � ' 11• '1' , r ' • i1 1 1 111 ,11 ,: t·ii·i 1 1 •1 , 1 1_, Ji i. I ,,1 1,1 _1 .1 11. � .t. � I !a ;:! "II I ll !i 11 �t : . " s ·t t ] !'5 .� 1 � i '. � !111 1!1 ill fflii .l�ill!II! I � 11 i I !II Ill ! I Ill ! i i , -Ii 1: 1 ,:1 1 1,11 : ulli:,: i1 1 !i ti j 11 r,1 1,, • l 't l1i1J i i I in 11 1. in di d I Ii)hil l h i 11' 11 di r .,1 t iU! fl i 1 11• Jd 1,11,1Jj i O !H iJ •! !,• ru,, i j,.1j H 1 fl I • , l ,ll f I ji,l Pt ! . l·, ' Hi lt L i ilti I l'1 H!J lHJ'l ;' :flit'\ih ,1 : ! fll.l ''1' f ! ii ,_!H J!; ! ll ! ili 1 ,.a .... l ' ' •' • 11 1 · ,i] '! I ' -�! ' ' ' ' !, ' ! ,. i..i , ,h ' • ,. ' l , ,l !l ,, ,!-I i,I I , . ,ih I , l • l. ;! , , H ,.!, �H l . I , • : �lj � 11 z :i s: � � 2\ j � "-� t l 'I! H d 1 1 ll_ !i 1h ; I ! l ' ' _i• li l!, ''! !• !.! ! 1 1 ·e.l "" , i l , ' 1 H !! lji 1', if U ''i ' %lh i" ·1' i • d 11 lt• •• 1,; 1 11 7! " ! ! , •• .11 • , 1 ; ,., ,, ·l• 1 ii .1 i, , · '11'1, l',' ! t l ' ' \ ·ll ll 1·,: ;, il 1_1 i_ .l! l j .a ?> j � :. l! �i : .S"' i -i� t I ' hli l'! l I l I j i 1,1 ,1 ,! 1!: 1! 'l' il. ' "!' 'l ' ' ' ! ,,, ,H ,, j"• ,, J Z ' ,i li ! i_,,'; 'i" ', 'i I I J•1 ,p, ,_l ,!< ,j;l ,'1 l' "! , l '•l • h· ', ,,1' , ,• ·it li l d 't i ! 110 ni1·!Uih 111• 1 iu lii in h_ I 1ihill ii 11 i f Iii• il l !}·l l'• ' Ji; Jjl ''! l!f J>;;lll ij !!i i, � !_iUi t_ i!il!lllliH idl11·fH,i !h '1 11; Ui!i !'11! hi u "i ii ti' ::, ,0 � i� !i..11 \!� J • �h -:!]' u.;:� f ... :/1 t ij ::) 1 H ! 1 iiUi nf1n;Hllri1 ,1lnHUln I l1·1i inll n ilH U ·_t � 1 I ., � • I ll ' , " ' ., " , .. ,,,., " ii ,. . . ,. it ! � 'h ... ii tel -'ii •••• "" .... � � a, ,- � 0. =·o·r-1:qoi \M,\01 ·(o .. p·s1,040-1-1:>tog�ga\ 1\'""0\0��\,1-t09�98\ :oJ :o�_,1 ·dwo::> •:o�·o»do odo:n�uo1:6of·o601 oo,,61<06ow1 -��p·oi1-91oirsH :o��·�os-91."Xtl-}l:JIHO-\Dx :DMP"""'O-•o•-,��09198'hp·"O,p-1.-,-.,a9 19g "l"X "cudL\'L -l'O� ·ia qo�:pono,� •01,opo:Sa pono,� City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 27 , L PLANT SCHEDULE TREES a 0 0 D co G02 GO TB TS3 834 s BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Cellis o identalis Co on Ha err l"B&B Gleditsia tria anthos O,a es G Sbeet Keeper Hone Lo ust 2-1 2· B&B no ladus diol a Espresso Kentu Co eetree 2-12"B&B Tllla a eri ana Boule ard Boule aid Linden 3• B&B BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Ro Mui h-RI er Ro Mat h Knoltwood Ri er Ro None Tur Seed None G. REFER TO p�()T;����O :,����:����LS 8. THE CON T AND INVENTORY TREE R TRACTOR SHALL FOR EXISTING 9.:F c��c�C:t D,,::itT���:'G EXISTING TREE TREE CONDITIONS OF �TING FACILITIES �L KEEP PAVEMEN� OR BRANCHES S DO NOT STORE OR M::'oo"i'L.z.Nir;���l�B';'�BTEY\B�RDE6:�Ri,� A� ��T���z.�TORBUILOINGS CLEAN AND DRIVE HEAVY MATERIALS OVER 1 THIS W)R · S EXPENS UNSTAIN 1. ALL V.ORK IN MN-OOT RIGH K SHALL RECEIVE•· TOP SO E. THE PROJECT Sl��·st:'L: DM�GE TO T OF WAY REQUIRES MN IL & SOO UNLESS NOTED BE KEPT CLEAR -tX>T S REVIEW OTHER'v\l\SE & COORDINATION APPROVAL --915�. \ / 1 I 0 L...-JO' I X 60' f"' I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN LHBcorp.com • • ·500 I D.ill,llll 555021218.127.M<S 2IW.S"1'tf0tSL S� SITEPlANKEl 191 NORTH WACK CHICAGO, IL 6060: R DR, SUITE 2500 D T�S SOOAAEAP FUllS1ZESHEET�l/2"x 11'2'0� DATE REVISIO,'I COPYRIGHT 20 I S BY LH3, INC. ILL Rx:HTS RE PROJ::CT IWIE: SE�ED. SHOPPES AT K CHICK-FIL-A NOLLWOOD SITE PREPARATION 8332 HIGHWAY NO 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, M.N DAAI\UlC rme, LANDSCAPE PLAN fll.E: OfWiN8Y:lW..II00743'600Dra�·l'WJ\l.A\1607'3L 10d C,<CKEO BUX .. ,, PROJ.u<>: 1wm OM\'1\lffillO: L1.0C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 28 .J!IIGE•:NtR-Al.·H·OlES;-· ---------------.. , ... ------------------... �L�E�G£�N�o-----------------,.� mrn �=�"O �][�S·----------------r------------------iL PAVEMEHTS OAII.Y. 1. IHIS S1l£[T IHOICAlIS USE CJ' SlTE REQUIREMOlTS. 2. PAID!ENT MAAIOOGS FOR DRIVE SlRIPl/lG & STOP UIIES l'IUlf AOO£D BY UlB AIIO 5. ROW l'IOOK. WOOi< EXlrnOS IIHO cm AIIO MNOOT ROW AT SEW.RAL LOCA110NS ANO CONSTRUCTION LIMITS @HOT usm ARE APPR@MAJI. HAS BIDI APPRO\tll BY THESE REWLATORY BOOIES. COOROIIIAlI WOOK mTH TH£ X REMOVE TREE @coosTRUCnoo t MIU•= LIMIT COOSTRUCTKII TRAmC. E)[CUIE 1100K HER£ (£.G. J. MAil. OPERATIOIIS. �����H:TE� ':�� �d/:/';.�� :�::r\:��J:X:TION m�;: PAWiC) TO DISRUPT MIU Al:«51> 24 HRS IIAXJMUM £AOi TIii� HO MCl!E THAN o. TH( PROPERTY IHmms TO BE FUU.Y OPERATI ONAL DURING TH( DURA TION CJ' MIIOOT. b. :T �J:��\o VAil. VEHlt\JLAR AUD PfDESTRIAN CIR<:IJLATIOtl, PAR!OIIC, 6. TRAmC COlllROL. PRO�OE TEMPOOARY TRAmC COtllR<X. 0£\IC£S AIIO SICIIACE @�=A���� lBOT COIISlRUCTIOO l!INTlC. l!Ali!IJH UH08STRIJCl!D AIID UTllJTIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE. OOllfOOMIHG TO THE MIIIHESOTA MUTCO, INCLUOOIG THE MOST t\JRREIIT flElD c.PRO-AT LEAST 1YfO FUU. IIEEKS HOTIC£ TO THE MAil. PROPERTY NAIIACER MAll\JAL (AVAllABLE AT HTTP://WWW.OOT.STATE.MN.US/IRAmtrnC). IIAl.l. ORCULATIOII: b'{g_,����:;G��:r�:ip���:f �t�AN 7. Pl.ANS HAVE BUH REVlOl£D BY MHOOT FOO WORK IN MHOOT RIQIT-CJ'-WAY. @PRIIARY MIU CIUW.TIOII ROO!E. OO!ISTRIJCTION TIWl1C PROHal!D. PROPERTY UANACER mLL NOTIFY AIID COOROCIIAlI \\IIH MIU IDIANTS. COORDINATE WOOi< 111TH MHOOT (BOO< CRAIG. 651-234-7911) 8lNDIN(J ®:i.� ·� '!'��� ��r��c�� r.:'wi ���� �l(.IRUCT J. RESTOOATIOII. U1tl£5S NOTED OTHER\\ISE, RES!OOE AREAS IMPACTED BY AllO ADJAtrnT TO OEMOU110N ANO COIISTRUCTIOII OPERA110NS TO EQUAL 00 BETlIR CQtlOIROII. PRIOR TO UOBR.lnNG TO THE SITE, �OEO RECOOO THE AREA TO HElP ENSURE COtlOITIOIIS ARE RESTOOEO (£G., SICIIS, ADA CURB RAMPS, PAINT STRIPIIIG OIi PAIDIEHTS. EICL). UlB HAS SIUlAA PRE-COIISIRUCTiotl 1')1)(0 FOOTAOC DAM ACES OR MISSING FEATURES l'I\U. BE REPAIRED, R!l'IAC£0, ANO PAID FOR BY !HE CotlTIRACTOR. @.) MArilAII MALL IRACTOR-TR.111IR ACC£5S TO LOADING OOCl(S / SER�<:£ COURTS AT IU MS. 0 30' 60' - TCF 8At{I,; DETAILS. I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. UiBcorp.com 11 VI. 5'-l)Cia Sl.Si,.5001 l)JkJI,. MN 55!01 I 118.717.e«o SCTEPI.AtlKEY cum1: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICAGO, IL 60606 D THIS SOUAAE AP?EARS 1/2" x 117 ON FllllStlE SHEETS. Ol'Ot/17 1.0 �TE REVJS£Df0R TREES& SIGN ISStJEOFOR RE'/ISIO!I COPYRIGHT 2015 BY LHB. L'IC. All RJGHTS RE.SERVED. PROJECT UA.\\E: SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD CHICK-FIL-A SITE PREPARATION 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN DAAIW/G 111lE: USE OF SITE & TREE REMOVALS fllE:. .. \160743WJ Ori�TgS'Gtt6014JG 0.01.d�g ORA ml BY: tro CHEOOD SY: JllT PROJ.t.O: 160143 OAA\�iliGNO: G 0.01C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 29 -------------------------- EXISTING POLE TO REMAIN, REPLACE HEAD WllH NEW EXltmNG POLE TO REMAl!�-->----REPLACE HEAO l'IITH NEW� F"���- \ \ \ \ ,,., ·,, ... " EXlSTING POlE 10 REMAIN, REPLACE HEAD Wl11-1 NEW EXISTING POLE TO RDlAl REPLACE HEAO l'IITH NEW ����--0�TRIC -REPLACE EXISTING POLES WITH LED & ADD PROPOSED POLE WITHIN CFA LEASE Ll�'E PHOTOMElRIC STATISTICS (MAINTAINED) FOR PARKING LOT AREA ONLY """" --0 ' ' oc ooa " "' IIEIGIT (Utll.ESS NOlID OlHERm�J " ,· " AT CRNlE 20'6" ... ,. UGff LOSS Fil.Cla! ·'·".,.,·' ., ' 10 20 30 40 Chick-Iii-A 5200 Buffington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349- 2998 -LL I � (.) -:c (.) ()� CHIPMAN DESIGN ARCHITECTURE INC 2700 S RlVrn RD 4TH FLR DES PLAINES, IL 60019 TEL;a47.298,6900 ::> en LL "C 0 1 -0 C: � ... C: "' (l)N u st"' "' C: "' ·-z §::. 0 -.c: -" (/) :.,, a. 0"'O•-;= ::, -0 o.J C: .., � (/) FSR# 03600 REVlS!ONSCHEOULE !:!Q, DATE Q[SCRIPTIDI! ,Ac"1TfCnarnoJ!'cT• "'"'"'"""" 16-1S!S =----� � PHOTOMETRIC PLAN ES2.7 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 30 STORM WAT ER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN {SWPPP) NARRATIVE lH!:�'i\.'"-ESOTA PCUUTIO'ICOOTRO..,U,'>CYp.•PCA)f.EGllATESS-Jo;.IJ,','Aru:tl'.XSCW,%E.SASSOC"1EOV.ITH CaiSTRLIC OCtl ACT1\TIY � lNll E� TO� GREAlER �°' ft.:E IC.F.f. Tii/WO:;H "GU;[P)l PCPJ'fT(NF.1 U NO, t,,Jj RIOY/.l\)AlllltOWrlG 1l£ DISQIAAGE OF'STCll.\lMlER A5SOC1'T EOVi1TH WISTRUCTIOl:IM:11'11TYTOi'l'.A l£ilS Of'THESTATE rH:o•,·ptS,A..\C::NTH IBEQ.EA'frlATERJ(;J A\'O lllE.1'-'f10.\AU•(llUT.\'IT tllSU'AAC,£Ell,,l(Al),),'ISYSTBI ST4TE ��s,sTBl (l�..DS) MOC'...'V .'l iHEGEtif.P>l PERJ.IIT(PffillT}�llEOEVELCIFWNTA\0 IIW\El'V.1A'OO!t 0f A STORII l'IA1lJl.fl(llVIJal PR[\'f HlUI f\HI (S'Mlf'Pl, Tw.. S'IWFP lSA COf.lEl'llt.lK:(IOf 111,.'ll'"JM: .. f\N1S �£E1$, ND STol.\ONl:DOElU\.&t:flSTW!T�SSlt'EfOf�SHA.._fl(_.;_COM)IIK>\'SAT/.Jf'rSTla.l:lnt':CONSIR\,Cncti ORPOST-COUST�lAClt\1UU. 2. ,t,!Y.1:'5111.AmUtfO\JllflEfTS A. to:ESP()�et.E PAll:11£§. tt-C£Ci'lt.ffi �l}(,0,EJW. CO:lTRACTCR(CO.'fflViCTOR)AAi.CO-Pifl\1nE£S OF HE PER.YU NfO f,li.EJC(�Y RESfOi'�ISlE fORCOl,'JIUA.'ICE VIJni 1ER11$AI.0 0Cll.QII01;S 0f ltE �U:IITT. OBH..'llACOr'YOF TllE PmfT A!IO CC1.J?\.YY,TTH PA.i:t 1S LB. LC.tl.8-f",N, Y,I<:� �E W.'STRIJC'Tl(XU.CT T\lTTR..�.'EflSFOu:.Ol:'iAWE�t.O,PAAT COFTHEP£1 WIT, VfRIFY W.AT PE,\1TR£CI.A.f;£1 1b'flSARE SAJlSf-E.O,l,:O COf.f'LE IEMQA"11.S O'ITi1$$1W'FP �. FO!l.flWSl�kJZA"ilCtlflCWJE: I) SOl 00Mfi.'iGN:l\'ITI1£$A.TTIIESHEl�\'E 5UNCOll.f'I.ETf01,,VJS(I.LS AA£STAnUZIDSYA�l f'EF.e�lAL\'EC£TATIVE CO'rt..R "lll1 AOE,',ffiY CE7�Y.O'.'Ul Tl£ElmRE PERV10US W.�H:E AAEA.OROnER EM'A.'..EUT UcA\'S�U:SSAA.Y TOF'R.E\'EIIT5a.FM.IJRE ltiCIE.R tAOStOEC0:�00:1.\ 1) PER\V..'Ull STOR1,rr1All.R LWu\GE.\'Oll SYSTUIS #if.Oft.RAl)O.'il.l,.&./1) s.EDe.!UIT l$flEJ.IO\'EDfRO'� IUll'ORAAr AIIOP;Al,'A'.Sff SE C4'I C:)lff.0CU PA..�:\'S A!IOOO'rlf't,.',(E sr s1 EMS. A'I) OOCHES J...'v. Sf"'9.JZED \�TTri IJ!AI. COi "Ul 3J Nl TS.'PO!!A�'l'S.'l'NllEllCl,,'CSl�EAO:io!OO Pmt.l�J...'OSEOl'ni'fl COOT l\'Ol.E,��R,E.v.O\'EO. B\'PSllf.SK,�£010 o::oo:f'OSf 1'A.Y eElmr1PUoCE. <4J FORP,WXtmM.�l,Tt£STIJCMtltSiAACm1st-£0,TEJ.!f'OAA�YE.ROSK>ll PROT[COO'C NIO�ETE.RCO:m«lllSCO'..'P\.ETC.D, �()TIIERL.qo[JlCESOlDTOTiiE ttO'),f()mo:R\\110IW.MEN(":lt1/IT>CEIIPCAS .«L!E.<11U,IRFIC1'SHE.Er RlGN!Dl:;G"JlEIEEOFOR PERJ.4.\!EUTCOVER. 51 OOTlfioD �l\11v\1.lA'.Dl�RfTiml ;OTOIT5 P�CO:filRIJC[IO:'tJ.GrJCU.TV:W.1,;S,E. d. Hl\lfOSt!Rf/CL'iG (E.G.,PA\OlflfTS):NTEfl.COW'I .DON Of ll'IDE:RG�O f,Cfll;. a. VEGCTATrlE CO\E.R/�CO:fTROLUA'�",EFS:AFTER O'PlJOfS(ll f'll(f\'ElfTl,,\Ofl'iJ5HClRI.Dm, l R!J toV'"'-.Oflfl.V"OOA�Y S','PS; A<=l "ERF"r\l.LSTAEIUZA1 )001SUTf.Bltsl:@, •) OEl.ttAI. tRE.A.11'00 S.YS1E 6 FOR E1ff.l.0.\"G TIE 00.91£ S£Ol\'Ei\TATI0S PROCESS A.�HON COt'f'l.i,IJ K.1: 1,u E£ ,lr,cH;\[0 FU.PJ...q,T 11.C.IOOFTrEPEFJ.11: NA B. Pi"R.�1T APf\lCAnotl. TKECO'(l'Rt,,CTORISfi.H.PCt.521..E fO!I.CO'Jf1.ETl'.'IG Tl!c Pi:fJ ,IT AmlCAT)!)'l O:UN:NJJ PA\l�iG TIIE.�TIOO FEE. O,',fERA.\D CO:ITTVCTOR L'USl SOTH UJS.T SG.'C TK:JfflY..ATICXl 08TMN ACOPV OFM f>E.RL'IT ,_,,'OJ.ff\ Y 0:f.ll\1; AT THElU>CA CO">'SlR\.ICOON STOR\l'l'IA1 ffi\'\U,gTE:h12;/o,•.p,��·•7¥'i��<Jfrt 4. Sf,Wi"RESPO:ISE1UnES (THE"fll•l.'.E.RIS�l!'13U.rOR FR(P.AJ;l'.G AJIOf.J 'E1,al,GT1£S1)P'?f'� ti) STOOl.\f/ATERPOUIJT'l(Y.l l,11lCATlC>'i LIEAS\f..ESOOillffi0�'19CllROIJ.!ENT.&L �EWOilon£.R P.£CXA:llilREVlW: R£fERL�::·PUJ OE\'El.Cf'tl:llTAG.REO.Elr W.mw;TNO. IMIHD'MSfl,,1,'EJ.WE.XT roP1..00fVIlO-"')'L'fTAG.�amrreotmv.cr uo..1�1!i\'1lll(ITY Of! ST. lot..lS PA.� A'fO 'l'El'OFNiOm Of .AG/liEJ'00 5l®i,\ATIR iW:.i.GEl'Eh1 FACI.JT't RElROflT' JU) TIRSl flG.q[O'{lll lO l.'E1,!0R,\\U.it l0f I.GREE\'ENT"l\ml 1:1\�f �w.HACR:.E.K Y/AllRS)til OOTHCT;,.VJ "/IGAW.'ENT nm J.0�1:,s1 AAIKX'I U f\'\ .... 'CCW.. IQ.Wi{A:/CE"CO:flAACT 110. \M�A.W 'ASSK.ll\\ElfTOf l-EI K)R.&.'llUJ OF �'£N1""\\ITH CfJY' WATERH!{O tl:ifflCT, C. �ll\,I 00,'fAAG£· �lTCO','fRACJE n'ffi:JU'I' r.ECOl '.ES Eff£Cl t/£.&\UI (')Clrl ... (t;0.\11.0.\YS MlER TIE ELECTRQ.\.'C SUal fflN... IP.IE. DO l�T BE.Gl'C IA!.O DIS1\.4ti.l'IG COl','SJ;!IJC00:i/.,CTrllTH U:flt.FtRl'IT CQ\lRAC>E IS Uf[Clt.'E. 11£ SIAll.l � Alrt VJ;O C4SM61','1J ACT1'11T1ES SIG-'.-JESn\,\T TlECOOlRM:IOR IS AMlr.1',::;RfSf'()fl�3UrYFOR PERJ,1TCO\'£.�El.'ID HA.SCCltli'lH>1,1THl'£R\11 11[Qt.WJ�tflS. !l. r.Otf"ICAI IC(l()f CQ'.'[FJ§s: MCO'mV,CTOR 1\1.l RECEl\'E A.l,l(JIFICl,TIOl'I OF CO'�E flID'.I ltl[L'S'CA ((.G.. �l\fl Wl. om:,1: !lOTIACATKlrl ORLET11F.J. rH PORl'OST ACMa'l�l�lflCATIONOF CQ','fRflGE V.JTHllES'1Pi'f'AT Tl£FNOXCT WE. l'l�IIOE CCf1ES lOTHEO'l',loER "''�EIK.'JtER. E. 00..\'::;€ Of 00,tAAGl FORl§!O'l',1,fllOR l�l OFfAAT ORj(l)mw.crOR)-FO!l:At.EIY 0t·,MR ORa:>iAAiOR. n£ C\.Q�?IT O\.,hlll.H.D /<£ti 0,',1 1:ROROP:CRATOR, 1.USI s.t£m A P£R'll L'OOlrlC'AIDUOOM:Pl<JlXHO ll'= l,'E\Y Ol'il.f.R ORc»AAIORCO','L'U.0.\'G c:otmRJCTICU fCTMTY. CXW�T TH:; llPCAAT 61»657.WA FOR lKS f®.l THE CUR�(T OWh'ffi l'USl N.50 ws,..n ANOOCEOF TEFM�UOMIOT/fOR\I AS li01E0 8UO',Y W1 1£UTil£0't'1:,,.'ffi9 1PCr.TlEPIU'ERTYOW.iGE S,ASllOIEO&l.O'i'I. F. TUlVl""TICtlOfCOVf�THfCO:rnlACTOA.1S�l5&E.f00 000Ftr,t�TllGi,fTHTHE O'M-.ERA.'IOTUWl'�TTIGPERlfTCO\t..cv.GES'f 00.'i'I.Ell'iGl,,',l)SUE!,.\nll:fG A I\OTICE Cf TcPJfl�Tm \flOT}FOit!A TOTlE L'PCA AI..OllC( Of! l(R\'flAIDI IIJST6£SU£.l.1mor.mm ))MYS ,t.,FTE.�Fl'�STAr.UZATIO!IAAS�E£H [S.T..a..15Jl:DFOi!;MSIT£NO COtlSTRUCll0.'ll.CmlTYISc:otlUttOO.r.1.-;1THC0,',1UI.OROKAATOR CHA.'«',,ES. CC61P\WICE'l',TTH f'EF:l'ITEO(AA[l!llflSIS�mm.sw.,s..�10fAl.oTICE OflEii1Jf/AllOIL G. m.ofJ) RBU<tlO.'t TIIEC.OIOAAC"l'CR Sl'.Al.l t:£[.P ACOP"fOf TH� S\',fft>.�'iQ.ll[f«),U owm to rt A�rlSM:Cllo:.'S A.',0 W4�ITDWICE RECOP.OS WSITE�:1'3CO:ISTRIJC11::>:l TIIS OOC�'EJRATJON\'UST E.!.'.II.CPTOl'lll.EF00.3''EA�Jfl'"'tR SUSl'ITTAla'TI!t:ll>TICEOF Tf.ll\'N'iTIOtt COOROO�TE�'l �OflllJS �rTAlJXI TOTl•t.0'{1.'iERA.TPROJ(CT CO'}f\.£TIO� H. CW.\'�(l.\'EflO\'ElflS)JO SYi'fW.U..'WIIEI.JEOOCU!UiT01.t..'RSTOltlEfX1?P?�ll.:CESS,1,1n Cl'.l'l\'O CO:;$lROCIICH.A'vJ A�REO�O 9Y lHf POlfJ(T 1£.C()f!Wli TO PNU U8Cf" TI-E PER�IT. l WiSTRLICTIOllACTI\TTY RfOJ.Rfl',Eli"JS A. G�ltAAl.:�'i'I.Y Y,1 1H PAATrO,OF1HEPER'JJJ TOr.RU!.EJilTJ-ES,'1WP,.'.D ll£t::£CtWJ,11flSCfl�P£1!SIT. Tl£6fSTl.'J...'IAGEl'ElIT �S(V!i'S)�JElrfflEDl'f HE S'fiPW A'l>f'tRl11 tJJSTe.f�El.ECTE0.NSTf.LlEDJJ,Dl,.'J.l';H.tEOrll.UAl'ffiO?iit,\l[A!C>f\JIICTIOWJ.. /Wil,tRl'l#XOf!Ql.llCE\'1\THM COt.SmJCTIOIIOOCU\'U4TS,l,'>WfN:TLRRR£C0t'\'Bmnous.110,l(:CEFTEO�J.EEFS''3f'AACl)C(S. ti. EROS�F�YEl mONPW.CTICES-.PU�'f fORN.Cll.'PW IEHT CO\'STil'VCroll'iW:TICESTOSATISf'l'f'A�T r(.BOfnEPrnf\l. STla.1ZE OPOSE"O 50I.Mf"5AS S(X.).'fAS PO;.�BJll:C IIOCAfElAWI 00,,'i 7 0.\YSAFTER00.3TRJCnotl ACf fl1TH'l°"""1 PORJIQ'IOf hESIE f�\S TU'POPAAI.Y 00 f'ER\'R,'E'ffiY CE.MfO. /,N E1¥)$'1'iPi'P BY r,.�n:oG TH!LOCA1 KIN Of AGfJ..S Y(,£Rf CO','STRUCOON 'l'IUL SE Ftt>SEOTO un\'lZE OURAtlON Of!E.IJ'OSEDs«LA.�. A. O'H,EK.\LJ'C,:THC.O'lilOl MFCllOUiG Pi'RSO'l�NIEDTIESl'll'PPNIHS TW�'•TI>r;:$'ti"Pf9l'oE�t /IA'� .lU1):nSAA\FE.CC.S.lf£Df.S'flHa,ll,C., TIW!'{t.0 OATU.\"STRllCIOO. CERlllCliTIOU 6,\,1 Hf.,V,:.E$ 5-lt. H) S41t PJ.J.'AS lll,"d "f, U Of It liW''/JOG C(ll!fljJiHOl,RS OfSkiUOf CO:;SIRUCIIQ'iS•'lff'f'/8�RFFKF� 8.=���i���:=��t::!�:���;�ui:=��:�i!���:.i.�:":,�c�!,�� a.� r'lf.PRE SENlATTfE SSiM�EDTOPEFlfOl'UIMM:OOm S�KJ 'l',P..l MS:J\'E.TIESE RE.S.PCMEIUTl�S; 1) SWWP. THiSHET,fKlW'.:G D00.N UITA110U OESCRl"xON,1)R£malC£DIERE1:l IIA.�f.: 2) TD'KlP.AAY ti-Y PSIUJA.'ffln;;s/l.OCATIO'i 30f A.�tiOT T02E C:UllJ,,w>i SCl. TYPES· !E..E SHE£TC1.0S£PIES. TPJ.1'11.GMThl:.moclOft 3) P£RIJN ,"Et lTW?S-�Al l STOOll1'/"Tt.RSrSHJ.l \5EP.i.AATE OO�lfTPi.�(Gn C. llf;0ti7'11:RIS RE9'0:\i�EF00.1tlE lOl'oG-TtR.IJOnlV.110l'I AVJl'.tmrEI44.\C(OfHfc:�·.v ,wsrOfi\f((Al t1tLWW3u.Elll SYSTU.l TllE r«.l0'1Wt3 �iOU ISOESG1.i..ru>TOf't:NOISU Olf.S EOOTJES· 11>.'.!£i11n.E: l\',l llE1o\lllCE PWt D. OW'IOfRE;S?(tl;f'llfTY;TrEOOEAALCO'ffPJ.tf001SL'1CW,ll.G£0FAl.l S'l'IP?Pl\'PliJ.lrnlAD.'.1.lctiTKECOfo'STJitJCTlOll9TEJ.liOIS ACCWlTAB.E.FOR �t.OCOO'liVGTORS ,..'l)Olt£.R COt/TAACTo:\SV.OOPJ'\G O:i �IEN.O THEfl�f\WU r,m l(Uiffilll.5T�J,'iATER F8'1'rT N,O SYrPP?REO..,�lEUTS. l\'OTTI mE CMl,'E.R Of f.'i'r N."EJ�aff r.:K-a >TO llE SM'P?. � RfGU.AlOil.YAGellESJ.:fJ PERim s � OOYPtTVlIDIRtCWia'UITSt'A'=AU.Rl:Gt!ATMY/.GOUS �OPER\11SW\,tr.;JJ,11soto:;l10rltt.ff�CO.\SlRIJCT}(XiU::TMll!:.S. n£ fOllO'll\'iG i!OOITl<WoL.RfGlMTO R$A."-f fJ,'O\',"N lO...-,Vi P£Rt1TTl',GMJSOO:TIO:t II CITT OFSTLO OSP� "4) f-"STYIOGAAOCS,OR.1-r.�s.GEP.ATTERr,'S,J.R!A.SOF STEE.i'StOr'f� SEE �TI �) f"W.l.GRADES,tAAl:w.EPAJTEA1lS.AA!ASOrST[EPstCffS--ftEStifETSCHso,JES... 6) r/P£RVIOUSSi.ff/!£t.lC.l��«)[)S OFn'W.ST/a.J.!Jt110N: SfE WETSC1.0!£RES. J) OOffi,-"lCAUO:IOfSl.,.f;F,l,CEf'iAJERSNiDY,UW;DSV,mt �1 mEOFfflfffi\lREW1ER.U:IOf.F f��SITE: ,, ... ffi'W.CF.EEX IJ fO'.t nE /.!al'E SlffU::E r<AJERS. OOl!flCAllOU Of mew ORIW/.,'Rf:O WAtlRS. I\Q.VCt'«l uriiqoo\'OOAL PROtICTlOl'I IWC.Y (EPA) IIPPRO'iEO TOT�V/\\J\I.J�IO:.\Y lOLO{TI.Dl)�KJWASJ[lO\DAU.CCArol {l,lA}fORf'OU.VTAIUSORSl[SSORS IOClffftED IIIAPffiWA. PJ..Rl B,IOOfTIICP(s:,tf fACl\�Ofllf'CAl''P.t,RID Y.AJER IW'SCAACH.n15Cfl[D;s.E<;.'.'f.'lT0101('iro-Hi,Sll'.P.\1tt0f00 flSH fX),\S,S£SStWT$/l1>PiSSCt\1'..0CU.VGUlCll..OOl>E,FECALOOJnl«\I. \) FO, nEABO\'E SfECW.OR r,'fl1,Jl.£D l'iA1 f.RS, OC,CO,.'E.'CT.-.T1Qrl ()f8'f'S U5ED JOA.DCftSS lllOl o.� Y,\A REOQl!a;L'ElfTS ro CC,.Ji't.Y\'flTH W:rU«(.-.O nHEPCR.m. M 1�) CCXiSTRVCOO/AMAS nm A.""E.J.O,l,',Cf.NT TO A.VJ QW.j•j TOl.lltN.SOTA.DEPA�Tll.iE IITOf �TU\.'l Ri:SQJRCES flll.R) Pl.wt f/AT ERS PRQ'lllG'ITEOAS'YiOOY:l:l'ti'Alt.R R£Smt.;OOtlS'OU,S.\1G �O:H SPAl'II�� "!J\tCS: I.A 11) TOPSOO.PRESE.R'IA11()!(f.,.t;9& SEE�ETC1.0 U:RES. 12) I\FLTP.A1JOl'fAqfj,S 10 BE PROTECTtD FRO\! EXCESs.r.e SC(t C0'.'i'/.Cl 1Ct1>:.D Sml.'OITAT 10U I l 'mt::0:i Of PROJECnctt ,� o. l\llnuwg tv.'t ,.,, C. §[01'-Jlff WfTR(X_PAACT1C£S. R.A!l �A'JJ 1-'i'l...0.'E.NT COSS TRUCJION PAACTIC£S m-.l l '.t',1\'&lf SEOOl�fT ffiW 00�'"1 St.W�YfA.lffiS. rnvot/O el.JT tlOTm,1EOTO.CO.llS A\fJ G1.ITT[.R S\'STE7.!SAf.OSTOF.M5E\YE Rr,\ETS TOSATISf'l'PAAT W£CfTIIE F'OIJ,!T. PRO\IY.: 6. DCsaiPOO'ICfIBE OO'iS1RUCIION U:m1TY l�\'\Wt'Cc.t'?O�ITS TU'POf1AlnS£ct\'E!ITA00:ll'J.9'1S\',lEAESOO.OOF:lfl.a£SCfDi�Osc:«.CflA"ITOACzy..",'!al lOCAT».IAS Af'PRO'IEO BYlH3 (SC[PAAl ._C Cf Tl£ PrnlfT FOR 11,'.SUl F.fOUREJ...'f.'iTS� 0. pEYIATERl'l'JAA"!>�IR.l.V.CiG:C(l.'.,LY'hm tPAAT IVDOfUE.PE.R\fT. ™U:ll\\T N.lV,'AT ERfl!CtlOEl"fATERNG OA:BA.l:l'IMti:lllG .a.trr.nES tsUSCHAAGE:OlitA \'A' .. \ERTiv\T [l(£$1/0lCAL.1:s£1USA'«:E.CQ,«llCOS.�l L'IR£CU.TIG ctWi:IHSOR OO,·,XStOPE f>R(f'�S,00 l\O:ll.\T100til'IEnNIDS�9:.l,fl:A\l/O,tRSEl''r �s,ow.eul\A'l>S.A.'i'f nnD ORM:t:(\t[tfTLAtUI �WATER �STS<:I-DEOUAT UYTRfAlI:0 8YO,SOO.\�t.;TOA.s.EIJ:l'C'iTATIOO e>.stlY,HEJ:!;VERFEAS11lf.0RTR!ATt0 l'ilnt �I EW.P"SIFM\lt\TE.R C/,N'IOTE.E�OTOA9:Cf.£Jff &..�·(. nf=GOMRACTORWS.T \lilW.lY aEO:.llE�TW S.lCflrlrYAJE.R P!.K>A, lO ctSCl\tAQ�G TO REtHtriG \'IAT IRSTO E1i'Sl'R£ AQEC,JATE TRiAT\'£.'ff r3 aa.'iG l'ET IJ() WAT Tl£ [15,Qi ,P,RCf f'Ol.m AAfl,DEOOl,ffiYPROTECTEOFROO EROSQi lMJSCOLR �TIMtt i/ATERFR«lfllTPAOOtl LJJSTU:l�'iTEOllrtOTil!�lEl�A liOH-.£11.ostif �W�'fR. 00 t:('SCWoRCc"D T0ll1E SJ...\1TAAY �EfiE.R \\TTH FUUiS....<t:XI FROU TH� Y-/�lr.J\V SfYIER IWfliOF1TY. E. r.SPECTlOl'.s ,.'(l t!AIITTtlW� ca•f'lY flJ1'H l".AA?IV.E.OFn£fUl.!fT. F. POl.lll1)CXIPRE.rarnc.,:i 1w1.!G£.l.'EJ(l �'f.l§U'\.ES· COVPI.Y\)mlP�l lV.F OFTHEPcR\fT. NOfE ,PllfPA.IU:AHQflGlUP£A fUEUSGOPWOOH Pl.AM� EIIEltGEHCT SP11.L PlM NTH Tl4E.Sffl'ff' AS Rl.�O OT TifS P,l,RT. A\'fhO S,\rf'f'(IT r-lOICATNJ THE lOCATIO'I Of P07fJ{tltl. PCUUlA'ff HlifAATl:t:lACThmf.S005mWN'S. R(:i,,,00v,l'j 1:11 . .t:lf'ROJ�UOfl CU';JIA\DCIJllfRl,!(l()(l COX(., .,.,_ •1 v.l:fO!.l>¥0!K'lGU.U Sl'",C.<KO,tfl�IM"1Jl"-lr,;fl:)t,.""fl.£1.ll(51!lj, lJ ,E .i,o,;l"'(Q.CtJ,W.:t(l .... ,UC II tMl,l ((\Wl t,."'l',\YJ.'.EUU·)..."'M";ll. 'OVJt.;,1 t-r 1 r<,ro,O tf'r, .. ..,,J"(C1':t0.<1 ru lfl l"'-'f\YA:Ul'U'l.. l",I A �1.A\M.c,)tt•J20C3,'<Urt1U"ff1,.-r-...AP.rnt W..'l lla.CflUT.�[F(VN l�Y,it'>l,\�[�\'-TlC!ll[�IN:a,'"JJ'ErM.n-'<U:•,..,:r'l.lla,O,[ srro1 nc,!r(Jllu'.OBlllW. !WIJ.()Jlla'",r.;,,�t-�IUT lf\,<;fU:,;,1 ·.i�•o-t H Q'OJ IO'l!i:J'U:J:W·,.11,..,u !tllDDIU,\:JU'iur.:.s:tf l-4!�0.0."H11t>lLlffl'7T-tll'O.«"'li 'f�O/Trl\O. t�l\l.-.,.�Sf,�\l.')'.lll�!>iJUIIJJf,O.JtQ<tw,:,.n:IIOO..CTI. INLET PROTECTION FOR IN CURB INLETS ![[D --(v �Sffo �1STRUCDOO EHIBAHff A. 111\'YY,TI\E: 1. SJA"lll,!..�Ef'Etmu.11ousmttco:�nwcno:t 1) f'RO.f.Cf SU\"!N{Y; TliE f'ROXCT l\",'Ol\"ES C(X''51Rt.lCTIOII OF AQOOI.R.-A RESJUWU ,., TtE S'-lOF'Pe SATK'.'CX l\'otXX>(F.M "JIOU.\',OCO l,f,US.