HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/01/19 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
JANUARY 19, 2016
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Items
1. 45 min. Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting,
Maintenance
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 January 4, 2016
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports -- None
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business
7a. Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution requesting the City
Council to call for a public hearing relative to the establishment of the Wayzata Blvd
Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 (a
redevelopment district).
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Recognition of Donations
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Meeting Minutes December 21, 2015
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes January 4, 2016
Meeting of January 19, 2016
City Council Agenda
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.
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
5a. Reappointment of Stuart Williams to the Fire Civil Service Commission
Recommended Action: Motion to reappoint Stuart Williams to the Fire Civil Service
Commission with a term to expire December 31, 2018.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC dba Pinot’s Palette - On-Sale Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor
License
Recommended Action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close
public hearing. Motion to approve application from Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC dba
Pinot’s Palette, for an On-Sale Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor License for the premises
located at 4712 Excelsior Boulevard, with the license term through March 1, 2016.
6b. Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
Recommended Action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close
public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution approving 2016 liquor license fees for the
license term March 1, 2016 through March 1, 2017 pursuant to M.S.A. Ch. 340A and
section 3-59 of the St. Louis Park City Code.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Resolution Requesting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to Recognize Impact of
Aircraft Noise in the Community
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution requesting the FAA to develop
alternate noise metrics and recognize impact of aircraft noise beyond the current 65 Day-
Night Average Sound Level (DNL).
9. Communications -- None
Meeting of January 19, 2016
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Approve Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership.
4b. Adopt Resolution authorizing execution of Hennepin County Grant Agreement for
Public Space Recycling Funds.
4c. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of monetary donations from: Lola Sletten in
the amount of $25, Joe and Arlyce Wiersma in the amount of $15, Julie Masonsmith in
the amount of $50 and The Church of St. Therese in the amount of $50 for Westwood
Hills Nature Center.
4d. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Jason Wallestad,
Sonja Saunders and Iris Wallestad in the amount of $1,000, and Jeffrey Raison and
Marilyn Reiter in the amount of $250 for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
4e. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a donation from Discover St. Louis Park
for registration, hotel, airfare and cab fare for Jason West, Recreation Superintendent
to attend the 2016 National Association of Sports Commission (“NASC”) Symposium
held April 3 – 7, 2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan in an approximate amount not to
exceed $2,200.
4f. Authorize the execution of a contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc, (SEH) for the
Wooddale Avenue Traffic Engineering Analysis.
4g. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed on consolidating permitting authority for Construction Stormwater
Management.
4h. Adopt Resolution calling for a public hearing relative to the establishment of the
Wayzata Blvd Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project Area
No. 1 (a redevelopment district).
4i. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of October 21, 2015.
4j. Approve for filing Parks & Rec Advisory Commission Minutes of August 5, 2015.
4k. Approve for filing Parks & Rec Advisory Commission Minutes of October 21, 2015.
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel
17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at
www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in
the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon
on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires feedback on the information provided in this report
and at the Study Session. This is a continued item. Once all improvement areas have been
discussed staff will bring back an overall City Policy for City Council approval.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to change how we fund certain
improvement projects? If so, is Council supportive of staff’s recommendations included herein?
SUMMARY: The City’s assessment policy was last updated in 2000; prior to that the policy was
updated more frequently. The following improvements are ones that have historically been
assessed in the City of St. Louis Park:
1. Paving, Curb and Gutter- Discussed on 11/9/15
2. Alley Paving- Discussed on 11/23/15
3. Sidewalks- For Discussion on 1/19/16
4. Streetlighting
5. Unimproved Street Maintenance
6. Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer Mains and Services
7. Watermain and Services
8. Fire Sprinkler Systems
9. Delinquent Charges (nuisances, tree removal, weed removal, curb / gutter repair and
responding to fire alarms)
10. Municipal Parking Lots
Since the last update in 2000, council direction, improvement costs and infrastructure needs have
changed in a number of the areas covered by this policy. Staff from Assessing, Finance,
Operations, and Engineering have been working on reviewing this policy and updating it so that it
is current and consistent with legal guidance. Staff anticipates that the City Council discussion for
this policy update may take several study sessions, to fully examine each improvement area. At
tonight’s special study session, staff is prepared to discuss Sidewalks and Streetlighting, as well
as Unimproved Street Maintenance if time allows.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The recommended assessment policy for the
various improvements will have funding implications. Information regarding financial impacts
will be a part of future study session discussion.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
History of Connect the Park! CIP
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Jeff Stevens, Operations Manager
Phillip Elkin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager
Cory Bultema, City Assessor
Steve Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Approved by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: At the November 9 and 23 study sessions, the City Council provided staff
direction on the proposed assessment policy for Paving, Curb and Gutter as well as Alleys. These
recommendations are summarized below. The next improvement for discussion will be Sidewalks,
followed by Streetlights and Unimproved Street Maintenance.