$01 1£R't'itsEli01£0 1�i oomPJ.CT DOCU! .. l:trTS.Hl l'Al UUAI.A'iD CONSTRUCTJCti RE(,'U�'f.lfTS F<>a lEJIPOOA�'f H�•,oo WIJR(l.lJ,O IM.U.�91[WOOX l3f.'ffiC1r'AT EtlTOOCO.R l'I TI'IOPli,,,s!.SASOf.SOlJ3£1lo.'tGO.COO. SP'"cCf1CrtOt,31;N>J.O�S:. ffiOSIO'iPREVE.'<IIOl:ISWJ...leEL'C�'iCf\'llll1TliE W0:1.:SOTAOEPA.'U UE.'H OFUWIS�TATIO.'I STNlW!0 5PWflCAW."S FOR a. OO!OU UOll OF EIJSfll;,,J TCF uor.o, oorn�. ?AAl-l'.O LOIS. ctn ,.'JJ CiVTTE.R,�IJ l.tl:l'..RGROlNJ UTl.mES. OOMlRUCUOO. ClWftlT ftlflO't b. 1�r1 unum:s.. c. "=f'/.R N:ORffUalfilffOf ST�ETS.0$$A.\O G'JlTER. SIOEW.AU NfO U.'.OSCJ.K MVS.. it rm,ci F0;{S6TAl.l.ATICCi Oi' �l()tj & �ECIV8'TATD'-fl.Vi5 NE PUW>M .. 'IT S.fO�Vo'/Att.R VJ .l�fl,'flfT Sl'SIE..t.\S, 1:,00.uw. StOIJEWJ\l. ORDER FROY rRST TOI.AST: a. rUT PROl[COOl r�DHTI\'O I\LETSl5al fUCE. IDWMTlOIIAAfASflOT T08EOG�IKOCII.OOi"!oTR1JCOOl flrmAl;tE I TU4-0RARY ![t(f,1£1/TA�I �f.\�riUQfl TQ CO:iSTJ;\JCTIO'( t,. �lTltllC£Aqooftl $TOO:st...ES ffl.(;COlmRlJCln'l � ruu·�rECT1(11rOOt....F\'t l�flS· A.'>Wlmt.lCTED. !!m 11 •l (Ol'CMI C/;J1 ,0.V S-O..,,_rl.TC"/..�t lll'l'MIO!all'(!,'1.lo t�J.:;l()-'J Cl"CO(fl\o,;:,I CA'F .. TJ.1 fl IU&.U Kl'll'KV'il'loCTV, tVM't"r tQJl::,11).rt.C'O:ntff:".IJUl'l0.1�� ;:'J t:;ll:U51RlfCL;81,0lf:;,f,T !,ltl"4M fY-1'19i"[�)t.1'v'�«-,f:U �.JillUIUllt'VUV'•,_W•,\:.SN.iNlcar.t !t lC"lJ.t"-'OUl!T,>C!!("'T>f:l'flCOJ;TVlb,tlllllrl")(l?tll:CIR:.l,H"O.V'iL fl S.J!llfl'N<.IJOSUltlt�W Jl'\lOLK.fOU.....,,..,. 0'1.2!!1',"l!-<:'l. INLET PROTECTION FOR INLETS tlQ1 LOCA TEO @ CURBS ,-:('(t!tl�(Of"tft,1. 'T,t:.I.\H!.'l:itLWTI'A,!ft>a. • l'.l.°"1l'ol.\CL HC'OTV,'Cl/llllj.lfi!ll'ft1"'4<1h• conim,,•om1L -Yi! i.x,rc.O'lR001-r.o<:1n 'lllf Qll�,>\,lf!IX.IJ>f"('.l'-'!'.A•.IH5J(.\J l.._'Q,ff,._..'Xl;I:)' �"11',',;tn;O\,'tSXlliUttrLIX.'dt">l'.\">Ne �.fl.f\A'O<M ClU.'OJlfJ'l.\l lv.n:l"��TCP,,,, 50'..E."'11.U�:!.'IJI-D.�'-'!l-Hl(llr,.oc,!D .... 10�/r)f"Q.l'AJ SV...!fl[IDQ.:f,Jf"O'JR\. • NJ.'1"'J 1'·6H$11,,ll!{C,U.-..lTCfl�tllH.S.\I ftO TOt',-C,Hl'f"OFLII.CfD•«.f •l.�1'.o.'.,t {J iswn.a n�lf00'Ul,111�S1A<u:Hl"1:� :,(r�l,.\Cl ltf'.>17',ll,$1i10M"'""°'IJ!,I.U<f\,TlW"V. �« • l'l'l'.:0:l'O({TU'l,W),t'H:tl)ll.'(11!/11,.V.l!WUI.: ffl:'IUll#'>.U.\'J;f/1,l 'lt.\!. \ "1\i'Oll'LINWl OWOJ"4\rr<t-LtH\,.._---..-,.IJH!J"W·,(Jf'K Dt(,'f1(,H l,l.'t" 111/'..l�C(lPlmllt"a:QI T-ir-..'v!I 1.;;;,,1 ��s.�,a.1,oc,..su,n.,.co:11.rc:ir.r;n CA�Wnffl) l. l-(AlfX,UO,l'-lflri\•n1Htl.\l.J{O:,.,rr,',«Nn\,;'J'.II\W.,!l n1,\,"tJ11,'f)<IO.IIOUU:�(l'IEU:l.l.a-1TAIUllK�':l)IIQJTI MJ.KID�",l,'l•W,f'Rlll"lt�IFIIA/,'J0"'-1'\''()'itr,J./..IQ &l'IJ.l<:CO<!rai•llll"ICI..J.$!«11,1,:�l 1 l'tl'l',,nt,l"'Q"l(OO.W,:1!hU llO(U IWVFllt. Ka�x�M tF 11':'t,�1,,l'9),I.Ml"J.V'1';,.Cl'tll�\-,UIOA L\l CAfAl fO:<HII lil>u.!)",Ul•nf'+T-EllliCf DUI\Cf4 1· tn u,, 1 I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. Uiac.o,p.�m 21VI.S-t�:c St..S'.!>.�IDJJI\V.'4 ssrol l211W7.!M6 cum: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICAGO, IL 60606 SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD CHICK-FI L-A SITE PREPARATION 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) & DETAILS QL=o:f08l; J,YT f'ROJ.'-0: 1�10 DV.M'lGf.0. C 1.00C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 31 � �!�.�;EVATION +�.r , .. u.�a. n,. \ ,,u,c J.ltnGUf T(�J.'11', fli>, D Rnh'-«t -��-----�- -- -·······-·· """'""'"' 0 ldJ·· I.J�«afaT.) t.J�d,,_, , A 01 20 01 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 32 NORTHWEST ELEVATION D ....J ....J <( z �� 0� 0� 0 a. s� _J 0 ....J .J 01;; z � ---------- i .. ·--- -·-···�-.-·-·· .... . ..---·-·---·-----·------·---·- A 01 20 02 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 33 I. 0U'.£Jt.EtimN.C·lrtRW�»�,..l.la,1.,o!!.1:D�\ll)\1 1 �;..:au:r.A1B1Jf1:n��V.ta:8J:'4n7.J J.f c«:r,.t(1<-A$1\�1 w,.i ��1ltlEN:l)NfUl\'.!Jl1h'l�$TC(rnl'JT,tRi£� t llflJ(llVJUiJc�moo�1;a,WiTUJN1.1D-Eo.mwu-lll1J. - - - - ••�rm&� -- --Wl!-0,T�G!t -••-�lt.tff"1U\'A) 1".>1J1/51Ql'Qi'f41PI .....--11i--CPA\Y,i!!IJl'aW'I I PERFORMANCE DOIVEII DESICN. ROUSEl'J10Pl:ffflf:S 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS SUITE2800 NEVI YORK, NY 10036 r u.•.:u1 �OM""\O'atJ I J.llll MIJt:a.!:\t -., Wt ISUt!IO. fflli':11�'£: l<NOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAYNO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN GRADING PLAN (NORTH) nt: .)'IWJ�o,,�QIT,IJ1(;.11 c.�,l\i\N•-:l)t•) trwim.rc Cf.ULDU .• '!\I J'NllO WIii C3.1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 34 , .. --�/ ····· ..... -...... --· ....... "" ..... ____ , .·�!;_:;-::. ......... ,.. -· 1. CNa.ShX.vm�t1nia:.v111a..�rcw,��v1w,.1 ,;inorn1J?[e).(.r\)\)fOIU11mltn'1a:t,")otrWr<!P.�')l',CI( r.r,� f. W'OU\(lA':f74tO"A.IBICDNll.l:OM'Tt:A4'1#JN.OJln..t'U.(I.G). - -- -"U'lVYU.?� - - - -rJ«DW"� -m-,�11r.1Uc.1Lt .,.,u/ FOtl!.lU.-»t � P.M'Ot�� 'f II PERFOIIMAHCE DnlVEII DESIGN, -- ROUSE!11<(>H.Rfli :.'5 1114 AVENUE OF lHE AMERICAS SUITE 2000 NEVI YORK, NY 10036 A u.·;n1 ,.o,.f;\flm t M,'lt') t.OAl'L'U'.!Z.\I �, '1"11 '-l.SK>'I llQ.t(IINt KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN GRADING PLAN (SOUTH) •w:,un «um,V'lr fnh) ID'lrl t.WJdlil C3.2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 35 I PER FORMAN a DnlVEN OiSICiN, IJll-,.ua I IWltit'.n TAkkf\h'.t»ll!r�.1,Y.I.Wil ..,.. SEl>HOt<El-dlE'� ROU EMIERICAS 1114AVENUE OFlH SU1TE2800 NEVI YORK. NY 10036 KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN GRADING PLAN lWEST) ,�.:•t,,.,:o.,;:-11w��:rr:f>tri nc WJ.'flt.:n: 3 3 (<(CltDl,t. JIII C ..,.,.. °"" I """""' City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 36 UNOERSTORY AND ORNAMENTAL TREES USED IN SMALLER MEDIANS ----- ---- �--� --- PLANT SCHEDULE GO 2 0 ,abt--"4<;,,•Clcf- y-, eo- a, . o..a,9-_A.,M�U � � !m: f!?rHICM.IW..,:SR,",:9(1;-<,'.t;. • Lti ,1a11 LUi..fk"'""'�Wll-fl'n<bd� � TSJl,IUtTWfs.N ___ .,,.. TOTA� PROPOSED CAL IUCtlES OU MALL PROPERTY 200" TOTAL Pf\OPO$ED CAL IUCHES OIi Cf A LEASE PAACfl 21" row CAL 11x:HES f06 P89:&CT nr TOTAL TREES ti OIP!IKUOUWOOOPRQffAIYA.IIOIOtl i.tAUBWl --- TREE REPLACEMENT NOTES: PRIVATE PROPERTY REMOVALS AND REPLACEMENTS ({A 8)-.20)) X C X A D CAlCUlATIONS TOTAL DIA. INCHES Of Sk3NIFICANT TREES REMOV(O ON All MALL lANO: 1·8, 23, 25 OR A• 149• TOTAL OLA. INCHES OF SJG. TAUS ON lAND OR 8 • 222'" TREE REPLACEMENT CONST ANT OR C• 1.S -TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS (INcilES) ORO•� TREE REPLACEMENTS REQUIRED• lliJS•J�• Jos·) MnDOT REMOVALS AND REPLACEMENTS (INCH PER INCH) ---) --------- PLANTING NOTES: ,. All UTILI TIES MUST ee LOCATED BEFORE MEOtAN EXCAVATION BEGINS UNDERGROUND �R LINES MAY EXIST ANO NEED TO BE PROTECTED OR ADJUSTED IF POSSIBLE TO ACCOMMODATE TREE PLANTINGS. 2. REFER TO Lt.1C FOR ENLARGED PLANTING PLAN (RELATED TO CFA LEASE SITE). 3. REFER TO LS.CC FOR PLANTING DETAILS, INCLUDING PLANTING INTO EXISTING MEDIANS. Cft;A�����HES OF SIGNIFICANT TREES REMOVED IN MnDOT ROW; Tree ll's 15, 18 • S6'" required or ll.treu TOTAL REPLACEMENTS REQUIRED IN CAL IN 160" TOTAL REPLACEMENTS REQUIRED 54 (assu es 3" al plantings) TOTAL TREES PROPOSED ON KNOLLOOOD PROPERTY, ]!1_' 2 ON PARKING LOT ISLANDS IN OWER PART OF MALL. INTENT TO COMPLY WITH CODE USING EXISTING MEOlANS IN ORDER TO MEET LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH EXISTING TENANTS REGARDING PARKING SPACES. 9 ON CFA LEASE PROPERTY. • CITY TO INITIATE DISCUSSIONS WITH CUB REGARDING MEETING CODE l,\ITTH THEIR PARKING LOT. THE ADDITIONAL TREES JNTO EXISTING AfEOIANS IMJrUWADDANOTHER 20 TREES. 160 ,o .__ ______ ..J.. _______ ..._ ______ ....._ _______ ...... ______ -,i" I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. LHB<orp.<Om 211·1.�S1.,Sle.!OOIIWl\llrlssso:!lltm1.e«o SITEPWll<EY wem: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICAGO, IL 60606 D tits SOOAAE NffAA8 tJ2" i. Ill" 0:1 FU\l SIZESHEETS. lSSUE.DFOR G©U11 81>SEJ h'O DATE REVlSIO.'l ca>l'RICHT20158Yll<8.r<C. A1.LRIGHTSRES£R'1£0. MOJECTIW�E: SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD CHICK-FIL-A SITE PREPARATION 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN OAAWlttGTffiE: PLANTING PLAN (TREE REPLACEMENTS) flLE: ..1100741600Dlafl4\]i'LAl100H3l l.0.d1'1g OAAl'1l BY: ZW CHEO<ro &f: [.!: PROJ.IIO'.: 1W7U DRA"1t1GU0 L1.0C City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 37 .,. M ,. Wft l'O oez "' SHRUH JA AA Ml "" ,,.., eo . OVERALL AREA CD LANDSCAPE PLAN. 1 , ....... . COUT Tiii" 1·BIJ ,·011 ··93 z &n:·BB Hflllll 4'D1D )'BB ••• ircour. .-,cotrr. HCOUT. ,,com. ,,wrr. ,scour. ,zeotrr. & I}, & i"> I PERFORIMIICE DRIVEII DESIGH. -mtu..L,n«1""'¥d'v.:c,:.:;,Jnwu:n THE MIERICAS I 1t4 AVEMJE OF SUITE2&00 NE\YYORK. HY 10036 LANDSCAPE PLAN: OVERAlL AREA City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 38 ' '"' l<EYNOTES: <I1 �::J��J;,,ic $1-Wll(!ll(il[D(,l'X),,u·n(Dtt/,O<...tl L'il'X 4'A\1Jti(CVOl1t, l. ll\.\.015'W.l 01 OWI'<.'e)M,U:O,'IOOO IIU..CH. a.ENI N.O f f'I (: C..llt:,O:iiJl l',l rUl Oft OTffEJll t'G.!1 � ... '1 EAW., c:at,'Bt �\C'II QC D0Cf'fl51IHAll(.(1,. USE.l'FOR1FUt.J" fOR!Mt\.!l(U:,,.1,,1h")r FCA,�.::rM..GOO.r,ow,,ma.u;,, U:U;5SOfHUl,',\9£WECl[Q. r�TI'.lnt,Ulll'IK'DAAEAl.r�,u.1./TIJllV.&l'utUKU:Cf t1Lt.0t ,.u1.r,0111r,nurk£Ve1JIJ\1.toODIRl"U.UtEEDs. <Il ��� ... ��t�!:����;��:����� "'l\1UIU'llO"'Jr.tr"Al \'J,L\6:flD,klO"..A.UOl,t W.!E3N.OFl't!lltlQ, "81,.IOflfCFJCAT,:tlfmfft.0.-'INUOnJ.HEA:.!:l'INll�O WIMtte(ltH:crtCAlt..'ll <I] w�t1«1r1 nlf!f,_�,111,01 flf:C\.>WW> <I) fill),UJ'4"1'JW"�L'IAQICUt,off.V.Q','BIL&:�f:r� SYMBOL/ GROUND COVER KEY: F�IKOW,llPCIJ�"lJ m74'1PMIIOO(U"""' PLANT SCHEDULE 20 SCALE � im BOT�ftCAL �.•c lCOMLiQf� rw.,g � 12 Ao, bll'mlffl '!t4M&0 / SlfMS Gltftl.1.,-Jc GI Glui11I, ltl1c111U\os·1mptril:II' I lmp•rlM UoneJlot\nt po Pie.a Qlaut".a ·o,nnta' / Blick Hie: SpN(• M!!lJlll 9Il'. JA 20 RA ... RAl 71 Fbb11 alprnum/ Alp{n• Cu11ant chi Ru4Gttt, 0 All Pl.ANTING PER DETAILS (J)tC.i:::'lLLJ(s\�w�� '1'r�P::;H;;;'A;;;SE:....:.1 ..::LA'-"N"'D�S,..,C"-A"-P-=E'-'-P-"l.A'--'N'-'----------------------------------� 1"'a2i)"-O"' COIIT ¥air 3'80 10·00 �ONT. IA 15COHT, JSCOHT. SILE ncom. fu IICOUT GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES: &'JUQll!llll. I, lt'JS Q\U'Kn P='t;;Sltlf CfA'1.Sn:vtCNIMD\C. wr.viT Cl t�fPf. fflURYN.l\o;A10JSCIFPJF1"�1Jll �.v.a,v.1""'11taau:otor:un1•,s1A1.lA1Dl l. =�:tiu.�=��c:c,g==;��"'-"()MN""''�F:tO,oca,Cfi."10.,..'"' COKlll0t11.W.fA111A.'lfH>Jl.ftltfl11tSV,UHMl»IX,C4ff M:=illlf.(.r, lo llX"A1Cl«UIJITE.S.IIOlFI llfit"'IO,:.iJ'EA�Uf;cr� A'ifClCICl1\JC11"11Ulil\'i0::XlJ1"VC'U,:l .. fHECXil1��!1cAllU'l.'O't'l�4lM:�IEU.L50Cn\lf!r \'okPtK'1RVlfllWitOFaRlilYl,V."r1 ((.DI,, \Cll'l.1B'IU J10f!A�IC.-1,1A.10:l'l•°' •Gn.a, C'OSIIIV'ol\ IIOJ lE AUCl\'.Bl.NU n>w tlOOU;OJ ,LN11toa1a,, or 001/IJU UW.LUk!IJ.BJ\'il.:,O\Vtllt.!OUlnLrlST/.lV.IY-l/1. ,,,.ursuor t1>rnir11ostt 1111s1:N.:CD1\\U H r.tn:c1ca. t. 111e:rtN1tA�s,ARu::va"Vl�RA"n10f.o.11tF RK.:RU'NK1llo:tn. �UJIO'ICIJ'EA.'IOf'IKtOF !lJl Cll�,.i,t.:1H, l.f'!Ol�'£.ilMCl«:A9tl.U.AK.C)rAVMtr.DJJTr;o1P.=n. 00 l,otSTOl'!ICfttr\NIHE.l,_YJIIAIOIYJ.SDVUl1M£"°°1S.P1 f.OIUo\\�(TF.EE�Oll(IIWOi(&. l, THiCOutlV.C::100 bl.ALLI\EB'FA.'((UllUS.fl\TIJV:SN.O .. Jt.tnnar.N1�01.t111.-�a. 1.mu,.v.M.Ctowsmn fN.:Ulfit.WlllE�»..ID,lfMC.�1AAC1MStJJV:SI. llE Ff:OIICI .f!lE f)W.LN.UJ'l Q.U,14C:#cct,SIIM:n:»"I \WS'JUNIJU.n.'ti!. GENERAL NOTES: l. UONDFJ:IJAltU,c:t\lUQEOA.�.EAI. �\IIOtlSlllUI &PU. Jl)f EID�DIOtll':'f Ol)f R,.O.\'t I PUIFORMANCE DRIVEII DESICN. UlkW)alPI 1,u.,,.. .. ,t.s.*1n-.,4-ttL"llc.:-�11,tU»nn 111,u.,,n QN. ROUSEf'R< 1f"r-f.'Tl2S 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS SUITE2800 NE\VYORK. NY 10036 t l!/IJ201J M9MUl'lNI I qtJ1'1.)tl FYi>l.l't\P'.fJll nl!.�I,\� l(NOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN LANDSCAPE AREA PLANS la.t _,o,1111X(•w,y.Au;111u�r, was,oo OfPff11,. ,..uJO ,wn (.tl.tt�Y.l L2.0 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 39 PLANT SCHEDULE AREA: F 2!I BOTN�Ctl II.A.','« I CO',',','.cfl tllJ.'<l. I Aanl=IJ.,'"""',..il�l�lto UUJ},l_S'f(Ffltrms Qil BOTN�Cl,Lll",,�'EIQO'.'{,'f'/[I:','!{ CR 10 CJblN.7��d'r)�1/�.tGrn1 "'' rt,V tl!f� a lnncnl'\\'JJ,,,.111 l•d 11'/>Pin Lv.-,Cllmrl 11 s�"'"'""'�·c�ldn\.J·tC'ardPruoPn,mhltal.i1 PLANT SCHEDULE AREA: G TREES 2J! DQfNtCAt.U"Y§ICCt,'1,'0l'lll>.\'J! � 2 kftt1M,'Nt1i"hm:!t<fflJ'/A'ffl"l"rn,,Jl,hrh !HRU!!.S 9ll Dgl'N4f:H Uf,',;JICot,',',�Ollflli,Y.E � 11: >npnn•>t-kt"/.tc:,,.Lli'/Nrab.>.nf"" AA D"uJ�/P"n:;n.'tllU'l'AC #.llllWSf'l:R[!f,jl.1.S QI! B()TNKM..IL,!,,'.'.E/CO'.'M(l,Ull,l,'.'f CR 11 C,lJ,,fugtflL'Jto<Ml'L'WI/RtffGr.-,, HJ1 H i. ...... ,oo-tu "�SH.b'IDiJUI UN t, llepH.uf11u�l'llYIL.""1nlffl/Vn,.,•L•i,C.�A .,_-\,HI---""""" l,G'l.ltcG/<111!: CIJC','(;.Ri"IEl"lG emu ,,141--+-l--,hL./l_::/:f)'frH "',l., I I,/" mlSHID COi�! 1ro.:et11.J PLANT SCHEDULE AREA: B � W-:'�!�'t:J1!!{1':!�1t!l:!'p« AA ZI F:>..11�/Ft1J1&tt� = uc:cu,. U,CQC'ff, 0��Af!!����-���:J.'.E1EA\B.l_;REAJ'AP�LAN'!:Jl: Bi___ _ __JW�/�(�/�(�6�-------- �"""'"'"" \r�IEl<lCfl'TH:ll. Ul00,',lfl'/l5f{ED J C()tY.f;Elf!Sil:CfllJ I ------r7 PLANT SCHEDULE AREA: C .IN!! 9!! oorN,CN,ll",'(:elCCL'NDlmU� fg!I M I httlt<�'�lt'Vl(IM1Hlt011?Lb1h l'l'-8 � .QJl. 60lNfCH.IIA'iUCa.\','Q'JU\•te !IZE JI\ • Ja¥rnt,;l..-...·A.-h"l�R-£1)s,""" ttcq,r, ncom. '2)�LA�N�D�S�CAAP�E �A�R�E�A�P'.!,LAfi_N!'!;:�cg_ ____ �b--J�·�·•���"'J6�l_ _______________ _ \.V Suh·: r 2 10'-0'" PLANT SCHEDULE AREA: D ™-J. 9)! OOTNKM.IIM1�(CO'l,',\Ocf1W,'.E M .J "'"•ffflrllAr�rfnr')'lht1tlrutJI,'°"'• :!:AJN.�PEJW•w, W1 ��������!:�=��!��, Ill! '"' 0�..b���t!�l!:l�§�Q�:�:�. E[.t,A_BR§EAMP!:JLA�Ni:JDQ._ _____ .!::::��··���":J6�L------------------ KEY NOTES; <I]����tn r.t'R..lf'IEl'IU\.lO:.tll,FW:1lmaJ.CK.r1 \T'A k').IU'flG).'illtS. 1.l.'\AOISHlrU.&S�l(.IJ10;'1.XX)l;U.CIL(\FA'f,cJ.Of'RiEC'V l�.1.tolJJN'(OOCflOnEROB.ElBOOV:!l.'Al�OO.l;[RJ/\.LOIQI Dt.l"t,STRlt.lt.:Xl us:e4·rrnnut:\r �!llOJlfiM.At02' R.'R FEP.01;i\l.A.n(7.SOOOVDI � L(F.£U0111lk'•'4.IEO];.!:C:Tm f'Ciltf;US\\ln1tl,COll,U.S,FFV.1/Ul�CIA''f:llflCIIUEN 11.U .. al U'nTftlltr\",tED�'iJDERU'UJ'IJ.1.ll..'1.\DlDEOl. <D='g=�������-��;�;����� FRIVDITTRl0CAtf;)!lVN.'1iOOl.l<X:Afr.a'llQ'.E"U.'.(),..'f:!ol'tt.l F.£fVt10S'«.-Y..A11'XlfOOII.N-f,,O'Bff5..HE[E3"".:U5'-'11 Rt;.J",ATJ:Xlf'fEU.=J:At�l (I] rouc;.,.1,;;r.11"1 lliieAA.£Mnuo1Rtw�-o <!] ,m1Ul'-6'Tl'Mft�l.".l,Ol(<"ffiCU-''oO'l8IU."�i:f�r- SYMBOL I GROUND COVER KEY; �ld:S:�r-v-....,."""-""'�--,,..,,."""""' & EJL'ff\OH'\EliflOUEES<EETLLUc.llllC\O""..Allaj("';;.v\\l • PERFOIIMAIICE iii DntVEll DESIGtl. U<-- ROUSE! 'l·!Ol'l-:RI II::':. 1114AVENUEDFTHEMIERlCAS SUITE2800 NEW YORK, NY 10036 f7l)..((.I ... \� KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332HIGHV/AY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK. I/JI ENLARGED LANDSCAPE PLAN n.e _, .. �mu&u���nUJ>!'IJ t-t.A\!llt. (,1:0li)U.�, filo)VO (ff,, L2.1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 40 L ____ _ t.Ollt Ul' .. K.t.FJoCnAIJNl'R'B�laoS (D.;!3_�11<�E111,rsi'iHt'IT'-'C<-'H_.__.,Bc,.Y..eDc,E:,R_,:0,!_ ___ ""'_· t,,wcE--_""_�_"_._"'_""_'"'------- U"ffl.�A!:.1!.CH rc,.\Utallr.t!.lfll'L. s-ia1·a»rN) """"' ��� '4'-tPE�RjEN�N-"'IAL=.,D,,,E""l:"'A"'IL,___ __________ _ � Sulir;HJ'S tJfq.t�...-o-i f'ICl.�f..:1Ul,CflllL ��.1:Z:� CD,1'.a.9a,.....OH� .,,..,�,a•u 1140,,0:nc:a,: f =���'!'!-::r.�1r·.... ..,. ..... ...-:-..:; .. -., ......... ...___ fa\-i;S;;;;HR;:';:Uii;B;-'D"-'E::..:1:�Al,.,,L'------------- � ka:UTS ROUND PLANTER SCHEDULE 0 LANDSCAPE AREA PLAN: H 'f"l=1V'-1' KEY NOTES: <flnNOhllN1ll-S !-'ft��tna,,ufllia,rntaan.PJ.1rrmlU,QC,r1urA �,������,�:�=:�o.���1 C.\,CIN'UUJ�l USil4",-;,t1'0:-..r1at•fNtUD.YN01 . ==::�"!��:!"C:\�=lf;O. .l."404. Nir1.tRUET\'.IR)fiU\DntRvtn:itHla.V..0tt!Ul. Q]=:�:.-:����:,���tJ�·:�r�� "911;t'ttnlf KtOCAt r.rl \'AI.\-Eeot UXAtars.za.uunr�EU..rt'.C. =::�tr���vlm>JtWrB'ITll zetCIUa=IIM\O (D1�11!r1r111CIIN-SA'Slil,:)fAUt'J'.a> <!J 'II0\'11:W:T� tR,°" ltOal.�"IA°'C'fl I.OCM",9'181 IJ.ID)r"..N[F� SYMBOL/ GROUND COVER KEY: EJ·�•t-itt!j WIAA!»tr;.K:£1>1ACLl.totf.•J PlANT SCHEDULE AREA: H � E!�'.!.:.!i',c:!ZC""''' WX :l:!�!\'!;�'="fa':Jnth\o\Vli'.I !!!"""'=== !JP ��t�l='il!H� n � ... ·m11!:,N>f'1�11, . . = IL'l.Q ... isii.::im. .!!!! tzaJUf, ucom I P!llfO��WICE Dn1VEN DESIGtl. .. _ ;,,t)1,l,i1.��UIIIW�1.,'))61:.11ulL1Jm ROUSE!' �()PU�'l l!:S 1114 AVENUE OF lliEMIERICAS SUITE2800 NEWYORK,NY 10036 I lltt®U l'Vl>5Lff\Et'81'T 1 «uxu PJ>N-'uet'll,T JIQ.l(.IM� KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, Im LANDSCAPE AREA PLANS AND PLANTING DETAILS ;:, .. ,� -::nl'JC�.J.mtffllJtl,J 06(,,l.OU- RA m.,u�, inrr L2.2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 41 ... _ -- CD BIKE PARKING DIAGRAM 1-.W-O- .·· .. W. 36TH ST RE ET :_ ··-�--. ( ; : .. i �-: i:.· ;t.··. ,._· .... -....... . '' '.' 1J ,, \ ·. '; i.tt,i. \'. ::· -· I • l \ .. :! . �� -,. -·.: I·.·._ .. L. , .. LEGEND • LOCAOOUOI IIIIGll OERO llkl MTCH�CCOIM>O.Ull 2 IIKfl) CALCULATIONS: u:.t AAG.(MOVIWJVfll.: Xt�tol�etr,.AA<...,PACIS x.a,AOVl)l.Da,1an1 ,ur.u1F011mAA. (, , i.; ; ·;-�:: GJ:I 1 ;,1 ! I I•�. ' I L. i h'· j -: i I i·-h' I 1-1 il'\ I! ' W,1 1·1..1111:,-1\Jl ,' I I (l ,.11 .L,._1 ' . ,-..... _, .· .J .. --:f-:'' - .::-1 ·1-- ·1�6 I PERFORMANCE PRIVEII PESICN. umop .ua ROUSEl·1{n1,1 ·1� I If::-; 1114 AVENUE OFTlfE MIERICAS SUITE2000 NEW YORK, NY 10038 ffoO.t(:ll.M" KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, /AN """"""' LANDSCAPE PLAN: BIKE PARKING DIAGRAM ... t,.Wtlt:PQ 0[�11.14 1'DIM>. u,n ...... Vl L2.3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 42 � I, ,t.lt,,,!t,f.(f®'t'lfCfl.OURIJC(P�r�ll)'t l ,VUJKll.'t!ETHO>IOIICXl'4l'l!t.lC»)'IIK.I.JA'OUILlfflla\lUl'J"-S. ___ -DO'ltmr.1:,-uuo.cQ - - - - woo,.t�mr,ru .. f) 1 WflA'll,WlCiW.IY,ifttU.Q\M'ltOf.'liU(l'GA.".)ta'UffinoT,O .- -.... --<Wm.CDl'lt.L\IS ........ 4.. ct'(J,,JU.1Ufl;JflifiW.f.Uw:.1Ull. (c:J U>Oc.lllYCO'T.l'I.IUU1W 1IUR.!.m � NA't1M'VCIY,ClfU,lltH.U © ct14'1/l.,(b]\U,JS @ ASIW(t,,t'lt\V.f. © l,fUC\M,.CUC\P.IA'OC'IJllUlfU.tMQJS'".l:IY.O,V.:,r»t © MUf'l',\'JIIP.:5'�t\!1$1."lJO/YTUl,PIH)';;l$U,'Ot.!Ot\Al:fU:(;II © ZiR>IEDftC\nA.'->QlfflA © o.nwn @ Wt:,1111.('(AAJ;. @ 11')'0,':'Ul'Uut © tlilhC,Jffllll @ P.li�Ol1P/l.-7C: @ l(.(QUl.(0.ftff'Ftll{WI.IGWIEU) @ KtlUNmt/llSl."tUCf.l.Qlt @) .lr..C011\INl>f.CY:.,tllU41ru ------· ---- G:=:I o,cgo�\tfu:KIOJl'rWOEri.!�)f�I t:=i U>IIOJn'Jt.!,i,�f,,1ft.1rt,.1.W\CU �· I I I I I I I I I 11.'Ul'lNrtt;Jl.'Ot"f.lftOH MCHl8tl\P.1.fffl0Jl.l(IS1,� CO',nu:RJ\fl"O, !, It I)/ I I I I I/ I I I I I I I// I I I/ I I l"ITWW-nr-r,mr,q I I ,,_ I PERFORMANC£ Dn!VEN DESIGN. .... 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS SUITE2800 NEVI YORK, NY 10036 <m:n., ,r1no-"''"; "'' nJn1rtJU,� ffl).t(ll.111. l(NOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN LAYOUT AND SURFACING PLAN (NORTH) 1u: .rxmt.,.Dl•f9'.('tl;ll'IQ.tllpJrtJ.t.,;-1Ari1"1tl Wt:1ulll wc,mn.,.,, lfWHl 11:111 Wff\ltl) C2.1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 43 (,:.::::::;.-::::.:-:->·"'···:::::� ..• --� ... �·······"···· ..... -�--·· .......... .. J� ! t . I I '\ ' ' '· ' '· / / .. .,... ..- -·---- ... --... _ .... ------· BliflllillD. \. J.i1116'.US>.R.O'KAU�Ql7a:t;l.fff.J�.Jlt)<t 1. fffUl.'..:IL.at<I.NfCltU'Cl.JT1J.C"t)'iM>T[JJ,',)(T,\�AL'<\\'t:tl\ Jl'i1"0l{?ft (D W,\IW.tmilWI {!) A!ll,ltHA,U'£.'.1. @ lt,'U,'IOf/Ulf.tlJ.QN,UfNNM.l.lU'tU 0 l!UW<Ul(�l.'OG-�UUJUltU.fi.l.t..',e,t.\)n.,1,llh))4 (!) 111,.._u�mncui;.auocmia10n-m1,1A�NJ1.111.,. © ftnOHJ;a,JQdUCCUlltA. 0 Cl,f,.tlJl(A. © QNQlt, (D W.Wlltttrut.'. © IIOlU'AUHtU @ \:Ull10J11U. @ '"\\.'1.�Ult,U.1. @ .AtUUIILl.l.ll.llll'JfJ.:1.t,'-'t,l((Ufkl) @ AC((t,&0.tr.wJ',')WU.IUl.(U © @ '"o.:.i:,.1.m.Yull'IM11<11,1U.1\M:M?VJJ(t ,.utrtu:c L...:it:>1S'1'-'0'�N,,'f,.;U .;.,1,\)1fl.�""111Ul.\ @ �U,.11l @ IOQDM1\.'t.LfY.J':A'Ohl(.,\fW,) @ uQ,i?CoUtta:., @ fPl''"-"•'ltrA\U21ff411J-f4 @ Jl\,(Ul,U""'Ul.:.tu @ ,1v,«t.lA.ut111;,.'4trO'l<WauJ'Ujtl(';I-Jwr.N.. @ m;'\(IIIUU10;.'Ula:1u.�n,c..cu.sffQ..(.Q)tN(llr.q\n:tl - - - -rr;;nl!fflt.t:fWll.lraJ - - - - u&l1111"1ft111UJ uZJ U,lffWff((l'l'.A(Tl.R(Y..$J [3) lr:J...-ttNn'(Q'l';ft"ltlUUII (=::J U:MICl'A'l"'"'JUr,li\l'O'UUl(\t c:=i J.OffNNWH'Of.\\t��.UCJCU a b f 'f I PE�FO�MANCE DRIVfll DESIGll, ... _ m"'IA.-t.ll1'4&JJl!.rn.\'d1,L'.'tim11m.uum ROUSEPmw1�1i flF'., 1114 AVENUE OFTHEMIEfllCAS SUITE 2600 NEW YORK, NY IOOOS lf,l.t.