In order to assess the cost for a public improvement to property owners, the City must be able to
demonstrate an increase to the market value of the land as a result of the improvement. This
increase should be equal to or greater than the cost of the assessment.
In general an assessment of 1 to 1.5% of the property market value can be assumed for most public
improvements.
1. Paving, Curb and Gutter
The City has 146 centerline miles of streets under our jurisdiction. These streets are broken down
into two categories, Municipal State Aid (MSA) and local streets. Each category is further broken
down into improved and unimproved. According to City policy, for a street to be considered
improved, it is constructed with proper drainage, concrete curb and gutter and meets the State of
Minnesota DOT “standard specifications for highway construction” which includes, but is not
limited to, a minimum six-inch granular base and at least two-inch asphalt overlay or strength
equivalent. If a street does not meet these minimums, it will be considered unimproved. There
are 37 miles of MSA streets, 108 miles of improved local streets, and 1 mile of unimproved streets
in the City.
The majority of our streets were improved in the mid-1950’s’s to early 1980’s. The life cycle of
an improved street is 20-30 years. At around 25 years, the condition of the street is improved using
rehabilitation techniques such as mill and overlay or reclaim and overlay.
Discussion:
Unimproved street reconstruction:
There is one mile of unimproved streets in the City. The majority of the land use along the
unimproved streets is residential. The proposed assessment policy:
Residential property - No assessments
Commercial / Industrial property - It is recommended that the rate for these land uses
be set at 50% of the construction cost.
In regards to the manner of calculating specific property assessment rates, Commercial/
Industrial lot sizes and widths vary widely. Staff recommends that the rate calculation
for assessments be on a front foot basis.
The remaining costs are recommended to be funded by the City.
Improved street rehabilitation:
City franchise fees collected through Xcel and Center Point are the funding source for
pavement rehabilitation. This funding source generates almost $2.4 million annually.
About 66% of the fees collected are paid by Residential properties. The remaining fees are
paid into the fund by Commercial / Industrial properties. These funds are used to pay for
street rehabilitation, sealcoat, and sidewalk replacement.
Residential property - No proposed assessments.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Commercial/ Industrial property - Commercial/ Industrial land uses pay in about a third of
the total franchise fees collected, the total fees collected from these land uses is half the
amount collected from Residential land uses. As a result, it is recommended that they be
assessed for half the amount of the cost of street rehabilitation. It is recommended that the
rate for these land uses be set at 50% of the construction cost.
In regards to the manner of calculating specific property assessment rates, Commercial and
Industrial lot sizes and widths vary widely. Staff recommends that the rate calculation for
assessments be on a front foot basis.
It is recommended that remaining costs be funded by the City.
Proposed policy:
Residential Commercial/ Industrial
Unimproved street
construction
No assessment 50% of cost
Front foot basis
Improved Street
Rehabilitation
No assessment 50% of cost
Front foot basis
2. Alley Paving
There are 21.2 miles of alleys throughout the City. These alleys are broken down into two
categories, improved and unimproved. According to City policy, for an alley to be considered
improved, it is constructed of concrete. Sixteen miles of alleys have a concrete surface and meet
the minimum standard for an improved alley. The remaining 5.2 miles of these alleys are
considered unimproved according to City policy. Of the unimproved alleys, 2.4 miles are asphalt
and 2.8 miles are gravel.
The majority of our alleys were improved before 1980. Our oldest concrete alley was constructed
in 1958. There have been 17 alley improvement projects since 1990. The life expectancy of a
concrete alley is 50-70 years.
Discussion:
In residential areas, alleys provide rear access to property where a garage was located, or
where waste could be collected by service vehicles. A benefit of this was the location o f
these activities was at the rear and less public side of a dwelling.
While not all properties access alleys, all properties experience reduction in noise and
traffic on the streets in front of them because there are alleys adjacent to their property. For
this reason, staff recommends that the assessments take this into account by breaking out
properties based on indirect and direct benefit. An explanation of this break down:
Indirect Benefit- All properties that abut the alley will be assessed for 30% of the cost
of the construction of an improved alley.
Direct Benefit- 70% of the cost of the construction of an improved alley shall be
assessed against abutting properties with direct benefit. A property is directly benefited
if one or more of the following conditions are met:
o it has an existing garage with direct access to the alley,
o an access to the alley could be constructed from an existing garage, or
o no garage exists, there is sufficient area on the lot to build a garage with access to
the alley.
The differentiation between direct and indirect benefit is a part of our existing assessment
policy.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Residential property- Staff recommends that the total cost property owners are assessed is
lowered to 50% of the total project cost.
Also, it is recommended that the cost assessed be further broken down based on lot
characteristics to determine the property owners that have indirect benefit and the property
owners that have direct benefit. This is consistent with existing policy and gives flexibility
to address unique situations
Finally, our recommendation is to change the assessment rate from a front foot basis to a
per lot basis. The reason for this change is that the majority of the lots in the City with
alleys are similar in size and area.
Commercial/ Industrial property- It is recommended that total cost assessed to property
owners be lowered to 50% of the total project cost.
Also, it is recommended that the differentiation between direct and indirect benefit be
extended to Commercial / Industrial properties. This gives flexibility to address unique
situations.
In regards to the manner of calculating specific property assessment rates, Commercial and
Industrial lot sizes and widths vary widely. Staff recommends that the rate calculation for
assessments be on a front foot basis.
Proposed Policy:
Residential Commercial/
Industrial
Proposed Policy Proposed Policy
Unimproved alley construction and
Improved alley rehabilitation
50% of cost
Per unit basis
Based on direct/
indirect benefit
50% of cost
Front foot basis
Based on direct/
indirect benefit
3. Sidewalks
There are 110 miles of existing sidewalks throughout the City. There are 11.2 miles of sidewalk
proposed for construction as a part of the Connect the Park! initiative by 2024. All sidewalk
segments proposed as a part of the Connect the Park! Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) are paid for
using general obligation bonds.
Staff has identified 3 miles of gaps. For purposes of discussion, a “gap” is considered a section of
sidewalk that is missing on a continuous street block. About half of these gaps are directly adjacent
to a sidewalk segment included in the Connect the Park! CIP. Staff is adding the construction of
sidewalk gaps adjacent to the Connect the Park! segments as a part of the annual construction
project.
As a result of the community visioning process completed in 2006, in 2008 the City developed the
Active Living, Sidewalks and Trail Plan after an extensive public process. The resulting system
plan and goals were adopted and included in the Comprehensive Plan in 2009. The pedestrian and
bicycle system plans were adopted and included in the Comprehensive Plan, and are shown on
Exhibits 1 & 2. The specific 10-year Connect the Park! CIP (Exhibit 3) was then developed to
construct some, but not all, of these facilities after additional neighborhood meetings and public
hearings. The 10-year Connect the Park! CIP does not include all of the segments shown on
Exhibits 1 & 2.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Existing Policy:
The City Assessment Policy for funding the construction of new sidewalks is as follows:
On collector roadways and thoroughfares, the cost of new sidewalk installation shall
be assessed at 50% of the cost and the remaining 50% of cost shall be financed by
general obligation bonds or other appropriate funds of the City.
On streets which are not collector roadways or thoroughfares, the cost of sidewalks
shall be assessed 100% of the construction costs of sidewalks abutting them.
Commercial, industrial, and multiple family properties shall be assessed 100% of the
construction costs of sidewalks abutting them.
Discussion:
Staff proposes that if we receive a request to add a segment of sidewalk, trail, or bikeway, we
would first check the segment against the Comprehensive Plan exhibits. If the segment is shown
in the Comprehensive Plan, we would recommend that the City Council add it to the Connect the
Park! CIP. As a part of the recommendation, staff would propose a year where it would fit in with
budget, workload, and other capital projects.
If the segment is not included in the Comprehensive Plan, staff would take a look at the analysis
diagram from the Active Living Sidewalks and Trail Plan. If it fit into one of the identified goals
and objectives from that plan, we would recommend that the City Council add it to the Connect
the Park! CIP. As a part of the recommendation, staff would propose a year where it would fit in
with budget, workload, and other capital projects.
If the sidewalk segment is not consistent with either the Comprehensive Plan or the Active Living
Sidewalks and Trail Plan staff recommends that it not be fully funded by the City. Instead, the
recommendation would be to consider it for construction with funding through special assessments
as follows:
Residential property- Staff recommends the assessments level be 50% of the project
costs for sidewalk construction.
Commercial, industrial, and multiple family properties- No change recommended.