(I�� l<NOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHV/AY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, Mil Co\llMlfflr1 LAYOUT AND SURFACING PLAN (SOUTH) n.t; .t'1IIIJ�D,,"1"C\ut1,rOJl!rplW1'V),._.1'b.t) Ci'WUU:R «0£.U':HII mlil.111 Ul'VI C,1,U.Mll> C2.2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 44 ......,,,,,,. \. raulll.ZS>.R,UfMDJJllV.CO'�:ffifl<l.'\mi't 1. P.:fW..v.fS.'EnctttfOR.Cct,\l'f'.T.tlXlliOnlJ.',')C,,.1.Ja-\::'"I\U(l',1 l. tmt>.Y'lln>J.tlllAt,tlU1J.l�t-\PNln.t..$""1J. t. t,t!V..."f:t,:HIUOHt..-:.\CIC\1'1.lln, .frtflUJ)Trt· © w.s-pu;nnw11 © �\111.l."1.!0lt. © l,f;)J.'oiJtJU1M�'•ftiUf/lU, © Y.J!WQitt�,:oai11j-. © WllO,/UklCut,,."OMIIA. ©LAT.O.tllQ,\l'.l#:OClllTU. © a,;J,l>fl,\j((�(:1l. © ruuan. © """"'""""" © .s1m,1GI.UUC.U .. @ \IAtfQJill\ 0 ,AIUV,tmr,.Q ® N:U.V.r::U.HLlS.;;;J"rA G 1.."tU?U..ltrnMIIJ./..\. © K(U'(TUM.'"U;tQl U(C,(U 0 �t,IJ.?.N/tu.\OlliC\?OIUOAA,�"12'> ® .,., ....... 0 Y.l',lf,:Ml'l.\.l�l.'ttl!Kh,t',ltl ® ("�\ffo\CC,,.P.D0VUUl1JUiCl - - - -ll'l,Y·iATtU'l:"4fll£'C.:Q - - - -V.!DUl-1i.f.YJf.c) --· - - -C(t�\l'U::tYJlllflS "c=!J KA"tiCIJrt((/1($1lf.UL(UI G:::') O,oqQ/v.N,,"Tl�'(JlUTTCCfUEll..5aiilC1<) 11t,t.\Y'11ttu.1Stn.t1twG1111i1uu Y1 60' I PEflfORMANCI: on1vm DESIGN. - ROUSE Fl�<.)PEf� I ii�', 1114AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS SUITE2800 NEW YORK, NY 10036 R\''1 .. -� I ..,,,. "' ... Jlll.ttU,Qt. J<NOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332HIGHVIAYN0. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, L\� LAYOUT AND SURFACING PLAN(WEST) ��ur:rc: C·«:Ct�l"tt r,.:1un em t,w.MV) C2.3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 45 Jll SITE DATA (PROPOSED} SITE DATA (EXISTING) SITE ANALYSIS RETAIL GLA({t>Q RETAlL GLA(4•SF) RETAIL G\A(./•sf) ·---- CUB FOODS 1?9.918 t<OHL'S 80,6ll4 PREVIOUS RETAJl 481.711 CURRENTflETAlL 46-1,'25,5 CUBFOOOS 129,916 KOHL'S 60,684 TJIMXX 54,610 APPLEBEE'S 5,785 RETAIL 161,266 NET LOSS (17,4SO} PMXIHO SPACES THW<X 54,619 PANEAABREAD 4.625 APPLEBEE"S S,793 O\JWARCEL • PA.m:AA'S 4.350 0\JlPARCEl · RUM. 1,015 OUTPARCEL-a.v.x 11,660 PREVIOUS PARKH«l 2,228 CURRENT PARKIIKJ 2,164 RETAIL 165.414 OUTPARCEL. twr..c: 11,660 OUTLOT·t� 9,000 OUTLOT • v,DUlA1 9,000 TOTAL 481.111 IIEf LOSS .. TOTAL 4&1.3S5 Sl<OPPING CEIITERS (36-361) PARKINO SPACES PMKINO l,UN. PAIOONO (1125D ) 1,857 I.I/IX PARKIIIG (11150) 3,0'.15 SPACES PARKfNO 2,164 PARKING AATIO 4.68 RESTAUfWITS l 1150) "56 PARKING 2,228 PARKING RATIO 4_63 - IU Jil Jll JI '------ ·----·__ ______, \........---____ ..) ,-. (rm 111 u 111111111111111111111111111111111111 L L 1111111111111111111111'1'1 rrrr� J® !J: TJt.WCX M�\9 '--ffifflY V[.51rl'Ult --------__ . cuaFOOOS 12UII l(<-�l ll[N RETAIL '/ � 68iltllmHtlJOl fHHfi'D"'l,)1:::rrtllttlllllllfl ... . l]l}tll mHM� -�HtHJ�·I I HHI ltrn I HHI ltl� � l.lHtrnlliH+Kllil�ttl HtHW - �II 1111111111 Ulilllll£\ LlllJ r;,, J f.Xl5TIIIG STRUCTURE TO Bf. Rnl7>'ATW D EXISTIIJ� TO REl'IAIN �l�EPLAN IU � <( � 1- C D D ............ C,I .A,\. u ,:... o-e.r..u� Ill lYift!;il:__ ,_,__ _ _, 1-1----' 1-I-- 01\if'Ut o..,-.,...J u•�-· 0-uncn,) .. �- r ��SEP,0:3 A SP 10 01 ., .. _, ·····t City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 46 EXISTING UTILITIES NOTES: UTILITY LOCATIONS WERE LOCATED BY SURVEY ANO INDICATE THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES. ALL UTILITIES MAY NOT BE INDICATED. LHB CONDUCTED A GOPHER STATE ONE CALL MEET (TICKET 163400187) WITH MARKJNGS ADDEO TO THE SURVEY. SITE LIGHTING WAS MARKED BY HANCE LOCATING SERVICES ANO ALSO ADDEO TO THE SURVEY. UTILIZE GOPHER STATE ONE CALL SYSTEM 651454-0002. COORDINATE WORK WITH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC UTILITIES THAT HAVE FACILITIES WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT, OR THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT. COORDINATE WORK WITH THE 1,W.L PROPERTY MANAGER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORl,IATIDN REGARDING EXISTING SITE UTILITIES ANO DISRUPTIONS TO EXISTING SITE UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK ANO AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. CONTACT INFORMATION OWNER: HEITMAN PROPERTY MANAGER: CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD-NORTHMARO 3500 AMERICAN BLVD #200 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55431 SR PROPERTY �IANAGER: LAURA MCGRAW 952-837�2 LAURA.MCGRAW@CUSHMANWAKEMN.COM ON-SITE ENGINEER: ERIC TRUCKER 612-363-7950 ERIC. TRUCKER@CUSHMANWAKEMN.COM DESIGNER: LHB, INC. 701 WASHINGTON AVE. N, SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS, MN SSIO I CIVIL ENGINEER: JIM TIGGELMR, PE 612-752-{;921 Jint T ,ggelaar@llbcorp.oom ELECTRICAL ENGINEER: MICHAEL BILBEN, PE 612-752-{;973 Michael.Biben@llboorp.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: ERICA CHRISTENSON 612-766-2831 Erica.Christenson@lhbcorp.com SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD (F.K.A. KNOLLWOOD MALL) STORMWATER SYSTEM CIVIL ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS AADIJI. ADOfTK).'W.. D"" DWIETER H lllPE Am AGGREGATE OL\I °'�lEUSIOl'I tn'IY ALT AlTERIU\TE DIP DUCTI.E IROUPf'E M'l'VD APPROVED OP ORAIH PIPE Kl APPRX APPOXl!MTE(L Y) OS OOWHSPOUT "' Bm DT ORAIHTU lllflll BUIJMlo'tOUS E IHFO 11.00 BUI.OING EAST,EAST\.'CG II/SU. BU\T ......... T EJ EXPNISK>fl JOlrT UIV Bl.VO BOULEVARD � ��·" IP 61,\ BEUCHMARK L LASOT BOTTOM El.EC ELECTIUC(AL) lF C ca CATCHB.6SIN EQ EOUAL MII.\TL CFS CU8tC FEET PER SE:CO,;O E\'I EAQtWAY CAST IROl'I Pl'E (\'MEIi l,'t>ICA.11\'G PIPE) EXG EXISDIG ""' CIP , .. CIP CAST-&."'.ft.ACE (WHEN INDfCATING F FFE FINtsHEO ROOR ElEVATIO."' rm STRUCTURAL. &AB OR WN....L) FL FLOW LINE N ,, C<PP CURED lN-PlACE PIPE '" FORCEJ.I.AIII CJ CONT ROUC O:i STRIJCTK>N JOINT l&JC C«VLV CHECKVAJ.VE FES FLA.RED EIIO SECTION roe C£1ITTRUIE FT FOOT.FEET ms CUP CORRUGATED .. 1ETAI. PFE FUT FUTURE Ooc co ClEA.'iOUT Go CC>l\C CONCRETE GAS (WHEU SHOWN ON UTUTY UHE) 00 COi/ST CONSTRUCTION G G���;;����I� ie��-��:Aciftotc2RB p PAVT COIIT CO,IYIII\J(E) (OUSI (ATIOII) IF UO ACTUAL GUTTER lS PROPOSED) PERF COORO CO()RDl,X..TE GA GNJGf Pl CPEP COARIGATEO POLYEfHYI.BEPlf'E GALV GA&.VNIIZEO PlS CSTG CASTVIG GI. GUTTERLIIIE PVC CTR CEIITER Gl/0 GROU/0 CTRL COOTROl GRO GAAllE CY CUBtCYAAD 150' ----JOO' ----- HICiH�'SITYPCl..YEIHYlEJIE RR RADIUS, RADII{" CURVE lAYOUT} HtGHWAY RCP REtffORCEO COUCRETE PPE AD ROOFOFW.'I INSIOE OW,1EfEIWU.'ENS10.'l REF RfFER{tUCE) IXCU(ES) REOO RrOUIRED IXFI.TRATIO:'f ROW RKiHTSOF WAY IXForulATJO.� Ss INSltAT(El{!'D)IJ()ff) SOUTH IMRT SAN SANlfARY SEV,ER IROUPVl(PIPC.) SECT SECTIOU lAtlOSCAPE AAGHITECT(URE) Sf SOUAAE FOOTIFEET U�EALFOOT/FEET SOG St.AB ON GRADE l.tJ\TEAW. ST STREET STA STATtON l.'NJ.'.lllf,I SID STA.� •lM>«llE SJM STORIIISE\YER li.U.\t\lUM T TA TESTING AGEliCY HORTH. NORTHIIIG TC TOP Of CURO (E.LEVATIOfl) HOSE OOWU CURB TD TRE.t.CH DRAIN uor .. , CONTRACT lYP lYPICAI. UOTTO SCALE u UG I.HIOERGROlliO Oi'ICEHTER Ul<O I.Jrl.ESS NOTED OTHERWISE OtllSU DIA"'ETERIOU/EUSION V V \!Al.VE PAVEMENT VlF voo,.-y LI( nno r.am UtJ Of PERFORATED 04SCREPAIUS1�A.Tl\'ELYLW1.al) PROPERTYL.llte W,·, PIACES WEST PCM. Y VINYL CHLORIDE w, \'/Ill/ \'//0 V<ITIIOOT WAT WATERt,WII I DRAWING INDEX GENERAL GO.DO COVER SHEET, SHEET VIEWS & GENERAL INF®IATION GO.Ot USE OF SITE STORMWATER PLANS (REFERENCE) Snt 4 STORMY/ATER REFERENCE PLAN POSSIBLE FUlURE PHASE �W.L ONLY STM 5 10-YEAR STORM WATER PIPE SIZING CALCULATIONS SURVEY (REFERENCE) 1 OF 4 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 2 OF 4 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 3 OF 4 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 4 OF 4 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY CIVIL C 1.00 STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)& DETAILS C 1.01 DEMOLITION, PROTECTIONS & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C 1.02 DEMOLITION, PROTECTIONS & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C 1.03 DEMOLITION, PROTECTIONS & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C 1.04 DEMOLITION, PROTECTIONS & EROSION CONTBOL PLAN C 2.03 GRADING, LAYOUT & SURFACING PLAN C 3.01 UTILITY, GRADING & SURFACING PLAN C 3.02 UTILITY, GRADING & SURFACING PLAN C 3.03 UTILITY PLAN C 3.04 UTILITY, GRADING & SURFACING PLAN C 4.01 FORCE MAIN PLAN AND PROFILE C 4.02 LIFT STATION STRUCTIJRE & FORCE MAIN PIPE DETAILS C 5.01 DETAILS & SECTIONS C 5.02 DETAILS & SECTIONS ELECTRICAL E 0.01 ELECTRICAL SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS E 1.00 ELECTRICAL DETAILS & RISER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LI.Of L 1.02 L 1.03 L2.01 PLANTING PLAN STORMWATER BASIN PLANTING PLAN NORTH PARKING LOT PLANTING PLAN SOUTHERN RIGHT OF WAY PLANTING DETAILS I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. LHBcorp.com 211·1. &,pef"'St, St,.500 IOUIN!.!'N SS&ll I 218.121.�6 aJEl/1: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICAGO, IL 60606 D 1lRSSOUNif:APP£AASVTx1r'r(rl FU..LSIZESHEETS. 01121/11 PER\'ITS 1(1 DATE NO MTE REVISIOII �Xll1BYUf3,tlC.H.LRIGHTSR£SERVED. PROJECT l!A..\1E: SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD STORMWATER SYSTEM 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN OAA.\��'GTillE: COVER SHEET, SHEET VIEWS & GENERAL INFORMATION FILE: DRA\i14SY:Cl'G CHEQ(EO BY: J«r PROJ.1,'0: 15@13 ORA\W/GM>; G 0.00 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 47 .JGENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES: I PARKING CHANGES l. fl.A!lOHFATiortS. 1. THiff.oflATYIUlUiOSTOU flJUTOFt:1'00'� OO�IGn!EDU�TIO�Of TH£CO'tSTf.UCOO�. b. W.rTOO!l\lPT10:ISTOf.'JU\1.H.ruA�AJ;Outlf:Sl�IA,'IORC\11.ATIOU.PAlli'iG,Ar'iDUllU11ISIOMM.\\IV:V�t [XTitITP� c. PW\10lAT LWT TWOfUl.l WEO,SIIOTlCETOTitE 1,'AI.LPOOf'�Tl' M»it.GfR(IAUAAll'(�AAW) Of TThU'O?JJil OiS',UPOO.\S TO\' [HXULAA AJ;O PfOOTRYl.'t CllC\MllOI� �AAlJffG A/ID HJiVO,'J.AT IXSW�TIOfiS 10 lffilffiES. ml IIAl.l P?.@UITl flA�.(,!II Y{11l t.Ollfl k'IO(OO�DL'i�T ( wnH 1,1/J..l mwm. PfRl(AUENT PAAKING LOSS (95 TOTAi.) PARl<IIIG GA/II (5 TOTAi.) 3. ���=��·1�������="�;:��()����:��:���=:t=:.=�::ncms 0 ESTI�ATED IDtPatAAY PARl<ltiG LOSS (414 TOT�) co,;smr,JlO,'iAAIASTOKEl1EllillfJ:(0:IDITIOt,SA.Q,lF.mouotf.G .. �(S,MJA(U1.BAAUJS.PA!Ufm.:fl,'IGO:I P.\VU,\E.HTS, ETL� LK8 W.S�•II. W.P.tl-<OOm:IJCTlO!tV,0£0 fOOTI.Cit OA\\l,Gf50Af.'.J$51;G FCAT1lR£S Will 5( ,.fPM.UO,RH1ACEO,AAOPA.'OFORlr™ECO�AACT0.1. 4 P.\VEMHfTf,'A'NTIM'lt:L l,W.'filllll;C((E.G, SlPHT W,1 EMG) Of OJm'IG PAVEMElfTS IS THE Wf'ONSl!llfTYOf TH£COIRPKTO:t lli5f((llJiDl.'A1tl1AVIPAV£MEtlnO.\lll S. FIJWWO::lt YfOR(EXTEli DSl:tTOCITYA.\Ol.'.'iOOTF:O'ilATSflU.ALLOCAOO:'ISA'iDKA.SU:UIAP?W'ftOBlllU PJ:Ci!J.ATO:U BOO ES. CootO:HAlE \\'01.(WTTH ml CITY AtiO 11.I.OOT,AIID RillO:U A�£ASIMP,;UfOIT OWOI.JID'I NiOC�.mocTK>:i ONMIIO!ISTO (QIJl.l011mrn.ro·,D1TXtl,AS IU.Qll.UO M Iii( 011 AM "J,OOT. 6. TAAfflCcotll�Ol. P?.0'(1()( T(l,'.f'OPA�YTPN"fX: comF.OL(l('l,(ESA.',OS.�tV.GE C.O:U00,1l� TOOO: llllllitSOT,\ llUTCD, l';c\UOl:IG ra: l.'.OSTCU.W:ttl fl(lDfilAWAI. "4VNLMI.E AT HmJ{\'Uf-N.OOUTATLJ,\11.U'S/IAAffl((!.GI, \ \ \ \ LEGEND - -=-CO:iSTRIJCTlOO U!IIITS c==:J (®f'IWIT&l.'11TEf.!A1STAG1:lGAAU.. 1KEY NOTESl,'AllACmSH: 0 NfP.a:ot,'AHO:Rfcno.'l.lJ.lYO)JUEDIOWMN'CWJJtmV/U!ICO:iSTRUCllONU\111\. umEOlOCAl.\\'OAAlS @nJ�t.lt.l(Ofi5raUCTlOOf,((rn0:nY. R[MlJT{ WJl TAArOC ��:�iK>.��:�.�G,!� .. ::.�����SU.-.ER£U[fHOmA.'iDVJ.lTRUC(). [)l(Ul[V/Ol(TOl,WUTA'lj @ ��=::c���::�t.\����0�:��� J}l����1�::iiti&RlSlO?J.llO.'CV/OR-(HtRETO © (0:iSW.ICTIO!IA�EAFO.�OJ.ECTIO/tAt OUU!t;G, OO�OT S10?.l£QO:n.mnORM.\T(RIAlSl.'lltJj00l OO'N, ® CotiSTRUCTIOII & MAl.tU:ms. W.IITCO�iSTRUCTIOll 11\o'ISflC. lfA"RA'II OICOMTRUCHOt.WJ.AC.Cm AT All 111,'.(S. @cot>SJIWCTIOllg!!A1iOM�llACms.. l,'A'.l{TA'rlUllOOSTRUCTIDMAU.A<m5ATAl.lHf.lS. t/Al.l(L'.{WfflOtl: @ Pf:1.\UJU l,W.L OF.CUIATIO:I RO'JTE. CO.�lF.OCOO:I TP.AfOCPiID!fWfO. @:��6Y�l�����;;��f�:���:�TPAJOC TU,:fOFAtl10BSmlCTNOWM THAIIAS'ti GU ® r.wrrrN:IMAU 1,moa-tlWLfRACCmTOlo.\():ilGOOClS/�l.\lCl(OORlSAT All mm. @ O.WJIT TWiOING& FilfOAAOO,'IWO.�IU.[ TO MAWT 11.lU 5UIV,([(OOH ACms 2� j/J.Sf,WJMUM [A(HTlfl[, ri0f.'.()F.[TIIA.'12TO]TU,'.[S. 361H ST W L - GttH+ti 11 H+t+H I� Gtit 11 H+Ht� � I m+ttl I H+Ht l+I H+H+Httttl-t I � mt f0 H fttttt-0 !WtlHtfHH ti �� 11 +ttmtt! H+ITT � 1-ttt 75' 0 -----75' 150' I PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. LHBc.orp.c.om 21 \'/. &.\)erio<St,S�.5001 MAn, MN 55W2 I 218.727.M46 CUBIT: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICAGO, IL 60606 D TIIISSOOARE.eJ>PfARS 112'� 1f2"0:I FUtlS\lESI-EETS. 01'27117 PE.R.\'ITS f,0 DATE ISSUED FOR 00 DATE RrnSIOII COf'YRtGHl 2011 BYUlB,�'K:.. N.l RIGHTS RESERVED. PROJECT W.�IC: SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD STORMWATER SYSTEM 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN DRA1'1�G TIRE: USE OF SIGHT FllE: .. \IS0343'rolCta��'G\\51m3G0.01P119 OAA\'mBY:Of'G IXQ.EO BY: J((l P�.t;O: 1503-13 DRAl\ll/G!;O;. G 0.01 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 48 RELATIVE OVERALL l'IHOLE MALL FLO\'/ RAlES (CFS) TO CREEK ,.. PRIOR TO WHOlE MAU STORMWATER AFTER WHOLE MALL STORlilvtAlf.R SYSTELlS •• SYS11=MS • 1 tlCH Sforu.t " 2-YR STORM 94 51 10-YR .-..11iwM !Bl 118 100:YA STORM 266 l7l STUDY POINT 1 FLOW RATES (CF S): INFlLTRATION SYSTEM ELEVATIONS: PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED 1 nLf1 ... 90182 1VRjrnJDRM .. 2-YR STORM 903.46 2-'1'A �f11uu ,., \8 10-YR STORM 905.11) 10�R 31UHM \O.S 100-YR STORM 901.01 100-YR STORM 1S.1 IU ®PROPOSED STORMWATER CONDITIONS L MODELING ASSUMPTIONS: 1. FOR SURFACE AREAS, SEE JIOTES Oll TABlES Of 1115 St£U. l. STORMWATER CAlCUlATK>llS ARE MOOElEO BY HYOROCAO Y. 10.00 SOFTWARE. REFERWCE •tsOJU WHOlE MAll lff STAT • IUFUJiCP.4 3. AN INFlTRATION RIITE OF 2 rum FOR TIE "lfl TRATtOH IS INClOOED "I TtE HYOROCAO M.OOEL BASED ON TH£ NFlTRATION RATES FOR THE OOMIIWIT SOIL TYPE r• THE NllRATK>!I AREA BEll/'G CtENi SANOS PER THE BRAU'i rHERTEC REPORT DATEO MAY 1, 201!. 4i. ()UAJHITY TAKE-OFFS BY AUTOCAO 2016. LEGEND: - - -SlOOY ARfA / S'UBJA1IR9(l) B(lJ!IOARY (t0,C1) * -SlVOY PC»fl 0 200' 400' PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN. LHBcorp.com 21 W. Superior St., Ste. 500 I Duluth, MN 55802 I 218.727.8446 SITE PLAN KEY CllENT: HEITMAN 191 NORTH WACKER DR, SUITE 2500 CHICA GO, IL 60606 COPYRIGHT 2017 BY LHB, INC. All RIGHTS RESERVED. 3 2 NO 01-27-2017 2-21-2014 12-9-2013 DATE PROJECT NAME: PERMIT MCWD REQUE ST PUD SUP PLEMENT REVISION SHOPPES AT KNOLLWOOD STORMWATER SYSTEM 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7, ST. LO UIS PARK, MN DR AWING TITLE: STORMWATER REFERENCE PLAN POSSIBLE FUTURE PHASE MALL ONLY FILE: .. \150343\600 Drawings\C\150343 STORM.dwg DRAWN BY: DPG CHECKED BY: JWT PROJ. NO: 150343 DRAWING NO: STM4 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 49 toelO � """'"'" t�tt98-i',S6 xe::1 �tCtt9B·i�6 '11111.l lCti� "NW '11016111woo1g 111 nos enuOAV 01�PU�1 £906 St10A311tlnS ON\/1 ':JNI '·o::; NOSNHOr ·s Al:ll:li/H A!Nnoo Nld3NN3H VlOSaNNIW '}U:I V<I Sln01 ".LS 11VW OOOM 110N>I ::1.115 NVl"'JllilH :J0.:1 A3Al:l nS 1VOIHdVU00d01 CNV AUVO Nnoa 01osouu111 W 01015 a41 JO """I •41 Jopun Jola,,,n5 P""l pa,01,15>1J �1np D WO I 104\ puo UOJS!",Odns po,jp Aw ,apun ,o aw lq paJoda,d ,o,,. pod,, ,o uo1d 'la,.,no S!4l l"'ll lJ!lJOO Aqo,04 I •\DQ SNOISIIEl/i 1.33s::I NI '31'V:JS ----0� og or L MIH SS3�aav o••ITTl/\9 9flll91<;0l '1 io;!:6001Y ·:NQ lNJrGSYl >llY/ll]QIS Jfl\1/ld �� 9rll9001Y ':JOO 11orasn �111111100 Jnsrld et UO]ID.latJ JOds 6"!\5f<] "'ll"!l uouD.1 •8 i•ds 6un•!"] JhO\tiO:J 6U,\5p(] •l"'l""n WX>l S Oi04UOn lJDIIUDS •tn4uon JaJOM •os aool!O'l1•1 ""'"""" ouo'!'l"'l -"'i•n = •!Od 1 40\1 ( .. 4ou1 !J! ;a1awo,o) ""l ,noJ>J!""O {••4>UI UJ J>l>W010) aaJt '"°"P!"'O "''oq4>\0:J "!•oq4>\DJ �'l"A 50!) ""l"A OJOc> •io4oon u,ouwn \UDJJ>\H •iod """d ''°4oor1 >!JlO>I] ,oa 'l'l""I] ,.l•N '!'l"I] ,,�,s '""IS »•as �JO)\UOS '°' J>\OM ,uo4d•tal puno,t;,.pun '!'\001.l puno,t;;apun >t•P•G po•<!J"'O 'l'"J 'l"""'°° 6555555551 KXXXXWXXXX& -->H ---- -n--g---·-·-·- I·.-• ON3831 •l,...., ""'"""H J.,.,.4l J.,.l P..P""'' O�I O! .u .. ,o,,o '"'!lWV \<I I'll ""'°'�"JI 'I ,P,8 'I .-:�•� (!Wl.01 "N OJl'..l /0 ''°"""'°" ''1-'>xl '"'""1) l: """'� "l°'"�-11 �IV"':> U."°'""ll "! '''"'"' p..:, J......,. l""'S l"'"'-""""l <>l•\S Otll"ll •'11 0\ � 'jOO_.'fl IHJ 001'1: .,_.,N >4l \<>mo '"n"d '<\� O'II /0 I'"' l< .& ... � "l!.<>tl lll ....... 1 '81 ""!1>,S JO "ii''<:> l«<><!l"'S •'11 jO JP!l 'fl"'S >'11 /0 l»! 9l"Wt .,_.,N "II JO l,.J r.;.� i:?.:f.tt ��J J't'J}ji':: :"1.:.."'.o�: .. :;-� ,!·;;:�� ��::·.::.=·: .. �':':.!: "'"''fl � ...... , 10"1 -JO Ol'J ,...,_ '4l "'"'I l"'\'IP laaJ �l "'l"'r>;:I 1<00'!1""5 f'!OO JO I"" 'll"'S """ JO •"II """" "II "° lL\<'d o o, .,_.,N """"" �.,, �, 1• ""'l '!I> o »1-0 \<OOOIOOS """' J• J"'1 4l""S ., .. Jo "<I .,_.,u .... . ,,. p11>,od 0"' l ..... """'4l �»J <!l"6St /0 ""'I"" O '"""V .,;,l "'"" JO 00,j \•H '4l 6u,p '1100$ O>IJO'll �>1-"'Q l•O>'fl"'S P!°' JO Jl'll OIOOS - 10 00,I 0,-"N 0'11 ....... '<"d 'l""l 1$ jO '6<>1!,1 >OI "I ,..,..y <•><>l JO ...,,, .... •LIi jO UOfl,.,.,.l'I OOI 01 '!>i..._ l� 010 �'luo,O>o ""°OOl <O P>'t'>'"''-""""'""""""''M "ll jO ln/1 It O�ij ''flJON lll "'"''""'1 '81 "'ll"'S ;<> ,aµ,,o lf,.SIOOS O'fl JO IP�"'"°" '4l JO ).<>d 10\U (-lvo<loxl '"'""P) a: ,.,,.d "&IJl"'ll»O JO l"""'l4l Ol l"M 0>0>'!1 "'IJO'O llO>OI""' l'fl JO _.._ \<"'4l"'S - JO '"" 'fl-"'N O'fl O> 'flJOll "'""II �HJ t.rr JO ., ... , ... 0 •• ..,,.. OI' "lO"IW !O .,,Jtio, ll u•i ,., "l °"'"""' '"'"'11 ,..._..,1 � ''"" ''11 Ooop ,,., st"L8 '<\nOS "'"''11 "°1'"'"11 ""'4l"'S •4l 10 "l"''O l"•'!lnOS -JO """° l""'ll"'N 0'11 l• ._ .. a �.Oll>J <O l'O<I."""' '!I .&oo� •.,.,,N tn "'"'"""' '81 "'ll°'S J• ,oµ,,o 1""4l00S "" ,. .,..,.'(I ,,.,.,nos •'11 1• ,.,• 1•«< ·9 •"' J .... ,. •-l"'""""o0 ,.,,,. oou•n '"' 01 &"J)..,,. �::,;�;.i :� i'!":.H,,':, ·�-';::� ;_1�� l:..�'!�! :S1f!f�.::i'���!.J.� ��.���;:.e1 tZi ,,....,,," 0'!1 0\ l»J 00�( JO "'"'l'!l' 0 ''°'ll t,...,,., ..... 'Ill" ,. .. !J?l"'ll""' ._,, :O"!i ,,,.,, .. """''""""'°""""l ",e'""l"°"l"P"""o,w •o 1•<1"!'"l"J Ol>Yl:'"l'i ''<l,-"'!l""-"!'1 '4l •· ;� :n��.��":l'f..:. -::��':tiJ ::i 7,,.•··:/:::,� �'!'1"':::��1.:::.:�;� i,,., .... "'�::.: : .. �· ; .. ��'::'.�"�i',, ·i l!:/,,%9f.',t�:,:;-"O:: j� !':: t��� :'J; t.::i:1• ·i1i;�Z�.:::::�:-l t:.;i���::/.J:Wtfii�.i:'"t�r����:6"1W.laq /0 '"°" .... "l la>J\S 'OW \ .. M 10 •"ll l ... -10-1"'� lpo'O._ •'fl &uo» ,,..,,._. o,wo, "'P"'"O \IOO'lln<>S 14l ,o ,..,.,o ':�7 .;:2;�:�;,i "r.:-:�1�:::i .;·:1.� �';" .;.:.:��':;1-t �it'e' :; ,i "':.!"ir�'.;;"! J0i:.o".:";;:.!: ;� ;.;�...-� 1�·���·.i� Z�J.'�':.."';:';.:'::.'':,;::., "':�.!.t!1t'f.:: ::J:.. ,,,, oq R• 'Pt ... 'OJ0<>"'<11 '<1= 1.16'>0,H 'II .&"'H ',U "'"'"'°l .,,, "'ll"S 10 "1"'0-0 IOO>'ll"'S 04l JO JO)"'"(! l'"'<l"'S >>n JO -"""" l"""I"'" 00, -� O�j .>0µ,"> 04l Owp •v>L!I""' !"I 0C l'�d O 10 �"°W\w;l :6"1""1!>] •'fl '"I i'IW.6.q jO 11.!"d 01/l O! "l"r>tl 11 .. 'lln<>S >'<! JO JP!! 'lln<>S PP" jO °'" 'll»U O'fl 0""' ""' O,tla'I! '-'>µ,no !<00\/100$ •'11 JO /l'M 'II,,:,;: """ I'> ""' """' O'fl 0! Rl""'(I 1•••41"'S Pl"' JO l"ll l<>• •>n •I """"" .,_.,II """'11 :, .. , t',t£ 10 '""1'10 D .ot ,00 ,IL U>! ''ll OJ i�.J>0yop ""''11 '"'I ,;t·ta 4l<'<>S '"'''fl "°"°r>O l'°''ll"°S OS! /0 !PH '11"'5 °"' JO -""'°" 1'""11"'" OL/1 10 6U!>"OWCU0J """l>'J 'D 0t..,,.'P R\J0"11 1• .. 'fln<>S 0'!1 j0 Jj0N'll"'Sl'\ .. /D \.D d \OLl.l "j, �""l;,q JO ,..,. pn)>O >'!1 0\ 0"1'i 'fl"" "" ·-IRA\ ... ....., """'II :.,.1 ,v,o f'!M 0..:,1' P•""'''" •• �,q JO \"°d PR\>O >O> JO l••> -� f,.;1 ,!� i::.:"t:e,J';a.:��','.). �·; '!'.�k"1� �J°-�"�1'%�c!�.tJ:t� �1 :JJ �rile'; lpo)' .. .,_.,, °"I'"""' p<JO "'""'" al oao,&,p lt ISi� 041 0\ 0"l\»<j>p '°"''11 '\HJ g·L•O '!R\""'fl-"" �"'"' l'I" ,,,...,., 0C "l"""' Kl "''"'P Lti Y•I •'11 •1 .C<l'"V"' ., ..... , n»J nt O><J l••-J•-1,t,i, Pl" Oe»p '"'l'"°""°" 0"!"""" P'"' .ct ,W ,tg ll'l •4l •l OU!POl•P >,0,41 !£ "H Ao•<AH �""l •lOIS jO '"' '••---10-\<l'p '"''""" ... q 1 ..... O 01 '"'I ,o '""' 'l"l in-so ,,..,,,..,_ """'"" P"' .,:� " 1/>I "" 01 ""-"""' "'""" ''"' W"Z�< '"'''°''11"" &..,""" poo ,.,...,w L'S <00.&p !< ll•I •'II :j t�l:: J:�.,'2/:,:.;/J\�I,��� l��•= ��;::i"\,l.'.,.��:J:1i::;o::�"'�'� ''11"'"-"""' l"'l '"' /0 .,.wo, ,. .. .,,.., ''11 ., ..... " .... w � .. J !'1"91£ "!""O ,. .. .,_ ... ,. JPil 'll"'S p,>o JO "'!I '11'°' 0'!1 •"°'o l<O] &..,,uu ''""4l ,-.