City Code requires that all development and redevelopment projects construct sidewalks in the
right of way adjacent to the development. These sidewalks are constructed at the cost of the
property owner. While these costs are not assessed, to address any ambiguity regarding cost
responsibility, staff recommends that that we include this situation in the assessment policy.
Staff recommendation:
Residential Commercial/ Industrial/
Multi Family
New sidewalk construction
(segments that are not consistent with either
the Comprehensive Plan or the Active
Living Sidewalks and Trail Plan)
50% of cost
Front foot basis
100% of cost
Front foot basis
New sidewalk construction
(abutting development and redevelopment)
100% of cost
100% of cost
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
4. Streetlighting
The City is responsible for operation and maintenance of almost 1,300 streetlights. In addition to
these, Xcel Energy owns and operates 1,800 streetlights. These streetlights are scattered
throughout the City along City streets, County roads and alleys. Streetlighting operation and
maintenance is paid for using general fund dollars.
Our current Streetlight policy is that the City will pay for the installation of a new streetlight at the
following locations:
1. Intersections: i.e., where any two streets intersect.
2. Cul-de-sacs or other dead-end street locations.
3. Hills, curves, or other conditions which create vehicle or pedestrian safety hazards.
This normally occurs in a situation where a hill or curve blocks out visibility of a
street light in either direction.
4. Mid-block locations where the block is longer than a normal block. This usually
occurs in those blocks that are over 800 feet in length.
5. Areas where there has been a problem with vandalism or other crime. Information
is requested from the Police Department on the numbers of crime cases that are
reported in the area of the street light request (vandalism, burglary, etc.).
If staff receives a request for streetlighting that is not consistent with one of these 5, criteria the
cost of the streetlight installation would be assessed to the benefitting property owners.
Existing Policy:
The City Assessment Policy for streetlights is as follows:
A. The cost of installing new street lighting improvements on residential streets shall be
undertaken only by petition of 75% or more of benefiting property owners and shall be
assessed 100% against the benefiting properties on a unit basis. A unit being defined as the
equivalent of a zoning lot. If a standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the
project area, special assessments may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any
combination thereof.
B. The cost of replacing street lighting improvements for residential properties on collector
streets with existing street lighting in place will be financed with general revenues.
C. The cost of street lighting improvements along any collector street, where street lighting
is not currently in place, shall be assessed 50% of the cost. If a standard zoning
classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments may be
computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof. General revenues shall
be used to finance the remainder of the project cost.
D. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density areas (six or more units per
acre in R-3 Zoning Districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the R-3
Zone), business, or industrial areas with existing street lighting in place shall be taken out
of the General Fund.
E. The cost of street lighting improvements in high density residential areas (six or more
units per acre in R-3 Zoning districts or a zoning district having a greater intensity than the
R-3 Zone), business, or industrial areas without street lighting currently in place shall be
assessed 100% against the benefiting properties. Costs shall be assessed on the basis of
direct and indirect benefits.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 7
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Direct benefits shall be equal to 30% of the project costs. The direct benefit shall be
calculated by dividing 30% of the total project cost by the number of street lights in the
project. The unit cost resulting from this formula shall be assessed against properties
receiving a direct benefit from an adjoining street light. Direct costs shall be shared equally
by adjoining properties when the street light is located on the property line.
Indirect benefits shall be equal to 70% of the project cost. The indirect costs shall be
assessed against all properties in the project area on a front-foot basis.
Discussion
Staff recommends that if we receive a request to add streetlights along a street and the location is
not consistent with our policy, that the cost of installation should be assessed to benefitting
property owners.
To initiate the installation of a new streetlight, a petition of 70% or more of the benefitting property
owners would need to be submitted. The level of assessment would depend on the type of road on
which the new streetlight would be located. The basis for this breakdown is that streetlighting can
benefit the driving public. Collector/ arterial streets usually have higher traffic volumes and are
higher speed, so there could be a traffic benefit to having additional street lighting on these roads.
Collector / Arterial Street: Assess 50% against benefiting properties.
All other streets: Assess 100% against the benefiting properties.
If a standard zoning classification does not exist throughout the project area, special assessments
may be computed on a unit, area, or lineal basis or any combination thereof.
Staff recommendation:
Collector/ Arterial Street All other Streets
New Streetlight installation
Initiated by a 70% petition
Based on zoning classification
50% of cost 100% of cost
5. Unimproved Street Maintenance
The existing assessment policy has a provision to annually assess, to abutting property owners, the
total cost of maintenance of unimproved streets and alleys, including material, labor, equipment,
financing, supervision, and administrative overhead required for special assessment procedure and
performance of work.