µo'(I l'""'lln<>S 041 jO JPH 'l!"'S P'P' I'm>»> l'"""""'"' '' • .....,s.0 """""°I '•P''l"'"'-"l'"''(i 1'"'>n"°"''"'"JPH 'll"'S f'! .. Jo "°"'""'-'I'. >,.._..,y '""l jD fot-J0-\"61• O'l/. "l ·•"1..,,...1' ,..,.a ,., •l "''" "'"' 1.,1 �o·ut '"'""op• .... ,, """II ""''" "'''°'<> """"""S 04l JO JPH 4l"'S "''" 10 >'Ii 1<W O'<\ 'I 1"°" O 01 "" ,o o,ow 1"1 l]ll "I"'<:> !'°'"l"'S 0'11 JO /PM 'll"'S '1'" JO •'-'!I .,,.., ''11 '11!" l'O",od \.OJ 0>0,'1! '>t>J «···· -",-,0,-0 l'"'4l"'S 0'!1 JO fP!I .,,-.OS P,M /D ODj I'°' "" 'II!" pf>,od 'fl"'S "°"'41 �"I tvl JOV,'"() l"'4l"°" ''11 JO }Fil S\"'S 0,00 "I! JO '"'I .,,.., 0'11 Oo,p l''M O,.wru a>""'ll "°1""11 l00>'!100S 0'11 jO ]PH q\OOS """' /0 '"'"' \<O>'ll»D 04l 10 """"-"'6 �'°>"/ oo 00'1"'"' R\.<>,-0 \<OO'lln<>S O'<\ 10 IPH Ol"'S •JOE JO V,d \O'U "\ ·�m 9 ·-to/ ... """l""OI 6"1"""' '£ "H loo<AH �""'l •1•1s JO 00,1 --Jo-11'!> '"'"""" "<\ "' !C\Od O OJ «>I ,o '""' IHI �l"t<O '"'I'°'"'""° ""'""" P"" ,ti .I.< U>I 0'11 01 ""'""">p '10W4l ''"I 1"!91 '""'"'fl"'' ... ,,.... P"' .<>t .1.t ,Q; \"61• .. , 01 O'll»i'P """"' !i"I <'><> ,<l"l-,'11"" "'<'°"" I''-"' .OC ,U) ,II ll"I ''fl OJ '"'"""' ''"'4l 'l"J gr,9 -"l""O l'"'4l"'S •SI /• JPI< Ol"'S P!<'< JO >DJ l"-oq\ """" 'll"'S """4l "'IJO'O ,, .. .,ros ,., Jo ,,,H 'l!ros p,x J• ,...,., 1"""""" ,,. 1• •"1""6aa :00,I P''l"'"O�•ll>l "ll J•l•Dl 0"' l "II •••<AH 'l'""l >lO!S JO .,_.,N ''!I .,., .. 'o\o<ao"'1 �l"'*l 'l""""'H '"'Wl"n P..,..,d '11• >'11 JO l<'M I< >&<o>li 'WOil £\i di"'"'°l 'Iii "'!P"S JO ,ai,>,O l<OOSIOQS ... jO /l'H "'"°" ''II JO J.Dd 10\U ('l""°"' '"""'"°) ,, ,., .. d NOl1dl�JS30 AH:13dO�d ·� "oS -Wott9 'OtllOO. ... ., "00(! '"''"""° '""" -(•.w�) O>JO """""" U '.....-.S ... -PLtwlt 'wtl.W -.OH "00(! I""'"'" •v.a n ...,. ("� r1 ""°H PK>) ..... ·-"" a � O'S -=ll'Ct P"" £U(9t> '<>Gl.!<6S -.OH 10>"""'0 "! • .,.,n ""'""""°'"'"l"!h••<loxl 0<,i Jo ....,_,,a ,,..1,,.41<»>10,"!"'"°-d J0 1uo"""°""'"'B ,,.,..,. .., -h•»>.od 1»1"'!"' jO ..... A�l ... .,....,. \ .. W 00, 0 ll»<lo,;I °"1-,,f� 0\UO <1,odox! JO 1)0 o,,poo.,;u> JIO" °"1"!010� 1i:I :slN3VllH!)V0t!ON3 1Vl1N310d ::10 1N3Vll31 V 1S 'n'lllllS 00 lOld 01 D311WS30 Sllll/135"3 OM •.utw0�d l�llH ·(. ••• < 'I •P'-'"<I Ol ••) "'°"°""" -oN l"""'"'°ll ,o •i� :: :,;;J��t·::: .�1,; '.f-v-��./�7.;:;�1!'til!Wt: ���.':...�:'°J '3'1111'1S 00 lOld Ol ll3!l00SJ<l SlllllOSV3 ON ".Ul<:ld',Hd l:lllH "106teGI """"'11 \toawn»(l �� �:� !;'s ';'o"�;ij,�>n,:\����·�N 't,,��·"l",:';",.;11 ,i:,.7c:..r�wi��,r!;: "n8()"1l .tOH Jtnn(OOQ !lld "1ld :us ".UH3d011d lOllJV {t l'""d OJ ••) �L!�I _..,II IU>"""'<I <O .. ,,I.I jO ,o.q'l'),• "" J• ""J /0 >'ll ,. -..., '<l! ,p,on o,p,,,.., �•• •u ,oq.,.,<1>s p,1op �, ....... .,. P•• <1"61Y Jo UOfl""'""' -.c (IGUYII U\Hffi-0011) 1t p>JOd Ol ••) ...., .... , ""'" 001':i.�J� � �:iu,1;; f.":r�.-�NJ���;t ... \�_! •��'.:' !ri=�;(o\llffi 00 N'!\OfS SV '.U!!krn/d Sl.:l:ll!V) 11 101 't p>»d 01 ,o) ttt GtH J>q<IJOll l""'"''O<! •• '1961 'I "<r="O P,P..,,., 'IBS! '! ,.QOl>{) l'>l"P 'l' .. 0 """D U'O •'11 "I P"" 'to-Gtt< ,..,.,... l"'"""'O •• ,op :;.:�·;;-.:;, �1:"J �"'J�,��· ;'11.;�,�� • .;a,;1:zoi .":,";:�·� :;��'�{lilllYn A:.Sl!/'$-0011) 11 p,,,-d OJ ,o) �l�U .. ,,:� ,\:,��:':c,;'°::'1/� •:N•-:.,;;:,:.4:. 'l,,�j ;t,:;�,::'f�.k ';���·� (lm.lYn u\lll1S-OOH) 1t 0"" < '! ,,._,JOd •I ••) n:••rn: "<'II ';o0 00 .. 0'1 JO ...,'11)6.H •'fl JO »YJO ''II "I 'ooo< °< 'P»n .,.p,x,a, pL<> '5MIL.-.:l '">""II l"'"'"""<I '° ,.,,..,,.H <>•oo:> 041 /0 "".N O "" "I '000< 'I 'P'°II .. pn>a, '000< 'l "-"'""J P•IO,, .,,..d l)""l 1� jO lu:, •<1 lq al0--00 "'l """"'"H 1'L {w.uvn .U,,Hffi-llOIO "\t pvo 1 ''""'d 01 ") ,;o>!lt<lS P"" 6Hl00� '&tt,,... '<:<>Loot ""q""'II 1"°''"""0 •• -•a <1U«>.J '"' J• ,,.,. •'11 1.1 p,p.»>0, , .. n.,...,a •'11 1.1 'l'>d .,..., ,s i• •ID •'ll lq "''"'" '11"""d "fl � ·it (llll1Yn A'.>\ITTS -0011) ii P,'"d "l •o) w;,Jl9'9 P,\op� ���:':,Id�'%':� •::,,NJ��,:.:'fl ... 'i,�!8.l '�,:::::-:t:;:.:; ;,t�J ·� ,,.,.,... ..... !""'-"'"' P""" 'PIS• •1 <n,.,,. -"I" JOU '""" ""!l"P'>U 'E'« :01011 it pL<> < •�>,od "l ,o) t906'9> .,. ,.t.t .. ::r,�'.::.-":.''t:.�;� ::J%�J.':'2;�0;,�,:i�"-l isWJ,J�.:z =;1�� (.ll'!!f!S NO NI\OHS SY '.U YJdOll<I Sl!lllJ'i) ·(1 P,JOd •l co) tLlott9 .,., .. "N ''""""""0 oo >661 'ti ''" .......... 'W6! ·1 ••n P'l•P ..... .,.,., •41 'l p010,o, I"'""' µ,d I•'<\ 16.,,0 'gfHOOt J>SU"ll l""""""l oo »P-""•M '''-""' "" "l ';:,.!,�..:'�: ',:!.,� .�1 ���J:-1;:;i:J:�J '°U6�� .:�,.'!."'.:;':��.:';"@ (.ll\Hffi 00 lll'Ol<S SV '.lllll.lJHd SlOllh') ii "''°� QJ <0) rnLKt -"'lW"N ,.,"""""1 •• "l'"""ij ,., "I p,:i;=; ,"."'.,t!d71:1'::'s % )f�' ,1 \����),;!!J'l:,�,,".""p'C.,�\%,""'��d "@) (o\lIDS t«I tfflO>S S'1 '.U>O<l.llld Sl.OllJV) 11 �''°d Ol oo) """"* "S""'H 1""""'"0 " '1861 't--"""""0 ••P_.,,., '!801 't -"""""'H p>\,P 'P>>o 1"'""""3 .... "I ...... "' ..... """""' .. """'"' .... .,...,.,.,,,,., .... ,. 01 i.l� ''« "!1)1-ltw . ., .. .,.. ::.;::: ��·.;·�·,J.�:w �J"'.;'�;i0f� �1.:: :i,:;.:.�7,J.,:o"'.:::.o ..J,'d ·�; ;"J ;;; �'if::''.�"';.�;��', ·�!�!;..:·�":''.11 ,t:! ��� :."1:1@ (.ll'ijffi 00 ...,,,s sY '.Ul<U,lld Sl�llff) 11 P"Od •1 w) t<= ,,.,.,... l"'"""'°" ,o ....,,,,.. •1uno:, O<O jO OO!llO '4l " :� '.'!YJ'.!:':O:�-�i.�,t.:,� J:%T":i"::°� .��;:"!��wo::;•@ (o\lEIIS HO 111.o!IS SY '.U>lldO>I<! S!:lllN) 1< P"' f <!»-"d •> ••) Dol1«;; """'"" :;;�::::O�J �'fs ':o ','g'.�"'i::'J.tt 1/f,::z.r.�;_:, �'.!t:.":f"@ � Ill -sY '.t.UPdO>ld S!OllH) 1< l'"'J 01 oo) l6l9!l£ """'"" \va"""'(J ...,,o_Q w-o .: .. 1:;1�'::".,;,".l �,"'.\; :�,0 �J 'i�"".::r .r:..":'am,;p:i·�:..::.r� <=• t«1 lfflOfS SV '.UH3d0ll<I SJ.:>:illV) "(t P•"'d OJ ••) �9 ... ...,. 1"'"""'0 oo -ij ''""""' • �'"J" .. 7�i" ... ',"',;;'�'.,� �:�.�ro"':;;; 'f.""1...��· .. t.;.�i;J.,"';�.:i;,i: .�..!.':�� (.l"lM'llS ffJ ll<OHS SV '.U!!l<IJW S!Jill'i) ·(1 oa>"'d 01 co) t!69tl9 ,.,""'II l""""""(I ,�,7,; :��·�!'.:,:.;, �':' !.;..���s"J}J�� !,.;'� =�,.��2.,j�,�';I .:i'�:'.:�@ (.lllHffi t«I ll'!O>S S'1 '.uWd()l!d S!O�J � .:�d � �o>,:�"i�;\',,;�.%.�\;.��l ��t.::i:: ,:� "l'i'!,�,:�@ :s1N3V\l3SV3 Ol 8NIONOdS3HHOO S310N ·siuowroop pJO>>J puo siu•UJOJnaoaw P!OU WOJJ •I U><D\l" uoi\ollliOJIJl �ll!ln :]lQN 99.:t-0£9 iU9) lS!O-Brt 159) l£U-Hl (009) 0Sl5-99£ (159) SIIIS-6!15 (£9£) lt!Q-U!l (ll9) 11SSl-tl6 (lS6) lil(!-6£6 (lS6) J.flillH] 13:JX l:JllilSIO 100\t,S >!m'd S1001 '1S lSl\10 NOllVHlOdSNVIJJ. JO Hl31'1H/Vd30 J.O!BN] lNIOd IJ31N3:J lSV:Jl'IO:J lllNd $1001 '1S JO Ai lcl S11l)!d0H JO J...10 lO"IDX IOOSkllS £QN1'1ITTO !010 051111 S0SVDNll1 £01Scll't00 lO)U!dSl:J lOSU)!dfO :s31NVdV'tO::> Allllln jQ !Sil dv'V'J A!INl:Jli\ {,3\�r,s oo !1W11S S'O') CoH 10 do1 paJO>'l •1"J'\t,��� -.,i,9 W GWH "' ... "'l "1 ""'lop uot!=ll "£1 '"l'l"''fl'°'l""""Jddo <q p,,JOO'l""'°"""'flO•O'I\Ol.>Op O°"l'l-'OW •R<}'OU O,>O;O<l.1 "9\ Rli><El UitL>:>< .,....,. . ......,,"1 ..... f'!f"'0,0 ......... ,1�•41 10 0>_)'>_ ..... ,._.io,o,,., ..... .,_.,;,_.,., ,0 ""!\>"'l•OO, -- ,0 )>0�0 , .. , ... JO �'""""""° 00 'I ...... "tl .......... , .. ,, .. .....,!". __ •'IP>"'! ,o "°"'""'"°' �1oq ·..-•-w .,_.,. JO """I'!"" pen,,•""'"°,....,.. oo q ._.'U "ti -.,.<>Ii -"> <doll OU •�.01""' 0"' ,,.,�u,; '"'"-"l"l <! 00'>"' .. ,o )1..»>JJ. ><I.I 1'! """ •lm1• 'P"• •• P>l"PP ,..,,,,,. .. ''""""" "'"""",, , ... I'> .,,t,i, >mod "'"°''"''""°"'»,{""" ot!l U<> 0"' ,.,,,. i11,do,d l>>f""" >Ill &u,,," '"'"'" J:f 'II � JO ;o 01".I •'fl "l <'!"I>=> J• .,-., •1-qo •• '!'"'II lll i•"'llq,,c,p , ........... r-,, ..... ,. ·6-o) '""'�"""' _., �-..., •"'""'' •1 ,,�...,,, Si;" ,, 1nq ,,..,,.. 'I'll wm:• ,...,... •u ...,,.... P"" no< '91 'n' JO "°" "'!l'>!J> .., I-� ;h,o ,,,,...,,,. •nU. """10N •>!Pf".J <q .. ,.., '"""'"'"I •OU. "'J lL>OW\IU"JO:> I'll f"" 'l""W"'"'I' ... I'll "'"" ,,.,.., "''� 1 l""'4 •!41 O�<lo,d "I � "N':JV P"' Vlll' <q P>l-•• ..:......: •ml P""l -"I .,.,....._...i.,H ,01oa p,op"'1S "'""'."ln •4l 4l"''""PJO»O "!P"'P'""'Jfi ''fl ""'"°"'.,,..,w.roe 'l'l.l "\I "'"'fl�p,do ns,:,v/nll' 10 ,w,wa�ri>o, ..,,.,,.,d ,., .,..,. '""�""w" p..p.,,,., 00 '"'°"' .,.,...,.,,.,,.... Pl>II 1rv ·, .....,.. tin -l"J ... -ltt'lt - t """� �•= s,·a a 1.,1 ,,.,.,, &10'89'" = < ""'"'d -.,,,. 1,.i. a l"'J ,.,,.,. u;•91c·1 = ; ..,,.d -l'C-.»--\"I ""''" to�'rnt'I • 10\0! °'" »IS 'S ,,..,.. ""'' ... l"l"" 0\ p,0,, I) ""'"""'J'< .,.. ,/0:::,':t =..><:� .. ·: ':%.."":�"'.�:�-::"'""'""""' .. .,,.,.,.,.., &.., ... , .. ,:,...,, ,o """"'',..,.'" ... "l- "' l""" """ ""' """'""'"I".1 .... l"!'l!Pi"'J0 """''"""'""........,,,. • .,.,,, ....... "'!101 ...... "'""" 1'1D< 't "qu;o,,o "° -· •,-d <1001 1S ,>d OJO '"'"' 0141 "'"'°"' UOll°"""l"I >pOSI" 0"" ta.,..,, "'1 , ..... � ... .., .,_ ll ....... ,.,.,;.,�.:;.::�� �:. ·:.":.: �r." .. p;:;J-;' �'!:�;� -::i :;. .D,a, '""'"""' O'U 1"! �I 00 .... 0..,( "'" P,�obo) 0'!1 'O<o, 00, 01 \0'!1 /1 1'!,,,J> ij "' 'l"'I' P'°'"'''""''"'""'<"6l>'l 'l l"I W ......,,rn.u>,"'!'°'P""'°" .. ,;rno,o••q ,...,,..,_(9) , .. ,;.:-..... """''""•'II I' ''l"'l' ""'II >p0q Oum•••• 1•w oq <ow ,.,.,.. u, 1"1 ..: """ .O".PE"'I "J >poq1"' P'<ab>J >'U 1»J W JO "'"' 'I 1""'• •'ll'toq JO \""1 .,,.. "1 100! • .., '"" l"I SI ><i "'"' p,o( OF1' .. ,,,,.., >'fl '-"'A••"' l"I >£ '°"-'1"'1 "'" 1'1'1•P y OU,!!"'!' 0'11 "I pd ..,, p,,obo, ,0�"11 '-:';,-.;· :�·�!:."': ..,�·.�r�:.. � .. }f�" .. ,:: ;:i n..·t .�"!..'":.".:.S::':.:.:i."<�1 (lO-L-; •ro-..-.,� "II "PJO) 1»J O'l """' 01 •••""'' oq » l"J "".J """ "'I oq l"" """ •.r>\ l""JJ o 10 ii':� � .. ;ci,: ��-:: !.';'!�':.;":'! i:: •• �.� �.�<!\:�:,"' .;',:' . .!:4.,i,\�; ;:t� u.<1 .. '"""'"" A>J ,pd l<JOJ/ 0'!1"'' 0•1 l""l l• 10 'll"°P •�->'11 >! "''"'""�"°'' ·�"''"" l"W OJ ........ 'I 416,p "!OOA D "'�"" l"l "'!I JO ""'""'·"' 0 oq IP<F pd lUOJJ OLI.I fol "'lll'l'"ll"J �l "'SI , .. l"l l"'"'"' 1aa,io o Oc,nnqo p;,< ..,.V 'O"� ...... ''" "'"' l'l'l•J> t----:> '"' ""''" .... , • .,. -� '"'-1) ""!)>" "I p><>_J>p •• ax, V ""'' 1.,...,.....,,,. p,,,.,...,, P'°'I .,.,.,. 00\""'I ,q ''"' ..... �·!�� =··P"' ·= 00'6 /0 '""'" ... """l'Q '""''"'" ""'"'"'"'"' •• ,.,.. O 1"» "" "'"" .............. "'! (£0 ..... 1---'a "Ol-"1-�t -.N 1'-0) .,,.,,,.,A�--P"''<UOl1"1!!'"1 '"'6,p,�l""I"' ., !'t� i� •;1!?,.":.'!.!t:;1,,�""��'1!"�,.".� � ;.;:;.,z7.;'�.��:: ""'11""" ......... J ... , .. w "''"" ''""'"'1 '"I .. ,�.,,. ••• ,,.,, .... •4':.��1nrc.����=: ::�:;�:;:"rf�:.!;,l���ia .:a�:.E ��i �·n�...,.,,p,.,,..,,. ""'""'"'o (') ..-n,s= All""""'' P"" '="'""" �' �"°""' •> "'""'11 1ou '""-'"""""-.""'""l'"'IIR\n•'< •.,.i"""uo"�""'""'"'Pi<..,,.,P-Pi"!l''l""'P"''""Pil""PI<'' .. ,..,, '! 10'1! -'"' WO� l"J gt /0 """'<'!"' � >poq l" aq ...... ,..,,,,,,.,, pca, ""-"'"" ,rf "> .,,..,,.Pi! .. ,,,.., 1°""1 uo O!I!•� ,,._,,,,,. o,.,ruauali 1�41!" °"""""' oq ..., •<»>o l•'ll °' P>lO>Ol .,,.... ... , •q 11>'1' " !'!-"\.<> ,o ..,,,,.,_, 0 '" "'"' �"'"""""' •'fl "I l'"'ln"'PI �-, o 01 •q ,,,.,. """'Y ·q •o,,o "°" <>0'6 JO \OOJ "'"'' 000�D0'7'!'o -::: ��:i� -�1=�·�s,s�--t<& {,so) 16.a """""� , .. ,...;, -� �."'1 "lS JO ,,,, Rd (- F'""J) <:! '""''"d -1<>,><>z "t KIOI 't »qc,,>\"°S '1o0 ""'""' 'Jl:troXWt< P"' »ttOX<;�t� "o H •don •1•� ""°'""" """-' .., -'''!W"l,P •uotl..,P J>OOII .. oa '3'f ovoz • ""' .•<R,V """-' "'110 'X ouoz, •• ,_,., "SIO 'X '"°l, 1.! ij"l'q •• P"Eln"'o, '1 '"°"°"' l>'!S"S l"C 1'00.V�VJ)CT All"I Ql OOtlld tOOO-tS• («•) IV Th? :lt«I :UVlS HJH,l){) JJYltm 091� VS� 01 llffllS�nd """ •10..,.ox!Oo o;:, .,.., JI '""'"'4 ""'"' "n!'1' _,.,..."' •41 /Q ""!"/O>Ol •'U "t �""''°""'"""'..:,s,....,..,'11 ., :5310N 1Vcl3N38 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 50 t::IOl: ttt�-t8&-tS6 xe,1 !HS-tBB·tSG -OID.L L&tSS "NW 'uo16u1woo1e �nos anua,w a1epu.{1 £906 SH0,\3/\Hns ON\fl 'ON! ··oo NOSNHOr ·s Al:ll:l'v'H A.LNnoo Nld3NN3H VlOS.INNll'i '>llJVd S1n01 "!S 11¥/N G00M110N>I :a.1.1s :J0:1 A3Al:l0S 1V:::>IHdVU�Od01 ON'<f AUVONOOB DIOSOUU)fi jD OJDIS 04] jO '"·""I •�l ,opun ,o.1,,.,ns puo1 po,•1•1�011 l1np D WO I JD4\ puo LJO]S)IUOdns P•�.P �w ,apun JO ow �q pa,odo,d oOl!I vodo, JO uo1d ·�•""' '!41 1041 �IB"' ��a,04 I ''""'' .,.. """'' .,.,,dn a,Jv/a, SNOIS/113/J \ \ fr \� '{ \ ',',,_) """'"""'',... t .:10 £ 3Nll HJlVV'l I \ \ \ \ -----09 01' 'K,1\81�01 IV ll;;\'.6001Y ·JOO J!GITTSV:l lflV/i80!S :>nSrld l� 9rU9001Y "JOO J!GIUSY] l!W.I\JOG Orlllfld 6� '-"'!1'''"13 10"5 6lJi]'l'l R)lOD '-"'!11),1•1] 10"5 6UJ\•J>3 J<><>\•oo 6un•1•3 m4c<>l'I UJ.JO\S 01o�uon i,011oos •l<'�'-"l'I .r,,i<w, •oa •vo�d<a1•1 •io4L<lr, ,c,04d<ap1 J>\>11 SDD •rod 1""11 (.04ou1 "! ,a\•«""O) •••1 «><>J>JteoO (,a4>u1 "! "l'W"!O) 00,1 ,nonp1>ao u,,oq4>100 u1,aq�>\DO ""l"il'"l.l 0.110/1 O]DD 0104uor1 u.,.ou�un ]UOJP{H •Pd ""°d oio4uor, >pP•l3 >OB >!'1"13 JO\a,1 O!J]:>013 r.>••S WJO\S ,. .. S i,011uos .., -'>JD,\\ avo4da1>1 puoo,6,-,pun OJJJ»l3 puno,6,,pun 'l'l"ll po•4'""0 g,n� a1onoo:i 655555555\ 800&••••••?1 nm x �fflSQ X _____ 905-----• • •• •••�z� ••••1 0 a ---�--__ .,_ ____ _ -�----- • ON3831 1runt !ll(l1J><mno�1111 "JJ "OS .... , a V3!/Y JIIC!jd.lOOJ lO,OWVlSilOYOS .. 'SllY1]0 """ ij)(l;,n,J ',,, ··� \()Ii �i �; l (/) () c� --1 ,- £1 3Nll HJl VV'l City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 51 nt!M'118·tS51te,1 u·�nee-1:s5 ·e1u lttSS "Nl'i '1101611111100JS innos en11eAV a1ep11il.1 £906 SlcJOA3/\JcJns ON\/1 "ONI "00 NOSNHOr ·s Al:fl:IVH A!Nnoo Nld3NN3H Vl0S3NNll'l '}U:1Vd smo, ·1s nvwaooMnONJI =:ai.1.1s NVWll'.ffi A3Al1flS 1VOIHdV>JDOdOl ONV Al:IVONnos Ml "ON ·60� O\OSOU"!l1 1 'JJ.l<IPOfl "] SD 0�1 --------------"'- a' , ,, D]OSOUUJl'l JO a101s •41 I!{' ,,.01 •4! ;apun """""'5 puo1 POJ>\S!!\J>'l! l1np o wo l J04\ poo ""!"!"-"'dns l""'!P Ow 1apun Jo ow �q paJOd>Jd SM ]JOd�; Jo U<lld ·i .. -,ns S!4l \04\ �m,aa ��a;a4 I '"� •iopdo £1/0C/I 0,0,01.,,•••nm•••"'"" •V•V�l SN0f$1113ll .1':/3:J OY = H:;JNI J. :3111:;s t .:10 z; 3Nll HJl Vl"l \ \ H:JlVl"l HJlVl"l City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 52 t:101" �91'6·£-� C----.�,:;:,0•1.. ,."1J , ..• tt&S·Mi8·Z86 �11:/ �tC8-t88·ZS6 "616!. Lena "NW 'uo16u1woo1a mnos 6nu1111ye1epuA1 &1106 SlJOA311lJnS ON\11 "ONI ··oo NOSNHOr ·s AllllVH A.lNnoo Nld3NN3H v.1.0�N1<1� '}lllVd smo, ·.1s 17'vW QOOM170N)I =!I.LIS NVW.11:IB :JO,:I A3AijnS 1\fOIHd\fijfJOdOl ONV A!;jVQNnoa 1¥l};l "ON ·6a� 01osauum l 'Jpopofj '3.':.�'-U -----'!Tl/?-- oiosauum Jo a101s a41 io S"-OI a�\ ,apun ,a1,a,uns puo1 pa,a1s16a� ..:1np O WO I lO'IJ puo UOJ5JM>dns P>J!P hu Japun JO aw ;:q pa,oda,d so>1 JJO<laJ JO uo1d •..:a11m, S!qJ \O�l "Ill"'� ;:q,;.4 I .,..,......, l>d !1/t</, 0\0>01 Rd 1>,�<I" >\opdn 91/ZI/U 0,0>0> J>d '>rl"\O >IOO<ln 91/8/Z< .,..,...,_,. 9 n SNOIS1113H .l33:I 01' � H:JNI i ::11V:JS o• o• L ,.,.H !;S,>/OGV DN1m1ns ,irnrn,,01 ,. oo�noo1v :ioa lHl>USVl lm'/1\J<IIS :Jl"l'ilnd ZS OJ;l.LOOOLV :ioa J.tlllUSVl llTVH.lOIS :Jr-..Od O> '"'!l""•IJ 1ods O"!J•t•J Jall"fl '"'!l"''IJ 1od5 �"!l•t•J Jn<>JW:J 6"!)'!'3 >!"�VO;, uuo15 •L04uon ..:,011uos •L04UOl"\-'>l01,\ xos aoo4<l>pJ a10LJUor1aoo4<l>iaJ IOIOl"1 ,oo •Wd J<fil1 (,o'P"I "! .r.,JOu.<>!()) •»1 snoJ>I)'-'>!) (S>'f.'\Jj "! J>jOWO[{)) »Ji Sr>OOP!»{) '-\;OQ'f.'10!) '-\SOq'f.'10!) MIO,\ •oo "''""' 0100 •1"�00!'( ""'"-''l"!l l""'l"'H •iod ,a.0,1 •io�uon "!'1"13 X"IJOIJ\0.13 ,oi•n >1J1oa13 »"'>S '-"-"'1S m<as t,o]!oos ·� R)OI,\ avo�d•i>i pono,61>puo •1'1""13 puno,6J>f'l'O a / \I '· '{' ' '·' 'ii J'�,· (\.,• !\ ,;l' f \ #•' ' ' ' 0 0 I 0'7 l!'_��-1w opp•1J po•�={) c=="=-=-=-=-=== g,nJ Ol>JOLK>!) "'""' ' GN3031 l:llJ « umm, Otool"OO H ·os a,o';; a VJ><'f J.ml'dl.OOJ l'0'1J.YAAHO"'o«II> 'S"l'l:30lll<Va J:JI H)lVl"I '.,_,,.t>'' ' ' •.. ( City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 53 ----------, ____ , I _,_' 1 40 20 0 40 00 l'lO .SCALE IN FEET LEGEND • l',(.IY>(:,((6(,?72$(,() P,o,,ec\y Comee Oeno\e, eosemen\ at<<> olfocUog loo,o parcel Ptopo.,d loose Porcel: Thot pert or the We•t 1S6.50 feet of the Eool 242.50 feet of the oou\hooot quarter of tho oouthoo,l quarter of oectTon lB, township 117. ronge 21, Hennepin Counly, l.!lnoesolo described oo followo: Beginning o\ the inleroec\ion of \he sooth line of \he north 499.55 feet of so!d ,outheo,t quarter of \he soulheoat quo,\u and tho wo,l lino of tho oosl 242.50 fool of sold soolhoool quo.-te, of lhe sou\heos\ quor\e,: thence South O dog,e .. 20 mo\ule! 05 soc¢nd• (oo\ o,..,med beo<Y\g along :,c!d wo,t I/no of eo,t 242.50 of sotllhoos\ qu"'ter or tho soo\heosl quarter. 178.39 feet: \hence tlor\l\ 77 degru, 46 m!nu!e, 09 seeondo Eost, 176.6J fool; lhonco norihos\erly olong a longen\lol c"""' con,o.,.. to \he north. r<1dlus 45.83 feet, dona of 34 dogrooo 21 mlnutoo 56 sooondo, 27.49 fool more Of !o" ta th• oos! ltno of ,old we•l 196.50 feel of tho oo,t 242.50 feel of the sou\heoot quort<r of \ho So>U\heool q,,ortu; thonoo North O dogroos 20 minutes OS oooond, Wost not \ongen\ lo sold curve along sold eosl line of •••I 196.50 feet of the eos\ 242.50 foot of \ho oou\heosl quorlor of \he ao>Utheoot <t<JOrler, 124.52 foot lo tho south 1'1o of wld north 499.55 fool of ,ou\heosl ::..\�. 0:9 �:<��w::t �:.�,.�.�"';:lr1n� :t .:J'�!�ti4499.55 lh:t ;,\,i"�fb�:}.��;.ter of \he so>U\heo•t qu<>tler, 196.54 feel lo NOTES CORRESPONDING TO SCHEDULE B PROPOSED LEASE PARCEL: @ Terms and «)nd!Uons of waler main, sonllary oewer ond ste<m "'"°'eosomente os sot forth Tn (lull Clo"' Oeod. doled Apr� W, 1951, roe<>rdod Apr! 29, 1954 In Book 1995 of Dood", Pogo 36.l, except os to \hot portion thereof vaco\od i, Ro.afutlon llolod October 9, 1991, recorded Oclobor 22, 1991 •• Oocumonl No. 5tU7401, Th• right to ploce structure• over ond on the sold eo,omen(o wo, conveyed in E<>sement O«d doted Novembu 4, 1981, rece<ded Oeeombor 4. 1981 oo Oocumonl No. 48M476. PORTION OF EASO.IENT AFFECTS LEASE PARCEL AS SHO\\l-1 00 SURl'EY @ Terms ond condi\ioo• of Communko\ion• System Eo,emonl, doled Ap,a 9, 1986, reo0<dod Apnl 14, 19B6 o• Document t-lo. 509B52�(ob,lrod). (os lo Poro.I 1) M"FECTS U:ASE PARCEL AS SHO\\l-1 ON SURVEY VICINITY MAP K/oAAY S • .JOHNSON CO. INC. LANDTIT1.ESUAVEY 1_3_8463 6? LO.NO $JR\ofi0RS l< CONSI.UAIHS 9063 L)"dole A,onu• S<>Ulh 9Fo=<n�lon. fin. 55420 (951) 884-5J41 (9�1) 864-5544 Fo, Emoa, tc,n!ltas;,,,Y<)'>"S.<om woo, wn•.hsj><Jrv,a)"O<s.<om ALTAfNSPS for: � SITE: KNouw:'o�ii.NLEASE PARCEL I ��2�0=164=20 =;:'�c·�T';11 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 3 OF 3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 54 J, S?.fl.>.1!4llll.llUl�IO'IUr3.IIU!l)'J:ltll•lS.\lrOU,LIF-nDWIY,1 CB, 1'Rtll-"lJHI!" 1 mv ... 909.1 L �v,1imml,.-.:J1�1�\·1t>.l('O.'L\l.Plltt)I.U::.i.,.'olrw..v.\.:ufr) ,r&,(O�'C(. =,-,----,:,c,:.===-=="'="e:,;- - - - - �Tflf.l('!UUD.U) - - - -WUE:l'l�J(;(J @ (.\.T()IJ.�ft " $,1,\l'JIJ{'IQt,l,v,;vl' • KlD\\,.,. -1-fAlEUl"l, t,:,.•,111.-;rw., -»-1fC-1;11Rf,OI. H f.Atttl\JU'l I PWORMAIICE DlllVEII OHIGN. - N>t.t..J'l��,lbn,��l� ROUSEPROl 'U-:'fli, �.; 1114 AVEl\'l!E OF THE .MIERICAS SU11E2800 NEWYORK, NY ID0.36 A\� M�.E.!!l�mt t U.:o.:) •n.� ••>«»�� KNOLLWOOD MAI.L CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 ll"GH't'IAY l\"lJ. 7 ST. LOUJS PAR.'(, U.'f UTILITY PLAN (NORTH) nc -��--,9'-B..v«..t•-.��:.., l¥1,'1lt.rt ...,,...,N C4.1 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 55 STRUCTURE TABLE sr.u:rw. """" "' r-vnl"I r:L,tt1 r:.atM = .... ''"' t'.'ll'o){� [�Q '"" >JUI,,, .... ...,, �,p) ''""' � .. 'f."f.:1 'e'J.llN �!lll) lnl.•)jij c,.n t:,ui 5111;.t lt-\Jltsl "'' """ lid.Ur,:! !r,l(ft!i) STRUCTURE TABLE ,�� c.,.s.tm, '" f't.l.t'TtJ t:.Wtt "''""'0>�� .... M:lt:Nl�..1 ''"' U.U�) �.!ilt.t} """".... 11:rv.tmM .... � Y'.LI)�) ,...-l..CJr• ,Cl.13(,lf .... 1awt�1 r.uo """"" .... lw.:llilloll»I fiJ.N! . ..,, .. ....Q .. t<Ult,;,t c:t.U �\41.rbt '"" ..r:»t:t '4<1 rrr,,M,m-1 "'" ""'"' ""'"' ,...., IW."JIIWJJ·I "'" ..... .,.,,, .. <£<) 1E!MiP-»t '"" ""' Fali"" �Tr•V�'n;l�Qlt\. s.i.,aeM.1 :.:Hft'l ... lTJJ.I t,,uit KUI ..... D + ...... -. .......... c::.� _.�,. ·- � \ f£1iSJJQ"'8.fl'lt«tlnTMVMtn1'.Jl6Q't;.>J't,)\ 1. f!Ju.!1£11.'i:!J(d!.'Jh'1':('0'.m;u:ft)'.Hl'U4'll<hl.lt� ... \m',1 I, /�IVJi lfr. ... ,«1tf(�l>,Yl:\,£tQ,V.S,llt\l f.;.\l,Dl4\;ttU,l.',)JflJ0 lf;li:,;)(M:£ - - - -toll:t(t.t11t-.(,1.Ui'A£'-Q - - - -fJ.RJ1..\l'r:,!fU£�fl @ (.\IOU,l.kl V s.,•.:"-uau,:O;;f )IC KW\\\f -1-NJUIIJ,.� __ JA.',C.11,,''1:1\!:-.h -•--!il.:)'_JtJUa � 'WI:l.:A\E I PERFORMANCE DRIVEfl DESIGII, 1114 AVENUE OF THE MIERICAS SUITE 2/lOO NEVI YORK, NY 10036 /h \lo.".;;111 r...O!I.Rl.OOT I J.W.J N)N1.'0.(\1 VJ OUl 61.Utcfl KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGlll'IAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN UTILITY PLAN (SOUTH) nr: .,.xm.m1t1•�t'l\.'\:l!IW1.t�fblt,1,."'�·1 IW.lift,:C ('((,�\Tit no.i.,.o ll:OI C4.2 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 56 �iJl'-ofio:H' lll\/.=90.U , / , , , , , , ,, , , , / �3'.;§IT.$1- ,,// lllV .... $0&� -*· � tH U) UJ � i i I I I I I I I I I I /;i.__ /� ,.�--�(/ / /, ® V u101,�, H'I0.\.1.\1 lft (.ATE.IILWI -1- _,_Sl...,._ ... ,,1t1n -·-IIO\StKf.tA MM\'Al\� fl'W!fUMf,!HiCU I PERFORMANCE DRIVEtl DESICH, ... __ IN��llllu.»l.h� 2ll),11.R..l�S�t�ll'.t•s.'h 1114 AVENUE Of lHE MIERICAS SUITE2000 NEW YORX, NY 10036 KNOLLWOOD MALL CENTRAL MALL REDEVELOPMENT 8332 HIGHWAY NO. 7 ST. LOUIS PARK. MN ui-'i'i'.rrv PLAN (WEST) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Title: Shoppes at Knollwood Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 57 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution granting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the City of St. Louis Park allowing the excavation of 2,160 cubic yards of material and the import of 500 cubic yards of fill to construct a stormwater treatment facility at 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street, subject to conditions. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the CUP request meet the criteria of the Zoning Ordinance? SUMMARY: The St. Louis Park Engineering Department has submitted a conditional use permit application to construct a stormwater treatment facility in the northeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue, on two parcels located at 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street. As discussed previously with the Council, the purpose of the project is to create shared infrastructure where the filtration basin will treat stormwater from multiple privately owned parcels. Another goal of the project is reduce barriers to redevelopment or building expansions within the subwatershed area north of the property by providing stormwater treatment off-site on public land. The proposed stormwater treatment facility is a two cell basin system that will have a dry iron- enhanced filtration basin. It will not have standing water present during non-rainfall events. The plans estimate 2,160 square cubic yards of soils will be excavated from the site and 500 cubic yards of clean fill material will be imported to the site. A conditional use permit is required to excavate or fill more than 400 cubic yards of soil. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is in the City’s CIP and it’s hoped that construction could occur in 2017. The CUP decision before the Council at this time does not include financial or budget impacts – it only relates to the hauling of material if the project proceeds. Due to high project costs attributed to the contaminated soil, the feasibility of the project may depend on the success of grant applications. A separate action by the Council will be necessary at a later date to authorize the construction of the project. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Resolution Planning Commission Minutes Development Plans Construction Route Map Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Michele Schnitker, Deputy CD Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 2 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: St. Louis Park Engineering Department submitted a conditional use permit application to construct a stormwater treatment facility in the northeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue, on two parcels located at 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street. The proposed project seeks to use existing city-owned vacant parcels to construct and operate a stormwater treatment facility that will improve the quality of the stormwater runoff to downstream systems. Location: Comprehensive Plan: COM Commercial Zoning District: C-2 General Commercial Neighborhood: Lenox Neighborhood Surrounding Uses: South: Highway 7 West: Pond, Louisiana Avenue North: commercial, office East: commercial ZONING ANALYSIS: Existing Conditions: The east lot is currently vacant and owned by the City of St. Louis Park. The west lot is owned by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and has a Clear Channel billboard on the west side of the property, and is otherwise vacant. There are some small shrubs and scrub trees on the site, and a couple larger mature trees in the boulevard on the eastern side of the property Background: The eastern site (7015 Walker Street) was previously the former Reynolds Welding business. A Phase II Environmental Investigation conducted by the city found that soil on the site is contaminated. Staff proposes to remove this soil as part of the stormwater project, and has prepared a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) in conjunction with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to manage the contaminated soils during the removal process. 1,970 cubic yards of contaminated soil is proposed to be removed from the east parcel, and approximately 190 cubic yards of non-contaminated soils from the west parcel to accommodate the stormwater system. An estimated 500 cubic yards of clean fill material will be imported to the site to be used for construction of the basin. The purpose of the project is to create shared infrastructure where the filtration basin will treat stormwater from multiple privately owned parcels. Another goal of the project is reduce barriers City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 3 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit to redevelopment and building expansions within the subwatershed area north of the property by providing stormwater treatment off-site on public land. The filtration basins will be lined to provide a separation of stormwater from impacted soil and ground water that lies below. Proposal: This project is in the city’s CIP. The city proposes construction of a two-cell, dry, iron- enhanced filtration basin to serve a 9.2 acre drainage area near Louisiana Avenue and Walker Street. The stormwater system will not have standing water present during non-rainfall events. The basin will fill with water to a maximum depth of 18 inches then drain down to the dry bottom within a design period of 48 hours following a rainfall event. The iron-sand media removes both particulate and dissolved phosphorous, improving the water quality more efficiently when compared to more traditional methods of stormwater management. The estimated annual removal of phosphorus is 9.8 pounds per year. Conditional Use Permit for Excavating: A conditional use permit is required to import or export more than 400 cubic yards of soil. The proposed plan requires the excavation of approximately 1,970 cubic yards of contaminated soils from the east parcel, and approximately 190 cubic yards of non-contaminated soils from the west parcel. An estimated 500 cubic yards of clean fill material will be imported to the site to be used for construction of the basin. It will take approximately 180 to 200 truckloads to remove and haul in the material with an estimated maximum of 25 trucks per day. Primary haul routes include Louisiana Ave. South and Hwy 7. Construction Hours: City Ordinance allows construction to occur Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and is allowed on weekends from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. However, anticipated work hours for the project are 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday with no weekend work. Construction Costs and Timeframe: The overall project costs are anticipated to be higher than what is typically expected for a normal stormwater facility due to the high cost of contamination remediation, which will be further refined once the project has completed the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program (VIC) administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The Engineering Department is working with the Planning Department and the Economic Development Authority to seek and apply for grant funding to aid in offsetting the additional remediation costs. Estimated range of cost of contamination remediation: $375,000 to $400,000 Estimated range cost of stormwater construction: $325,000 to $350,000 Construction Duration: Construction for the stormwater system is subject the approval of the project by MPCA’s VIC Program, anticipated project cost estimates, and the procurement of additional project funding. Once funded, construction is anticipated to last eight to twelve weeks. Landscaping: The applicant will remove any significant trees from the site. Mature trees on the east side of the site will be protected during construction. City staff explored adding additional canopy trees at the site, but Clear Channel has a sightline easement for the billboard which prohibits planting trees in that area. The areas surrounding the basin will be seeded with native seed and plantings similar to the existing stormwater pond to the west. Long term operation and maintenance will be completed using mowing equipment on a roughly annual basis and minor excavation and grading on an estimated 10-15 year basis to remove and replace the sand-iron filtration soil mix. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 4 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting was held on February 22, 2017 in the Community Room at City Hall. There were two members of the community in attendance, and no concerns about the construction of the stormwater ponds were raised. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 5, 2017. There were no public comments made. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit for 2,160 cubic yards of excavation and 500 cubic yards of fill to allow construction of the stormwater detention system with the following conditions as recommended by staff: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Official Exhibits. a. Exhibit A: Site Development Plans i. Title Sheet ii. Existing Conditions iii. Demolition Plan iv. Erosion Control and Site Restoration Plan v. Iron Enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) Plan vi. Iron Enhanced Sand Filter Sections vii. Storm Sewer Plan viii. Pipe Sections ix. Details 1 x. Details 2 xi. Details 3 b. Exhibit B: Truck and Construction Access Haul Routes 2. All required permits shall be obtained prior to starting construction, including but not limited to: a. NPDES Grading/Construction Permit. b. City of St. Louis Park Erosion Control and Building Permits. c. A stormwater management permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 3. Stormwater Management: a. The drainage system shall be owned and maintained by the City of St. Louis Park. b. A complete soils report shall be submitted prior to permitting for City Engineering Department review and approval. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 5 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit RESOLUTION NO. 17- _____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-79(b) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT EXCAVATION AND FILL FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED AT 3400 REPUBLIC AVENUE AND 7015 WALKER STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. The City of St. Louis Park has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-79(b) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of excavation of fill within a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District located at 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street for the legal description as follows, to-wit: See attached legal description. 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-10-CUP) and the effect of the proposed excavation of 2,160 cubic yards of material and proposed import of 500 cubic yards of material on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the excavation of 2,160 cubic yards of material and import of 500 cubic yards of material will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed stormwater system is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-10-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to permit export 2,160 cubic yards of material and import 500 cubic yards of material at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Official Exhibits. a. Exhibit A: Site Development Plans i. Title Sheet ii. Existing Conditions iii. Demolition Plan iv. Erosion Control and Site Restoration Plan City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 6 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit v. Iron Enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) Plan vi. Iron Enhanced Sand Filter Sections vii. Storm Sewer Plan viii. Pipe Sections ix. Details 1 x. Details 2 xi. Details 3 a. Exhibit B: Truck and Construction Access Haul Routes 2. All required permits shall be obtained prior to starting construction, including but not limited to: a. NPDES Grading/Construction Permit. b. City of St. Louis Park Erosion Control and Building Permits. c. A stormwater management permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 3. Stormwater Management: a. The drainage system shall be owned and maintained by the City of St. Louis Park. b. A complete soils report shall be submitted prior to permitting. c. Pond discharge shall be coordinated with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 4. Prior to issuance of an erosion control permit, the developer and contractor shall follow the procedures and requirements for this development for Demolition and New Construction to single-family homes as required under City Code 6-71 Construction Management Plan. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. Construction shall commence within two years from the date of this permit approval, with the ability to renew the permit annually for a period of up to three (3) years. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of a Building Permit, which may impose additional requirements. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 7 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Legal Description Block 186 of Rearrangement of St. Louis Park… BEG AT THE INTERSEC OF CTRLINE OF REPUBLIC AVE NOW VAC WITH SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TH SLY AT R/A WITH SAID SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TO NLY R/W LINE OF STATE HWY 7 TH WLY ALONG SAID NLY R/W LINE TO ITS INTERSEC WITH CTRLINE OF MONITOR ST NOW VAC TH NWLY ALONG SAID CTRLINE OF MONITOR ST TO SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TH ELY ALONG SAID SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TO BEG EXCEPT STREET. Block 187 of Rearrangement of St. Louis Park… BEG AT INTERSEC OF SLY LINE OF WALKER ST WITH CTRLINE OF REPUBLIC AVE NOW VAC TH SLY AT R/A WITH SAID SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TO NLY R/W OF STATE HWY NO 7 TH NELY ALONG SAID R/W TO ITS INTERSEC WITH THE SLY EXT OF THE NELY LINE OF LOT 12 IN BLK 187 OF THE PLAT REARRANGEMENT OF ST LOUIS PARK TH NWLY ALONG SAID EXT OF AND NELY LINE OF LOT 12 TO THE SLY LINE OF WALKER ST TH SWLY ALONG SAID SLY LINE TO BEG. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 8 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA April 5, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: Torrey Kanne, Rick Person, Ethan Rickert (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Erick Francis, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of March 8, 2017 Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of March 8, 2017. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 3. Public Hearings A. St. Louis Park Walker Stormwater Ponds – Conditional Use Permit Location: 3400 Republic Avenue & 7015 Walker Street Applicant: St. Louis Park Engineering Department Case No.: 17-10-CUP Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. Plans for a stormwater treatment facility require excavation of 2,160 square cubic yards of soil from the site and 500 cubic yards of clean fill material to be imported to the site. A conditional use permit is required to excavate or fill more than 400 cubic yards of fill. Ms. Monson provided background on the site. She discussed landscaping, construction haul routes, construction hours and construction schedule. She said a neighborhood meeting was held and no one indicated concerns regarding the stormwater project. Commissioner Carper asked if the diverted stormwater would drain into the groundwater. Erick Francis, Water Resources Manager, explained the design of the treatment facility which prevents diverted water from being infiltrated into the groundwater. Commissioner Carper asked about involvement with the Minnehaha Watershed District on the project. Mr. Francis responded that there are no restrictions placed on the project by the Watershed District. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 9 Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Commissioner Carper asked if there are any measures in place regarding blowing dust and dirt during construction. Mr. Francis said additional measures for dust control will be in place. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, she closed the public hearing. Commissioner Carper made a motion approving the Conditional Use Permit for 3400 Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:11 p.m. A study session followed the regular meeting. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary H E N N E P I N R A M S E Y D A K O T A S C O T T C A R V E R 30 494 212 5 100 7 4 17 3 55 12 9 15 19 41 5 19 35W 32 13 55 47 10 49 96 252 694 44 51 9 10 66 494 100 100 7 55 55 52 494 94 109 14 152 10 5166 3052 280 51 94 94 35W 494 77 14935E 51 55 35W 31 26 1 46 46 42 5 5 494 13 149 111 212 101 1 35W 94 153 52 65 2 36 35W 30 152 394 394 47 65 44 110 38 M I S S I S S I P P I RIVER610 169 101 101 81 81 81 30 12 169 169 169212 62 62 62 21 17 25 3 32 118 OSSEO MAPLE GROVE BROOKLYN PARK PARK LAKE SPRING VIEW MOUNDS HILLS ARDEN LEXINGTON LORETTO MEDINA WAYZATAORONO BROOKLYN CENTER CRYSTAL PLYMOUTH VALLEY GOLDEN MEDICINE LAKE ROBBINSDALE ST. LOUIS PARK HEIGHTS COLUMBIA SHOREVIEW HEIGHTS FALCON FRIDLEY BRIGHTON NEW SPRING PARK HOPE NEW ST. LAUDERDALE ROSEVILLE EAGAN MENDOTA HEIGHTS MENDOTA RICHFIELD EDEN EDINA HOPKINS MINNETONKA CHANHASSEN EXCELSIORSHOREWOOD WOODLAND DEEPHAVEN GREENWOOD CHASKA BURNSVILLE PRAIRIE LINO LAKES CORCORAN BLOOMINGTON LONG LAKE PINES MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAULMINNETONKA BEACH SUNFISH LAKE LILYDALE MPLS/ STP AIRPORT ANTHONY HILLTOP TONKA BAY WALKER ST R E P U B L I C A V E G O R H AM A V E W LAK E S T TH 7 (WES T B O U N D ) TH 7 (EAST B O U N D ) W LAKE ST 2ND STLOUISIANA AVELOUISIANA AVEDATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS G1 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941G01.DWGST137941G012/13/2017 9:24:53 AM 2/14/2017 1:03:21 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 1 TITLE SHEET 13TSTORYVICINITY MAP NO SCALE LOCATION MAP NO SCALE PROJECT LOCATION CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) CITY PROJECT NO. 4016-4000 SITE Know what's below. before you dig.Call R NOTE: THE EXACT LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUCH AS GAS, TELEPHONE, FIBEROPTIC, ELECTRIC, CABLE TV, AND PIPE LINES ARE UNKNOWN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL BEFORE COMMENCING EXCAVATION. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL SYSTEM.....811 SHEET INDEX DISCIPLINE SHEET NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER SHEET TITLE DESCRIPTION GENERAL 1 G1 TITLE SHEET 2 G2 LEGEND & STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED QUANTITIES 3 G3 ABBREVIATIONS & GENERAL NOTES 4 G4 EXISTING CONDITIONS DEMOLITION 5 D1 DEMOLITION PLAN CIVIL 6 C1 EROSION CONTROL & SITE RESTORATION PLAN 7 C2 IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) PLAN 8 C3 IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER SECTIONS 9 C4 STORM SEWER PLAN 10 C5 PIPE SECTIONS 11 C6 DETAILS 1 12 C7 DETAILS 2 13 C8 DETAILS 3 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 10 TH 7 (EAS T B O U N D ) TH 7 (WES T B O U N D ) WALKER ST R E P U B L I C A V E G O R H AM A V E 3 3 5 5 3 3 6 1 3 3 5 6 7020 7008 7010 BM1053 G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G E O H E O H EO H E O H E O H E O H EOHEO H EOH EOH E UG E U G E UG E U G E U G E U G E U G E U G E U GEOH E O H EOHEOH EOH EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG E U G E U G E U G EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUGFOT FOT FO T F O T F O T F O T F O T F O T F O T FOT FOT F O T >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > >>>>>W W W T U G T U G T U G T U G T U G TUGT U G TUG TUG TUG TUGTUGTUG TUGTUG TUG TUG TUGTUG TUG TUG TUG TUG TUG T U G WWWWWWWWWWW>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT W W W W W W W W W S S S S S S D D D D DYH DYHT T ELEC ELEC E L E C T ROW ROW ROW ROW MNDOT PROPERTY SIGN EASEMENT UTILITY EASEMENT SIGN ACCESS EASEMENT 1 2 TOP NUT HYD MTMT SONYA MTMT TEXAS VERTICAL BENCHMARK TABLE BM # BM1053 BM1239 BM1240 NORTHING 153856.0670 152698.2510 157703.8650 EASTING 504188.3980 498934.3760 499748.5870 ELEVATION 907.19 902.02 939.60 DESCRIPTION 0 60 SCALE IN FEET 30 KEYNOTES: 1. BORING 3 HAS BEEN FOUND TO HAVE ________. 2. BORING 4 HAS BEEN FOUND TO HAVE ________. DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS G4 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941G04.DWGST137941G042/14/2017 10:49:55 AM 2/14/2017 1:04:30 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS 13TSTORYGENERAL NOTES: 1. TOPOGRAPHIC BASE MAP PREPARED FROM A SURVEY BY SEH AND UTILITY BASE MAPS. 2. HORIZONTAL CONTROL DATUM IS ENGLISH BASED ON HENNEPIN COUNTY COORDINATE SYSTEM WHICH IS RELATED TO THE MINNESOTA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM NAD 1983 (HARN 1996) ADJUSTMENT SOUTH ZONE. 3. MNDOT MONUMENT SONYA (BM1239) IS NOT SHOWN IN PLANS. IT IS LOCATED 1,157.8' S AND 5,254.0' W OF HYDRANT (BM1053). 4. MNDOT MONUMENT TEXAS (BM1240) IS NOT SHOWN IN PLANS. IT IS LOCATED 3,837.8 N AND 4,439.8' W OF HYDRANT (BM1053). 5. VERTICAL DATUM IS ENGLISH BASED ON NAVD 88. 6. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 1-FOOT. 7. SOIL BORING INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN SPECIFICATION SECTION 00 31 32. BURIED FOUNDATION (APPROXIMATE) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 11 WALKER ST R E P U B L I C A V E 7020 7008 G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GEOHEOHE O H E O H E O H E O H EO H EO H EOH EOH E U G E U G E U G E U G E U G E U G E U G E U G EUGEUGEOHEOHEOH EOH EOH EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUGEUGFOT FOT FO TFOTF O T F O T F O T F O T F O T F O T >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>W W W W W T U G T U G T U G T U G T U G T U G T U G TUG TUGTUGTUGTUG TUGTUGTUG TUG TUG TUG TUGTUGTUG TUG TUG TUG TUG TUG TUGWWWWW>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT W W W W W W W W WW>>S S SD DYHT ELEC ELEC ROW ROW ROW MNDOT PROPERTY 895 900 890895 892 8 9 5 900 900905 905900 893 89 4 895 15"24" 1 C3 2 C3 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+002+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+24 L1 L2 L3 L4L5 C1 C2 C3 891890 890891 892 892 893 895 897 897 895 893 895 897 899 901 903 905 896 8 9 6 898 898 893 895 897897 3:13:13:1 3:13:18 9 8 89 8 89 6 2 C8 2 C8 897 899 901 903 OVERFLOW CHANNEL CONTROL TABLE BOP=0+00.00 EOP=5+24.26 L1 C1 L2 C2 L3 C3 L4 L5 DISTANCE 43.50 23.12 13.27 24.03 30.84 28.78 44.18 316.53 RADIUS 51.31 49.17 39.07 DIRECTION N85° 01' 26"E TAN IN=N85°01'26"E TAN OUT=N59°12'11"E N59° 12' 11"E TAN IN=N59°12'11"E TAN OUT=N87°11'55"E N87° 11' 55"E TAN IN=N87°11'55"E TAN OUT=N45°00'00"E N45° 00' 00"E N87° 52' 46"E STATION 0+00.00 PC=0+43.50 PI=0+55.26 PT=0+66.63 0+66.63 PC=0+79.89 PI=0+92.15 PT=1+03.92 1+03.92 PC=1+34.76 PI=1+49.84 PT=1+63.54 1+63.54 2+07.72 NORTHING 153744.01 PC=153747.78 PI=153748.80 PT=153754.83 153754.83 PC=153761.62 PI=153767.90 PT=153768.49 153768.49 PC=153770.00 PI=153770.74 PT=153781.40 153781.40 153812.64 EASTING 503936.42 PC=503979.76 PI=503991.47 PT=504001.58 504001.58 PC=504012.97 PI=504023.50 PT=504035.75 504035.75 PC=504066.55 PI=504081.61 PT=504092.27 504092.27 504123.52 DELTA ANGLE 25°49'16" 27°59'45" 42°11'55" ARC LENGTH 23.12 24.03 28.78 TANGENT 11.76 12.26 15.08 RADIUS PT NORTHING 153798.90 153719.38 153809.03 RADIUS PT EASTING 503975.31 504038.15 504064.64 0 4020 SCALE IN FEET KEYNOTES: 1. XXX GENERAL NOTES: 1. XXX DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS C2 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941C02.DWGST137941C022/14/2017 12:59:22 PM 2/14/2017 1:06:33 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 7 IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) PLAN 13TSTORYCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 12 885 890 895 900 905 885 890 895 900 905 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 890 895 900 905 910 890 895 900 905 910 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 EXISTING GRADES EXISTING GRADE EXISTING GRADES EXISTING GRADES PROPOSED IESF PROPOSED IESF 1 C3 WEST IESF-SOUTH TO NORTH NO SCALE 2 C3 EAST IESF-SOUTH TO NORTH NO SCALE 7' 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 PROPOSED IESF 1 C8 1 C8 885 890 895 900 905 910 885 890 895 900 905 910 -0+10 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60 2+80 3+00 3+20 3+40 3+60 3+80 4+00 4+20 4+40 4+60 4+80 5+00 5+10 WEST-EAST IESF/RIPRAP CHANNEL PROFILE DESIGN EL 897.50 DESIGN EL 896.00 4" TOPSOIL SEEDED 4" TOPSOIL SEEDED 4" TOPSOIL SEEDED SEE GENERAL NOTE 4 ON SHEET C1 PROPOSED IESF STA=0+20.72 EL=889.39' STA=1+59.29 EL=891.01' STA=1+74.25 EL=896.00' OVERFLOW STA=1+83.71 EL=896.00' STA=3+08.11 EL=896.00' OVERFLOW STA=3+66.30 EL=897.50' IESF BOTTOM EL=894.50' IESF BOTTOM EL=893.00' 5' KEYNOTES: 1. XXX GENERAL NOTES: 1. XXX DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS C3 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941C03.DWGST137941C032/14/2017 10:42:45 AM 2/14/2017 1:06:50 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 8 IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER SECTIONS 13TSTORYCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 13 WALKER ST G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GE O H E O H E O H E O H EO H EOH EOH E U G E U G E U G E UG E UGEOHEOHEUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUG EUGFOT FOT FO T F O T F O T F O T F O T >>>>>>>>>>>>>>W W W W W T U G T U G TUG TUGTUGTUGTUG TUGTUGTUG TUG TUG TUG TUGTUGTUG TUG TUG TUG TUG TUG TUG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT FOT W W W W W W W W WW W >>S S S DYHT ELEC ELEC ROW ROW MNDOT PROPERTY 895 900 890895 892 8 9 5 900 900905 905900 893 89 4 895 15" RPC STORM 24" RCP STORM DD CB 1 CB 2 MH 1 MH 2 CB 3 FES 1 FES 2 FES 3 MAINTENANCE ACCESS 5+00 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+502+00 2+50 3+0 0 3+50 4+00 4+50 >>>>>>>>>>>>1 CO CO CO CO CO CO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 C8 1 C8 12" WM 12" WM 4 C7 4 C7 SIGN880 885 890 895 900 905 910 880 885 890 895 900 905 910 0+00 0+20 0+40 0+60 0+80 1+00 1+20 1+40 1+60 1+80 2+00 2+20 2+40 2+60 2+80 3+00 3+20 3+40 3+60 3+80 4+00 4+20 4+40 4+60 4+80 4+90 EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE 1 2 IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTERMEDIA IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTERMEDIA 1 C81 C8 PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE DRAIN TILE PROFILE 1 BERM MATERIAL SHALL BE _____ BERM MATERIAL SHALL BE _____ STORM SEWER STRUCTURES NUMBER CB 1 CB 2 CB 3 MH 1 MH 2 NORTHING 153852.64 153853.43 153875.54 153905.41 153905.44 EASTING 504077.15 504089.12 504397.91 504129.59 504383.84 TOC 900.72 901.22 905.13 902.84 905.54 DESCRIPTION TYPE B 2 X 3 TYPE B-1 2 X 3 TYPE B-1 2 X 3 TYPE C-1 ROUND TYPE H ROUND FLARED END SECTIONS NUMBER FES 1 FES 2 FES 3 NORTHING 153824.22 153827.88 153829.99 EASTING 504111.27 504131.02 504382.20 INV EL 893.82 893.82 895.32 DRAIN TILE CONTROL POINT TABLE POINT # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NORTHING 153762.71 153764.58 153779.32 153780.93 153787.09 153809.26 153810.12 153813.29 153800.52 153803.38 EASTING 503946.79 503991.21 504022.95 504061.15 504074.41 504094.79 504115.21 504190.45 504225.36 504293.29 INV ELEVATION 888.60 888.78 888.92 889.85 890.26 891.10 891.56 891.86 892.17 893.04 DESCRIPTION DRAIN TILE OUTLET 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6"-45° PVC BEND (2) 6" X 6" PVC WYE 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6"-22 1/2° PVC BEND 6" X 6" PVC WYE 0 4020 SCALE IN FEET KEYNOTES: 1. 6" SOLID PVC DRAIN TILE. 2. 6" PERFORATED PVC DRAIN TILE. GENERAL NOTES: 1. CLASS OF RIPRAP SHALL BE _____. DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS C4 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941C04.DWGST137941C042/14/2017 11:07:06 AM 2/14/2017 1:07:34 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 9 STORM SEWER PLAN 13TSTORYCO LEGEND PERFORATED 6" PVC DRAIN TILE SOLID 6" PVC DRAIN TILE CLEANOUT 3 C7 4 C6 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 14 2 C8 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW CHANNEL NO SCALE 4'12" MINEXISTING GROUND LINE 4:1 4:1 MATCH (TYP) 1 C8 TYPICAL IESF CROSS-SECTION NO SCALE 22'± NO SEEDING IN THIS AREA WEST CELL EL 897.00 EAST CELL EL 898.503:1 MAX SIDE SLOPE (TYP) EAST CELL EL 894.50 GEOTEXTILE BASIN LINER, MNDOT TYPE 5 6" DIA SLOTTED SUBSURFACE DRAIN (SEE DRAINAGE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS)1'-10"WEST CELL EL 893.004'IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTERMEDIA 5-8% IRON FIBER BY WEIGHT 6"6" MNDOT SELECT GRANULAR BACKFILL 4" TOPSOIL SEEDED (TYP) 12" RIPRAP CLASS 2 DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATEN0 REVISIONS BY REMARKS DATE DRAWN DESIGNED PROFESSIONAL UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED APPROVED CHECKED CHECKED DATE REG NO OF TYPED OR PRINTED NAME: SIGNATURE: FILE NAME SEH PROJECT NO PROJECT/CONTRACT NOPLANS PREPARED BY:PLANS PREPARED FOR: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 PHONE: 1.800.325.2055 www.sehinc.comMODIFIED:PLOTTED:USER:RBL RBL RBL PJS/DAO TAS C8 ENGINEER S:\PT\S\STLOU\137941\5-FINAL-DSGN\51-DRAWINGS\85-HEAVYCIV\2016 WALKER POND\SHEETS\ST137941C08.DWGST137941C082/14/2017 9:43:13 AM 2/14/2017 1:08:38 PM WALKER IRON ENHANCED SAND FILTER (IESF) RONALD B LEAF, PE 50022 MM/DD/YY ISSUED FOR BIDDING MM/DD/YY STLOU 137941 13 DETAILS 3 13TSTORYCity Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 15 Phase II Environmental Investigation STLOU 137941 Saint Louis Park ES-1 Executive Summary Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH®) was retained by the City Saint Louis Park (the City) to conduct a Phase II Environmental Investigation (Phase II) for the proposed Walker Pond II Project in Saint Louis Park, Minnesota (herein referred to as “project area”). The project area location is depicted on Figure 1. The City plans to construct two lined storm water filtration basins that will treat storm water runoff from adjacent developed urban land. The purpose of the project is to create shared or stacked infrastructure where the filtration basins will treat storm water from multiple privately owned parcels. The City’s goal with this project is to attract redevelopment on the adjacent parcels by providing storm water treatment on public land. The filtration basins will be lined to provide a separation of storm water from impacted soil and ground water that lies below. The preliminary design layout is available in Appendix A. The investigation included four soil borings (SS-01 through SS-04) completed to a maximum depth of 25 feet below ground surface (bgs). Two soil borings were completed within the currently proposed east filtration basin in the area of the former Reynolds Welding building. The other borings were located in the proposed west filtration basin and near the storm water discharge area on the western portion of the project area. Soils encountered generally consisted of sandy outwash deposits below sand fill material. Fill material was present in every boring to a maximum depth of 17 feet bgs. Deep fill is located on the eastern portion of the project area as result of previous construction activities associated with the Walker Street project. Groundwater was encountered as shallow as 9.5 feet bgs. Six soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis. Soil sample SS-02-3 indicates shallow fill in the proposed east filtration basin and in the area of the former Reynolds Welding building is impacted with petroleum compounds and non-petroleum compounds. Soil is contaminated with Diesel Range Organics (DRO) (148 mg/kg), lead (474 mg/kg), Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) equivalent (1.931 mg/kg), and Tetrachloroethene (PCE) (0.92 mg/kg). The sample was analyzed for TCLP lead and the result was 2.8 mg/L, which is below the EPA Lead TCLP Hazardous Level of 5.0 mg/L. One groundwater sample was collected from boring SS-04 located on the western portion of the project area. Groundwater was observed at 9.5 feet bgs and the concentration of DRO (212 μg/L) is above the Minnesota Department of Health drinking water standard of 200 μg/L. Review of previous environmental documentation for the former Reynolds Welding site that occupied the eastern portion of the project area indicates soil is impacted with DRO up to 445 mg/kg, BaP equivalents up to 14.96 mg/kg, PCE up to 6.5 mg/kg and TCE up to 4.72 mg/kg. Groundwater was observed to be 16 to 23 bgs. TCE was detected in groundwater at 26.3 μg/L. Soil vapor results indicated Methylene Chloride up to 1,117 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), PCE up to 3,910 μg/m3 and TCE up to 489 μg/m3. Based on Demolition Plans for the former Reynolds Welding building efforts were made to minimize soil disturbance and this contamination remains below the fill on-site. SEH recommends completion of a Response Action Plan (RAP) and special provisions that address contingencies and proper screening, handling and disposal of regulated soil that may be encountered during construction activities for the project. SEH further recommends that the City enter the MPCA Voluntary Remediation Program for approval and assurances of the Response Actions. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use Permit Page 16 EXHIBIT B Truck and Construction Access Haul Routes St. Louis Park – Walker II Iron Enhanced Filtration Basin March 6, 2017 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Title: Walker Pond – Conditional Use PermitPage 17 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 1, 2017 Action Agenda Item: 8f EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing a Major Amendment to the Special Permit to allow a building expansion at Benilde-St. Margaret’s (BSM) school with conditions recommended by staff. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the city council wish to approve a major amendment to the special permit? SUMMARY: BSM is requesting an amendment to its existing Special Permit to add approximately 2,200 square feet of flex space within its building and to convert approximately 4,700 square feet of storage space into classroom space. The following is a summary of the proposed improvements: 1. Convert a courtyard into flex space. The courtyard is located within the existing building footprint of the school, so the addition does not expand the existing outer perimeter of the school building. 2.Remodel storage space into science labs. The storage space is located in the basement level adjacent to the proposed courtyard infill project. Neighborhood Meetings: BSM conducted two neighborhood meetings. 1.Neighborhood Committee. BSM meets 3-4 times per year with the neighborhood to review capital improvement plans, programmed activities, and other issues resulting from daily operation of the school. Two residents attended and expressed support of the addition, and concern about light impacts from the windows and illuminated cross. 2.A neighborhood meeting was conducted and support was expressed for the addition. Lighting was also discussed. Planning Commission: A public hearing was conducted. Comments were received regarding lighting and the illuminated cross. At this meeting, BSM agreed to not illuminate the cross. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a 5-1 vote. The meeting minutes are attached. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Aerial Photo Draft Resolution Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Development Plans Available Upon Request: Resident Handouts Regarding Lighting Impacts on Wildlife (58 pages) Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 2 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: BSM has been part of the St. Louis Park community since 1956. The site was originally owned by the Christian Brothers, who started Benilde as an all-boys school. In 1974 Benilde merged with the Minneapolis all-girls school St Margaret’s, forming the basis for the current school. BSM has changed over time, as has the land surrounding the school. Single family housing developed to the north and south of the school, with some multi-family housing developed adjacent to the school’s southeast border. Today BSM has approximately 1,140 students, and does not plan to increase enrollment. The proposed improvements are meant to improve the quality of the facility, science labs, and classroom experience. Zoning Regulations: Educational facilities are a Conditional Use in the R-1 Single-Family Residence district. However, BSM operates under a Special Permit that was first approved in 1985, and has been amended several times since. BSM was last before the City in 2008/9 for a Major Amendment to its Special Permit to improve its athletic fields. Location: Comprehensive Plan: Civic Zoning: R-1 Single-Family Residence City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 3 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: BSM is proposing to amend its Special Permit to: 1.Convert a courtyard into flex space. The courtyard is located within the existing building footprint of the school, so the addition does not expand the existing outer perimeter of the school building. The subject courtyard is pictured below. 2.Remodel storage space into science labs. The storage space is located in the basement level adjacent to the proposed courtyard infill project. Building Design: The conversion of the interior courtyard into finished flex space will require interior remodeling, including modification to interior walls. The only portion of the improvement visible from outside the building will be the roof. The roof will be 30 feet high, which is the maximum allowed in the R-1 district. It will extend 15 feet above the existing school roof, but still be approximately five feet below the roof of the auditorium, which is located adjacent to the proposed addition. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 4 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s As the picture illustrates, the interior walls will be extended above the existing roof line. The walls will be constructed of glass to allow natural light into the flex space within. Lights within the flex space will be down cast, so the light emanating from the new windows should be similar in appearance to other windows throughout the building. The new glass wall will step in approximately 10 feet from the existing exterior wall. Parking: A parking study was completed as part of the 2008/9 Special Permit amendment to improve the athletic fields. At the time BSM had a total of 544 spaces, 386 spaces on-site and 158 spaces under contract with Beth-El Synagogue, which is located across Barry Street. As a result of the Special Permit improvements, BSM added 46 spaces on-site, which increased the total available parking spaces to 590 (432 on-site and 158 at Beth-El). The study also showed that the total parking required by the city zoning ordinance was 363 spaces. The conversion of the lab space requires an additional 46 spaces per the zoning ordinance, bringing the required parking total up to 409 spaces, which is fewer than the 432 spaces provided on-site, and well short of the 590 spaces provided when the Beth-El spaces are included. Lighting: Exterior site lighting will not be added to the site. As mentioned above, the new roof over the proposed flex space will have glass skylights to bring natural light into the space. At night, interior lighting will be visible through the windows. At the Planning Commission it was presented that the lights would be downcast, however, after the meeting, the architect reviewed the plans and determined that there are some lighting fixtures inside the space that will cast light up to the ceiling. The intent with these fixtures is to use the ceiling to distribute lighting evenly through the space to minimize shadows. As a result, the ceiling may be visible through the window. The light fixtures will not be directed out the windows. The elevation drawing above shows a cross affixed to the windows. The plans submitted to the Planning Commission showed the cross back lit to provide a halo effect. Some residents from the neighborhood expressed concerns about the back lit cross, and asked that it not be back lit. At the Planning Commission meeting, BSM agreed to remove the back lighting. Public Hearing: At the public hearing, residents expressed concerns about the lighting from the windows, and its impact on the wildlife. Concerns were also expressed that the lighting from the proposed project will exacerbate the spill light coming from the existing parking lot and athletic field lighting which impacts the adjacent residential property. Materials were submitted to the commission for review and inclusion into the public record. Due to the number of pages (58 pages), the materials were not attached to this report. They can be made available by contacting the City Clerk. The Planning Commission moved approval of the application with conditions recommended by staff, which includes a timer on the cross to regulate its lighting. This condition is no longer relevant as BSM has agreed to remove the lighting. The Planning Commission also directed staff to review the parking lot lighting at BSM to ensure it meets city code. Staff spoke with BSM after the meeting, and they are reviewing their lighting practices, and the possibility of turning some of the parking lot lights off at night when the facility is not in use. Staff is also reviewing the parking lot lighting to determine if it complies with the spill limits allowed by city code. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 5 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Neighborhood Meeting: BSM conducted two neighborhood meetings. The first meeting was with the neighborhood committee. This is a small group of BSM officials, BSM neighbors appointed to the committee by the neighborhood, and a city liaison. They meet several times throughout the year to discuss projects and daily operation of the school grounds. The project was presented and lighting discussed. As noted above, the illuminated cross was expressed as a concern. A concern was also expressed that the glass walls will impact the native wildlife, particularly the birds. BSM is considering a slight tint to the windows that is similar to the tinting of other windows used throughout the school. The tinting would reduce the amount of internal lighting visible through the window, and also reduce the amount of heat coming into the building during the summer months resulting from the natural sunlight. The second neighborhood meeting was conducted specifically for this application, and persons from five households and one person from Beth-El attended. The project was presented, and lighting was discussed. As noted above, the illuminated cross was a concern, but residents seemed amenable to it being on the same timer as the parking lot. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Major Amendment of the Benilde-St. Margaret’s Special Permit to convert the interior courtyard into student space, and to remodel existing storage space into science labs, subject to the following site specific conditions: 1. The addition be constructed as illustrated on Exhibit C – 2017 Building Addition 2.In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 3.Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 6 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s AERIAL PHOTO City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 7 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s RESOLUTION NO. 17-____ Amends and Restates Resolution No. 09-084 A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO. 09-084 ADOPTED ON JUNE 15, 2009, AND GRANTING AMENDMENT TO EXISTING SPECIAL PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-37 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO APPROVE A BUILDING EXPANSION AT BENILDE ST. MARGARET’S SCHOOL LOCATED AT 2501 STATE HIGHWAY 100 SOUTH FINDINGS WHEREAS, Benilde-St. Margaret’s School, has made application to the City Council for an amendment to an existing special permit under Section 36-37 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code to allow a building expansion at 2501 State Highway 100 within a R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District having the following legal description: That part of the South ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 31, Township 29, Range 24 lying east of State Highway No. 100, north of the south 330.00 feet thereof, and west of the east 450.00 feet thereof; also the west 233.58 feet of the east 450.00 of the north 500 feet of said South ½ of the Northwest ¼. Subject to roads. WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the information related to Planning Case Nos. 00-20-SP, 08-45-SP, 09-12-SP, 17-12-CUP and the effect of the proposed modifications to construct a building addition on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan; and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a continued special use permit was amended regarding the subject property pursuant to Resolution No. 09-084 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated June 15, 2009, which contained conditions applicable to said property; and WHEREAS, due to proposed additions to the building, amendments to those conditions are now necessary, requiring the further amendment of the special permit granted under Resolution No. 09-084; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to restate the conditions of the permit granted by Resolution No. 09-084, to add the amendments now required, and to consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject property in this resolution; WHEREAS, the contents of Case No. 17-12-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 8 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s CONCLUSION NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 09-084 is hereby restated and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a special permit to the subject property for the purposes of constructing an addition to the school building and converting storage space to classroom at the school building located within the R-1 Single Family Residential District at the location described above based on the following conditions: 1.That the grading and drainage be constructed and maintained thereafter in accordance with Exhibit A – Grading and Drainage Plan, Exhibit B – Sodding, Seeding and Landscape Plan and all conditions set forth in the City’s Flood Plain Zoning District regulations be satisfied as specified in Section 14:123.100(2)(a) through (k). 2. That all grading, sodding and seeding be completed by October 15, 1985. 3.The special permit shall be amended pursuant to Planning Case No. 92-42-SP to permit construction of a pylon sign 19.5 feet in height and to permit a total sign area of 200 square feet. 4.The special permit shall be amended on May 1, 2000 (Case No. 00-20-SP) to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with Official Exhibits C thru K. Exhibits B and D, landscape plan may be modified as to the exact location of the arborvitae plantings along the north lot line to most effectively provide screening and to preserve existing trees. Exhibit B landscape plan may also be modified to move up to 50% of the new bufferyard plantings north of the Princeton Court townhomes to directly east of the east parking lot, provided this is agreed to by the applicant and Princeton Court townhomes. b.Prior to any site work, applicant shall meet the following conditions: 1.Obtain a Watershed District permit and submit copy to City. 2.Applicant shall sign assent form and official exhibits. c.A building permit is required, which may impose additional conditions. d.If parking should become a problem in the future, the Zoning Administrator may require that proof of parking be converted to parking and any additional measures taken by Benilde-St. Margaret’s at its expense to mitigate the parking congestion. e.A five foot building height variance for an auditorium is approved, subject to all conditions of final approval. f.The property owner shall grant a trail easement to the City at no cost in a location to be agreed upon by both parties, if it is determined by the City that a trail is to be constructed in this area. 5.The special permit shall be amended on June 15, 2009 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 9 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s a.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with exhibits incorporated by reference herein. b.Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met: 1.The property owner shall dedicate at no cost to the City a 10’ easement required as part of prior approvals along the west frontage road and along 25 ½ Street West. 2.All required permits shall be obtained, including but not limited to those permits issued by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 3. The applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee in the form of a Letter of Credit or Cash Escrow to ensure the installation and survival of all landscaping materials. The financial guarantee shall be in the amount of 125% of the cost of installation. 4.The applicant shall establish a committee consisting of three neighboring property owners residing to the south of the property, three neighboring property owners residing to the north of the property, and representatives from the Benilde-St. Margaret’s School. The committee shall meet a minimum of two (2) times per school year to discuss the upcoming athletic schedule and any outstanding issues raised by either Benilde-St. Margaret’s or adjacent property owners. The Community Development Director or designee shall be informed of and may attend committee meetings. c.The requirements for a minimum of 400 off-street parking spaces and for a minimum of 44 proof-of-parking spaces on-site from the May 1, 2000 approval shall continue. d.The applicant shall install and maintain a device governing all outdoor amplified sound systems on the site to be in compliance with the City’s noise regulations. e.Music played over any outdoor amplified sound system shall be permitted until 10:00 PM for a duration of not more than thirty (30) minutes before any varsity athletic event or for occasional outdoor events typical of a high school. Neighborhood notification shall be required for any special outdoor events featuring music. f.Upon the City’s request due to planned construction of a trail, the property owner shall grant at no cost to the City a 10’ trail easement along the north property line running from the cul-de-sac at Westridge Lane to the east and terminating at the northeast corner of the property. Should the City construct such a trail, the City shall be responsible for any costs associated with fence or landscaping relocation. g.The current application does not include the construction of a bubble or dome on the property. A major amendment to the Special Permit would be required if a bubble or dome is proposed in the future. h.Use of field five (5) for athletic activities, as designated on the official exhibits, shall between the months of September and December of each year be prohibited during the following times: 1. 9:00 PM Friday to 9:00 AM Saturday. 2. 9:00 PM Saturday to 9:00 AM Sunday. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 10 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s i.Use of field five (5) for athletic activities, as designated on the official exhibits, shall between the months of April and August of each year be prohibited during the following times: 1. 9:00 PM Friday to 8:00 AM Saturday. 2. 9:00 PM Saturday to 8:00 AM Sunday. j.Upon completion of the new primary turf field (field 1), and until such a time as it can be brought into full compliance with the lighting requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, lighting at the existing track and field (field 4) shall not be used except for track and field meets between March 15 and June 15 of each year. k.The applicant shall follow guidelines for all fields and associated facilities on the site, as follows: 1.To the greatest extent possible, all major non-track events shall take place at the new field 1 (one) per the official exhibits. Major events shall be defined as any non-track event with over 100 fans in attendance where both the lighting and sound system is used. 2.To the greatest extent possible, the applicant shall utilize only one lighting or sound system at any given time. In no case shall the applicant utilize more than two lighting or sound systems at any given time. 3.Athletic training using the on-site bleachers shall not be permitted. 4.Except for current users, the City’s Parks and Recreation Department, temporary, or emergency situations, the applicant shall not permit regular use of its fields by other schools or organizations. A minor amendment to the Special Permit shall be required to allow regular use of the applicant’s athletic fields by other schools or outside organizations. 5.To the greatest extent possible, the applicant shall attempt to minimize use of the outdoor amplified sound system and field lighting system during months that school is not in session, with the exception of current summer sports programs. 6.The addition of new summer sports programs using the outdoor amplified sound system and field lighting system shall require a minor amendment to the Special Permit. 7.Except for the National Anthem, summer sports programs shall, to the greatest extent possible, avoid playing music over the outdoor amplified sound system. 6.The special permit shall be amended on May 1, 2017 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a.The addition be constructed as illustrated on Exhibit C – 2017 Building Addition In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of building permit. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 11 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 1, 2017 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 12 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s EXCERPT OF UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 19, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Greg Hunt, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther 4.Hearings A.Special Permit Major Amendment Location: 2501 State Highway 100 Applicant: Benilde-St. Margaret’s School Case No.: 17-12-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, provided the staff report. The applicant is requesting an amendment to add approximately 2,200 square feet of flex space within its building and to convert approximately 4,700 square feet of storage space into science lab classroom space. Mr. Morrison reviewed construction plans, parking and lighting. He stated that all the new lighting inside the building is strictly downcast and the windows are slightly tinted helping to mitigate light coming from the windows. He said an architectural element, a cross, will not be lit by flood lights but would be back lit with an LED strip along the back side of the cross, providing a halo effect. He said this was a concern at the first neighborhood meeting. He said at the second neighborhood meeting putting the cross lighting on the same timer as parking lot lights was discussed. That seemed amenable to residents and it is written into the conditions of approval. Natalie Ramier, CFO, Benilde-St. Margaret’s School, spoke about the proposed plans. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated it was a nice addition. Commissioner Robertson stated the design is top notch. Commissioner Carper said he attended the second neighborhood meeting and had some questions about the cross and lighting. Those questions have been answered satisfactorily for him. He asked if the cross facing Highway 100 is illuminated. Ms. Ramier responded she did not think the cross facing Hwy. 100 was illuminated. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. Elisabeth Shapiro, 2500 Princeton Court, said she was representing her husband who was unable to attend, several of her neighbors who face the wetlands, school fields and school. She said she also represented the magnificent wildlife that is present in the wetlands adjacent to their homes, City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 13 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s the neighborhood and the school. She said they understand and are excited about the proposed addition. She said, however, that the modified design still has a negative impact on the residents, the wildlife and the wetland. Ms. Shapiro said she is the neighbor who was concerned about lighting at the first neighborhood meeting. She said she is grateful that the plans were modified somewhat from the first meeting. She said she could not attend the second meeting. She stated that the modifications are inadequate and unacceptable to the residents for the following reasons: 1) down cast lighting in the atrium is still visible from the outdoors; 2) an illuminated cross, even backlit, causing a halo effect at night, and even on a timer, still faces their homes and is visible clearly from the north facing windows and decks, illuminated and visible at night. She said to be very honest it is an affront to the diversity of the residential neighborhood. She said it shows a total lack of respect and sensitivity to the diversity and harmony of their neighborhood. 3) The tinted glass windows still allow light downward emitted out to the surrounding fields, wetlands and neighborhood. 4) Ms. Shapiro stated that the glass windows will also reflect external lighting. She added that there is a lot of external lighting at the school. She said the school’s minor modification to their concerns by redirecting the atrium lighting downward and placing the cross illumination on a timer are really ineffective in minimizing the impact on the neighborhood. Ms. Shapiro presented and distributed to the Commission four nighttime photographs illustrating her concerns about existing lighting on residences and wetland. Ms. Shapiro spoke about light pollution impact on the wildlife and environment. Ms. Shapiro spoke about glass that can be used that doesn’t reflect light and will not emit light. Ms. Shapiro distributed letters from the following neighbors concerned about the proposal and lighting: Nancy Murphy, 2504 Princton Ct.; Marc Rothstein, 2512 Princeton Ct.; Jeffrey Sawyer and Karli Koski, 2500 Quentin Ct.; and Judy and Jerel Shapiro, 2516 Monterey Ave. S. Ms. Shapiro distributed materials from Joanna Eckles, Audubon Society; Kristen Osterwood, Green Building Alliance; Leeanna Newsome, Green Business Certification; International Dark- Sky Association; Audubon Minnesota; and Report of the Council on Science and Public Health regarding Human and Environmental Effects of LED Community Lighting. Ms. Shapiro concluded by saying the neighbors vigorously oppose any addition to the light pollution that impacts them nightly. She said the proposed plan is insensitive and disregards the neighbors, wildlife and wetland. The atrium proposal adds more light pollution. They ask that the city demands that BSM respectfully and sensitively deal with the plan so that the neighborhood and wetlands will be able to live in a neighborhood with lighting plans that emit zero additional lighting impact. Lee Snitzer, 2504 Quentin Court, said he missed both neighborhood meetings. His concerns were outlined by Ms. Shapiro. He said it seems significant that BSM chose not to light the cross across from Hwy. 100. He said he assumed that had to do with amount of signage allowed by city code. He asked the Commission to explore that. He suggested that the cross should not be lit. He said BSM is a great neighbor and tries to address concerns. He said timers are not always controlled well. He spoke about property values going down due to excessive lighting on their properties. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 14 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Jay Jaffee, 2521 Princeton Court, said his property faces east. He does see the light coming from the north at night, often until 10 or 11 at night even without school events. He spoke about moving there seven years ago and enjoying the wildlife and wetlands. He said anything adding illumination is not a good idea. He spoke about the non-lit cross which faces the service road and Hwy. 100. He said he wasn’t sure why the proposed new cross needs to be lit. As no one else was present wishing to speak the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kanne spoke about property values decreasing over time due to excessive light. Commissioner Robertson said the lit cross isn’t necessary for the auditorium and science rooms. It is an applied ornament. He said the amount of light that would come from atrium and cross is dwarfed by the field lighting. He said it would be wise on BSM’s part not to light the cross. He said he is sensitive to wildlife biology. He said it is frustrating the field lights are on unnecessarily. He said the issue of the lit cross should be revisited before the item comes to city council. Commissioner Person asked staff for a reminder of what types of conditions were put in place when the athletic field was expanded. Mr. Morrison and Mr. Walther spoke about hours of lighting, use of audio equipment, and lighting fixtures reducing the spill. The Council asked the neighborhood to meet regularly with BSM regarding relations and concerns between the two. The committee has been meeting regularly. Dean Laird, Facilities Director, BSM, said parking lights are on all night for security reasons and interior lights are shut down at 11 p.m. He spoke about exterior security lighting. Commissioner Carper said he thought parking lights were on a timer. Mr. Laird said the cross lighting could be put on a timer. Commissioner Kanne said the effect of lighting on property values is relevant and important to consider. Commissioner Robertson said when the field lights go off the cross light should also go off. Chair Peilen said she didn’t think the addition of the back lit cross was insensitive. She said she believes BSM wants to be as good a neighbor as it can. She spoke about the good relationship between BSM and Beth El Synagogue. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she didn’t think Benilde intended to offend anyone. It could be discussed further. She suggested that all lighting could be reviewed as a condition of approval. Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of a major amendment to the Special Permit with staff conditions, and including further review of all lighting and conformity to current zoning, prior to city council consideration. Commissioner Carper said he is against the motion as proposed. He said there is an established working community committee so there is an ability for discussion of light pollution, including back lit cross, so it wouldn’t need to be covered in the motion. City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Page 15 Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Commissioner Robertson said he thought it would be wise to have an additional lighting conversation prior to consideration by city council. Natalie Ramier, CFO, said BSM wanted to hear more discussion this evening, and she said they are willing to remove the back lighting of the cross. She will speak with BSM and community members about lighting that occurs when an event is not happening. Commissioner Robertson removed his original motion. He then made a motion recommending approval of a major amendment to the Special Permit to allow a building expansion at Benilde-St. Margaret’s (BSM) school with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-1 (Kanne opposed). Commissioners asked staff to review all BSM lighting. Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY COURTYARD AND SCIENCE CLASSROOMS BSM1603 SYMBOLS MATERIALS {J;f' i==i EXJSTltlG CONS1RUCTION BUILDING SECTION 0 WALL TYPE � EARTt< IMRKER DESIGNATOR A101 f :· .. .,,:.:.-·.:I CAST �N·PlACE CONCRETE © SIM WAI..LSECTION 0 KErnOTE IZZ,zJ PRECAST CONCRETE MARKER DESIGNATOR IZZ23 CONCRETE BLOCKJCMU A10\ @ SIM kX,;;'-•i! SAND DETAIL t,14.RKER CD WINDOW TAG � CW/SF TAG GRAVEL. BALLAST A101 � BITUMu.lOUS @ SIM DETAIL Ml\RKER � CW/ SF PAN EL TAG t?ZZ&kl STONE A101 r&00J BRICK �·· flln STEEL, MET.Al. STUD BUIWING 0 MOUNTlNG HEIGHT 1 ELEVATION MARKER OESIG«A.TOR �PLYWOOD 2 LYO � FINISHWOOO 1�3 lmERIOR REV1SION � ROUGHWOOO ELEVATION f,WU<.ER DESIGNATOR � PARTICLE BOARDiO.S.B. 4 'cHllll:fJ BA.TI INSULATION �-, VlEWCALLOUT 'i---CENTERLINE � L - J RIGIDINSUlATION � j.·.·.·.·.·.·j FOAM INSULATION ©-BUILDING GRID LINE OOORTN; f-%162) CAST STONE j;(,:,,., .. 3:,·,;,1 PlASTER � LEVEL HEIGHT ,MRKER l'·:(/;�r,,1 GYPSUM BOARD a.11' ITilIIIIII ACOUSTIC CEILING TILE NJV MOVE N:.P ACOUSTICAL CEILING PANEL /\ff ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR &UM Al\Jf,'JNUM BUJG BUILDING BLI<G BLOCl<JNG BO BOTIOM OF BP BID PACKAGE BRKT BRACKET C!P CAST IN PlACE CLG CEILING CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT cot.ic CONCRETE CONT CONTINUOUS COOR COORDINATE CT CERAMlC TILE cw CURTAINWAfl. DETL OET.AJL DIA DIMIETER "'" DIMENSIONS OIi DOWN DSP DOWNSPOUT EA EACH EJ EXPANSION JOINT EL ELEVATION ELEC ELECTRIC/IJ.. EO EOU/11. EQPT EQlAPMENT E.XIST EXJSTING EXP EXPOSED EXT EXTERIOR FAf FLUID APPLIED nooR FD FLOOROR.AJN FON FOUNDATtON FE ARE EXTINGUISHER FF FlNISHFLOOR fttl Flti1SH FlR FLOOR FO FACE OF FV RELO VERIFY FTG FOOTING GAI..V GALVANIZED GC GEllERAl COllTRACTOR GW8 GYPSUM WN..l BOARD HM HOLLOW METAL HT HEIGHT ID lt�SIOE OW,'.ETER INSUL INSUlATION SHEET INDEX ITTLE ABBREVIATIONS INT JrfTERIOR UG UNDERGROUIID JT JOINT UNO UNLESSNOTED OTliERV/ISE KO t<JlOCKOUT VB V1NYL8ASE LOC LOCATION VERT VERTICAl l,l'J< r,'AXIMUM VFY VERIFY MECH MECt-W-IICAI.. VR VAPORRETAAOER MFR r,WNfACTURER WI Wirt< MIN r,'JNIMUM WD WOOD MNTD MOUNTED WI.I WALK-Off I.IAT 1,\0 f,�SONRY OPENING ws WINDOWSHADE I.IP MET.AJ...PNIEL I.\R MOISTURE RESISTJ\tfl MTL METAL MUll MULLION NIC NOT IN CONlRACT NOM NOMINAL NTS NOTTO SCALE oc ON CENTER OD OUTSIDE OlAMETER OFD OVER FLOW DR.A,IN CFS OVER FLOW SCUPPER OH OVERHEAD PC F'RECAST PIJ\M PLASTIC I.A','.INATE PLYWD PLYWOOD PREFH� PREFINIStiEO PT PAINT RAD RADIUS RD ROOF DRAIN ROL ROOf DRAIN LEADER RElNF REINFORCECYR8NFORClNG RED REQUIRED REV REVERSE RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING s,rr SHEET SIM Slfi'JLAA. SLR SEALED CONCRElE SP SPACE ss SOLID SURFACE ssn STAINLESS STEEL STL STEEL STRUCT STRUCTURE TAC TEXTUREO ACRYUC COATING TEMP TEMPORARY TO TOP OF TS l\JBESTEE.l TYP TYPICAL PROJECT TEAM BerrldD Sl Margarel"s School 2501 MN·100 SI. Louis Park, MN !o416 PH: l952) 927...4176 ARCHITECT l,\lfer Ox!YAddle AlchitedUt"e 123NorthThird Slleel, Sule101 l,'JRM'apoli'J, MN ss.101 PH: l612) 337-<XXX) FM:. (612) 337.o:JJI INQERIQR QESIGN ffi lnUni.oo De�gn Z,5 Ma,1<.d Stn�«. Su�e 489 f,\Meapolis. MN 55405 PH: (612) ffi9-IITT SJRUCJURAL ENGINEER BKBMl:ngineers 59JO&odr.trn8tvd l,fnne,1pob, MN 55429 PH: (763) B4J..0420 MECH/El EC ENGINEER Ema.ntH'tM>n Podu Inc. nr,, Bu5t, like Ro�d Edin.I, MN 55439 PH: (952) 930 • OO'SO = Op,.n:G<o\lp 10350BrenRc!W. 1,'fnnol<>Ma., MN'55343 PH:(952)� GENERAL NOTES 1. All WORKSKPJ.L COMPt.YWITH SCHOOL STANOA.ROS ANO ALL APPLICABLE LOCA.L AND STATE CODE REOUIREMElfTS. 2. CONTAACTOR Stw.L VERIFY DESIGNATED ROUTES, STAGING METHODS AND SCHEDULES FOR DE.UVERY, STORAGE. ANO REMOVAL OF CONSTRUCTION MATERtAl.S ANO DEBRIS WITH OWNERS AS REQUIRED. COtllRACTOR St-W..L REPAIR ClMIAGEO SURFACES. 3. PAAlW. 01/INER OCCUPANCY: CONSTRUCTION TO OCCUR SUMMER/FALL 2017. OWNER Will OCCUPY THE. PREJ,'JSES DURING ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD V/ITiilliE EXCEPTION OF AAEAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. COORDtNATE WITI-1 OViNER DURING CONSTRUCTION OPEAATtONS TO MIN1MIZE CONFlJCTS AND FACILITATE OWHER USAGE. PERFORM THE. WORK SO AS UOT TO INTERFERE Wini OWNER'S OPERATIONS. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SITE PROTECTIO N ANO SU6Mff STAGING Pt.ANS. PHASING Pl.NlSNID SCHEDULES F'RIOR TO STAA.T OF WORK. 4. l,\A.lERIALS SW\l.L BE PROVIDED ANO INSTAUEO BY ntE CONTRACTOR UNLESS NOTED OTHERVVISE 5. COKTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY E.X!STING CONOITION S ANO DIMENSIONS. REPORT All DISCREPANCIES TOAACHITECT PRIOR TO STARTING. 6. 00 NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBl.E FOR QUAJJTY OF DRAWINGS REPRODUCED FROM ORIGINAL CON STRUCTI ON DOCUMENT !\ARO COPIES OR DtGITAI.. FILES. 7. REMOVE. RE.F'.AJR AND REINSTALL DAIMGED ELECTRICAl. FIXTURES. VERIFY QUANTITIES AND TYPE 'fflTH OWNER PRJOR10 INSTAl..lATIOH. B. MATEruAI...S TO REM-OJI� TO BE PROTECTED AS REQUIRED FROM ClM1AGE. cotrrRACTOR Stw..L BE RESPONSIBlE FOR REPAJR/ REPLACEMENT OF OAt,�GED l,\A.TERIALS TO LIKE NEW CONOITION. 9. WHERE MATCH E)(JSTING IS INDCCATED, PROVIDE NEW l,\A.TERIALAS NECESS,,,\RY TO PATCH. EXTEND. OR REPLACE E1JSTING /.M,TERIAL UNlESS AN EXCEPTION IS NOTED. HEW fo'ATERlAL SHALL �IATCH EXISTING IN ALL ASPECTS. 10. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REMOVAL AND REP1.ACEMENTOF 1\1..L l,\A.lERlAI...S AND SYSTEMS NECESSARY FOR INSTALLATIOH OF NEW CONSTRUCTION SYSTEMS. 11. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY GRID LOCATIONS .ANO £MMENS10NS PRIOR TO STAATING CONSTRUCTION ANO REPORT Nff DISCREPAAQES TO ARCHITECT/OWNER. 12. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CVTTINGIPAlCHlNG AS REQUIRED FOR NEW l,'IEIP. 13. COtlTAACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAIAAGE DURiNG THE COl�STRUCTION OF BUILDING ELEMENTS, CONTRACTOR Sl'W.L PROVIDE REPAIR/ REP!.ACEMENT/RESTOAATIOH AS DETERMINEO BY ARCHITECT/OWNER miller dunwiddie ARQl<TECTIJRE 123 North Third Stnlll Su Ho 104 MlnnoapoU1 MN 55401-1657 www.miUordunwlddlo.com p 612-337-0000 I 612-337-0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP BKBM--ENGINEERS --:::F I emanuelson,podas con,umno•no1n••11 • • 1nun1sen ... I PROJECT: Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE ClASSROOM BSM1603 2501 MN-100 Sl Louis Park, MN 55416 I REVISED: P1ojK1.No.:: BSM1603 Dair.: Issue Dale Dnll"lf'IBy: EKK Che<ilo<IBy: KPM ©2017 M:IIN Ount,lddif' A1rhileeh1'1t, Inc. I DRAWING TITLE: TITLE SHEET FULL SIZE SHEET: 24' X 36" I DRAWING NUMBER T100 I\ 'IOI City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 16 FIRE AREA 1: NO WORK FIRE AREA 3: NO WORK A OCC AND E OCC 14,560GSF 591 occ 1 EXIT + EXITING THROUGH FIRE AREA 2 BACCESSORY OCCUPANCY 9 occ ------:. FIRE AREA 2: NO WORK E OCC , WITH B ACCESSORY 17,735 GSF 4950CC 2EXITS EXIT2.2 248 {FIRE AREA 2) 188 {FIRE AREA 3) 4360CC FIRE AREA 1: NO WORK FIRE AREA 4: BASEMENT NO WORK E OCC WITH ACCESSORY SANDU 44.448 GSF 4100CC 2EXITS EXIT 4.2 4060CC PROJECT AREA IN FIRST FLOOR: INFILL EXISTING COURTYARD (2244 GSF) FIRE AREA 5: FIRST FLOOR A OCC AND E OCC, WITH B ACCESSORY OCC 41,120 EXISTING GSF 2,335 NEW GSF 43,455 TOTAL GSF ?OCC 5EXITS 0 0 00 FIRE AREA 4: FIRST FLOOR A OCC AND E OCC I FIRE AREA 6: NO WORK 44,448 GSF 2.3440CC 6EXITS EXITB 4.2 199 (FIRE AREA 4) 1fil_(FIRE AREA 5) 360 occ 1 '> PROJECT AREA IN BASEMENT LEVEL: REMODEL EXISTING SPACE AND INFILL EXISTING COURTYARD (NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE NOTED ABOVE) {1-J'- FROMFIRE AREAS GO UPSTAIRS TO EXtr5.3) \�: .. FIRE AREA 5: BASEMENT A OCC AND E OCC, (FORMERLY S OCC ) 4,705 EXISTING GSF 1,630 NEW GSF 6,335 TOTAL GSF 3190CC miller dunwiddie ARQtlTECT\JRE 123 North Third Senst Sutto 104 Minnoapolla MN 55401-1657 www.mlllonlunwiddio.oom p 612-331-0000 r 612-337-0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP BKBM --=- ENGINEERS --=:F I emanuelson•podas consulHnQ 1ngln,e1& • • 1nun1sen I PROJECT: Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 2501 MN-100 SI. Louis Par1<. MN 55416 I REVISED: BSM1603 Issue Dale DJa'Ml By: EKK Cht>cited6:,: KPM ©20171,1:llef Dumdd<fte Arch"lechn, Inc. I DRAWING TITLE: CODE PLAN OVERALL FULL SIZE SHEET: 24' ;it 36"' I DRAWIN.G NUMBER G100 I j ' J ' s • i I ' '5) City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 17 ® 4D 8ASEMENT LEVEL DEMOLITION PlAN 0100 118"" 1'-0" Ill H H S/IJ..VAGEFOR REINSTAllATION " H H H H ® DEMO PLAN KEY NOTES ® ® ® ® ® ® ® NEW OPENING IN EX/STI11G FOUNDATION WAU_. COORDIWI.TE I'll STRUCTURAL REMOVE EXISTING DOORS REMOVE EXISTING UPS SYSTEM, SALVAGE FOR RELOCATION TO FIRST FLOOR EXCAVATE EXISTING COURTYAAO AS NEEDED FOR NEW FOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS-COORDINATE WlTH STRUC"TURAL REMOVE PAAT OF BENCH REMOVE EX/STINGVCTFLOORIN LOBBY AIJO CORRlDOR REMOVE ARCHED LINTEL VP TO CLG TO BE REPLACED WITH FIAT UNTEL TO IMTCHAOJOPHIING miller dunwiddie ""'"'""""' 123 North1hlrdStrmS11ita 104 MinneapoUiiMN 65401-1657 www.mlUardunwlddle.com p 612-337-0000 f 612-337-0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP I emanuelson•podas oono"nlng •nglnoero inunisen '"'""""""'�''""'n'"'"''"""=-"'''""'""""'''Al""'"""""'"""'"°"'"'"-,ECT su;m..=:,,1<,JJn(,\flh�AC>.U\h."""BiSeOAAct<lOCT ""'""H,M,SCHUsmreo,""E""" Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM 8SM1603 2501 MN-100 Sl Louis Park, MN 55416 Project/la.: 8SM1603 Issue Dale Author Checker ©20n �Iller °'1ffl0d<iie hch1.ct...-e, Inc. liPB'AWJt1�2i'.fitim1K!J£'f;;1t)'fj;''\ BASEMENT LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" JI 36' 0100 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 18 FIRST LEVEL DEMO PROJECT NORTH 118"" 1',0" DEMO PLAN KEY NOTES ® @ ® ® ® ® ® ® @ e e e NEW OPENING IN EXISTUIG FOUNDATION WALl. COORDIW\TE WI STRUCTURI\L REMOVE EXISTING DOORS REMOVE EXISTING UPS SYSTEM, SM.VAGE FOR RHOCATlONTO FIRST FLOOR EXCAVATE EXISTING COURTYARD AS NEEDED FOR NEW FOOTINGS ANO F0UNDA1l0NS -COORDIW\TE Wint STRUCTURAL REMOVE PART OF BENCH REMOVE EXISTING VCT FLOOR IN LOBBY ANO CORRJDOR REMOVE AACHEO LINTEL UP TO CLG TO BE REPLACED WITH FLAT LINTEL TO �TCH ADJ OPENING miller dunwiddie "'""""""' 123 North Third StnietSuit, Hlii Minna.ipoUsMN 55401-1657 www.mlllardunwlddla.com p 612-337-0000 f 612-337-0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP II ernanuellion-podas ••••""logonglooo!O inunisen Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 2501 MN-100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Prcj•dNo.: 8SM1603 Issue Date Author Checiler ©2017 �tiler Dun,idd>O Arilited .... e, loo. jiPRAWiffqm)ill;!'.,'!tJiBSE:2215; ::j FIRST LEVEL DEMOLITION PLAN fUlLSIZE SHEET: 24' X35' 0101 /T City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 19 ,a 40 BASEMENT LEVEL A100 118"" 1'-0" ,,l 95-2 "-./ l 95-3 "-./ ' ' / ' ' l 95-4"-./ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' @ � ----5-D ,,l 95-5 "-./ GENERAL NOTES 1. NOTE 1 2. NOTE2 FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 ® ® 0 EM!cRGENCY EYEWASH & SHOWER DUAL-SIDED FUME HOOD FUME HOOD lOCl<ERS COATAACK WHITEBOl>RO ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. COORDINATE WI ELECTRICAL DISINK DISHWASHER EQUIPMENT. N.I.C. GLASS GUARDRAIL Ill 48"" MA>:.SEGl,1HITS FURR OUT E;<.ISTING WALL SURFACES RELOCATE UPS SYSTEM. COORDINATE \l\'ITH ELECTRICAL COOROIN/\TE DUCT WORK LOCATION WITH !,\ECH 42' HIGH CMU WALL COVERED WITH GYP BO EXTENDlNG 15' BUONO RAMP AT BDTl1 ENOS. GYP BO CAf'AT A.F.F. HOT WATER HEATER. COORDINATE WI MEClil\MCAl STAINLESS STEEL �ORl\ll AT STAIRS, MOUITTEEJ TO POUREO CONCRETE WALL METAf.STAIR RAILING ANO HAt!EJRAll miller dunwiddie ARCH!Tttl'URE 123 North Third S!mtSuite 1� MlnneapoU,MN 55401-1657 www.millerdunwlddla.com p 612-337-0000 f 612-337--0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP inunisen Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM 8SM1603 2501 MN-100 St. Louis Palk, MN 55416 8SM1603 Issue Dale Drami By: EKK KPM ©2017 Mllai Dun\'d��� Atcl,tocluro, loo. Eo.AAWlff�--Titt:E +'H!XY< BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN FULLS\ZE SHEET, 24" l,36" A100 c,-,-;----�,--r-,,-·,-"-;,;'l City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 20 95-1 95-1 95-2 / r------1 i ®i .i�-,..,.f--i- -------: -' '"------' ---=95-A Cl'--" ------95-B 95-5 GENERAL NOTES 1. NOTE! 2 NOTE2 FLOOR PLAN KEY NOTES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 EMERGE/ICY EYEWASH & SHOWER DUAL-SIDED FUME KOOD FUME HOOD LOCKERS COAT RACK WHITEBOARD ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. CODRDIW\TE WI ELECTRICAL DISINK DISHWASHER EQUIPMENT, tl.l.C. GlASS GUAROR/\IL IN 48' MM SEGMENTS FURR DLJT EXISTING WALL SURFACES RELOCATE UPS SYSTEM . COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL COORDINATE OUCT WORK lOCATION WITtt MECH 4<" 1-!IGH CMU WALl COVEREO WITtt GYP BO =ENDING 15" BHOND RAMP AT 60TH ElfOS GYP BDCAP AT AF.F. HOT WATER HEATER COORDINATE WI MECHANICAL STNNlESS STEEL 1-WlDRAILAT STNRS, MoUmED TD POURED CONCRETE \l'IAU MHAl STNR RAILING AND MANORAIL miller dunwiddie """"""� 123 North Third StraetSutte 104 M!nneapoU,MN �1-1657 www.millerdunwiddle.01Jm p 612--337-0000 f 612-337-0031 I!) OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP I emanuelson•pOdM oon,ulllag ooglnoe,, • • 1nurusen l'·FRQ;.!i;Qn.XsL,,;;Jz& r��t-�:s;I Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 2501 MN-100 SL Louis Park, MN 55416 BSM1603 Issue Date EKK KPM l'.OJ:tBW/N(iill'.it�?;?ift'@i/0N!f&z ij FIRST LEVEL PLAN FULL SIZE SHEU: 24" /I 36' A101 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 21 ROOF PLAN 1/8"" 1'-0" 1,040 SF I FLAT EPDM ROOF 340 SF 1 FLAT EPDM � F r I 1 cp I FLAT EPDM ROOF / 1 1 590+ SF ,1 SLOPED EPDM ROOF ,,Y ,,1'@ 550 SF FLAT EPDM ROOF 'I � I 'eJ / I I//' ,// I m I �· II I I I I I -1 --B-----!B------: 0--- 1 00� I I -_1 _ -gj\'( '�ii �i,.::::::i.:.: """"" I ! i --r--------1----- 1 !I -----95-C I I I -1--------'-I 95-2 A ----·---f-----·· ---11-----95-D '-.../ 95-3 � '-...1/1 '--" 95-4 '-../ 95-5'--" PROJECT NORTH miller dunwiddie ""'"""'"' 123 North Third StruetSuite 104 MinnnpoUs MN 55401-1657 www.m!llerdunwlddle.o:1m P 612.-337-0000 f 612-337-0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP BKBM -"'iie,ENGlf!!!,�!,-____ _:::5�- • I emanuelson.podas oonoumng ""i'""'" inunisen ,,_,,."' ..•. ltR.B\lliiJSQ.tfil/r;,t�ft&-f;-ff1iffe:.:?!;:·\ Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM BSM1603 2501 MN-100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Proied.No.: BSM1603 Issue Dale EKK �edBy: KPM ©2017 �m .. O<.mwidd;., Ar<WKI"'•-Inc. l,bRA®ifiG_>tjjtl3r,scyFc1f:'.2C] ROOF PLAN FULL SllE SHEET: 24' X 36' A170 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 22 26'-lr+/· _ __S_EW_JlOOF 2 rl,, 126'----=-FT � CLERESTORY ELEVATION 2 �-c1S,a> .. ",'1"·-o""=====�---------------------------- ---------'--------------------1...C== _TOPOFl,1A:-f{� CLERESTORY ELEVATION 1 118" = 1'-0" ----�E'f!_���:� � - 0 --"'"-'"""' A..I 1� __ -1c----------------------iil __ NE'f!_R� 1 • i 11[1 .. :;;:; ' � PARAPETELEVAT!ON �cc1c.18:C .. 0,7.1e:._0si .. ===�------------------------------- @ EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 118"= 1'-0" 95-1 66'-81/2',/- @ WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 0 118" = 1'-0" miller dunwiddie """"""'" 123 North Third Stniet Suite 104 MlnneapoUsMN 55401�1657 www.mlUardunwlddla.com p 612-337-0000 f 612-337--0031 � OPUS. THE OPUS GROUP 1:!!11 err,anuelson-podas II conoul11"g enolnoe« • • 1nun1sen Benilde-St. Margaret's School ENTRY ATRIUM AND SCIENCE CLASSROOM 8SM1603 2501 MN-100 St. Louis Parll, MN 55416 P,oiectNo. BSM1603 �·· Issue Date Dramilly: Aulhor Choci,odBy: Checker ©20171,tlle< Dum.iddie Arffi1ecluro, Inc. j·-.tiMW!Jil�;:tj)itE\1/iJt!iBilXWi,iiiHij EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FULL SIZE SHEET: 24" X 35"" A200 City Council Meeting of May 1, 2017 (Item No. 8f) Title: Special Permit Major Amendment – Benilde-St. Margaret’s Page 23