To our knowledge, this has not been done in the past, and staff is concerned about demonstrating
benefit for this type of maintenance. As a result, staff recommends that this provision be removed
from the City’s assessment policy.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 8
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
History of Connect the Park!
As part of the “Vision St. Louis Park” initiative that began several years ago, one of the resulting
strategic directions identified by the Community and the City Council was “St. Louis Park is
committed to being a connected and engaged community.” One of the priorities of that directive
was a focus on developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails. As a result,
an extensive public process was engaged through the Active Living, Sidewalks and Trail Plan
which recommended an approach to developing citywide pedestrian and bicycling systems,
addressing trails, sidewalks, key crossings and prioritizing their importance. The plan suggested a
strategy for implementation, how existing areas of concern might be improved, and where new
walks and trails should be installed. In brief, the plan was developed with the following key
elements in mind:
Purpose - "To develop a comprehensive, city-wide system of trails and sidewalks that provides
local and regional connectivity, improves safety and accessibility, and enhances overall
community livability."
Goals and Objectives -
Develop an interconnected network of pedestrian and bicycle routes throughout the city
and linked to transit systems, providing options to automobile dependence.
establish a citywide grid-system of sidewalks every ¼-mile
establish a citywide grid-system of bicycle facilities every ½-mile
close gaps in neighborhoods’ existing sidewalk networks
Anticipate increases in the use of mass transit, including the possibility of a much improved
multi-modal system comprising buses, light rail, heavy commuter rail, local circulators,
etc.
Establish safe crossings of highways, arterial roads and rail corridors using innovative
strategies, improved traffic control systems, grade separations, etc.
Develop safe links to schools, commercial hubs, employment centers, institutions and
transit facilities.
Develop recreational pathways that link neighborhoods to parks and natural areas,
providing opportunities to improve the health and well-being of community residents and
workers.
Make connections to regional and recreational trails to link St. Louis Park to larger
metropolitan open space systems and destinations.
Provide safe and easily accessible routes for residents and workers in the community,
including children, seniors and the disabled.
Create a cohesive, well-designed system that includes a coordinated approach for signs
and orientation, standard designs for street crossings and additional "user-friendly"
amenities such as rest areas, information kiosks and upgraded landscaping.
Incorporate strategies for funding, maintenance and snow removal into the overall plan.
Develop a Capital Improvement Plan based on priorities, needs and available resources.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 9
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
The goals and objectives of the plan are more graphically illustrated as follows:
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 10
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 11
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Both the system plan and the set of general criteria for prioritizing the pedestrian and bike
improvements were generated through community input from the Citizen Advisory Committee,
Community Meetings, 205 online survey responses, and meetings with the Planning Commission,
Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and City Council. In addition, general support for
the goals was vetted through the subsequent Plan-By-Neighborhood process, Community Survey,
and Community Recreation Survey. Plan development and prioritization was also tied directly to
public health, safety and well-being. The system plan and goals were adopted into the
Comprehensive Plan in 2009.
The logic behind prioritization and plan implementation was also based on the following
objectives:
Focus on Key Destinations: segments that serve multiple community gathering centers in the
community (schools, parks, transit stops, commercial nodes) rated higher.
Focus on Transportation: routes that provide north-south connections through the
community, into adjacent communities, and to key transit stops rated higher.
Focus on Bicycling and Walking: the ultimate goal was to provide a quarter-mile “city” grid
of sidewalks and half-mile grid of bike routes. Improvements that fill gaps in the city
pedestrian and bicycle networks, improve safety at certain intersections, and provide
crossings (bridges or tunnels) of major railroad and highway barriers rated higher.
As part of the plan development by the Citizen Advisory Committee, specific sidewalk locations
including side of the street for construction, were driven and chosen by a variety of factors unique
to each particular area. These factors included access to specific destinations as listed above,
continuation of segments already in place and / or closing of gaps in the system, school bus
routes, and other input of the Committee members.
As previously stated, the system plan and goals were adopted and incorporated into the
Comprehensive Plan in 2009. The pedestrian and bicycle system plans as adopted and included
in the Comprehensive Plan are shown on the next two pages.
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 12
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Exhibit 1
Special Study Session Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 13
Title: Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) – Sidewalks, Streetlighting, Maintenance
Exhibit 2
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JANUARY 4, 2016
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:21 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), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources
Director (Ms. Deno), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms.
Batra).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes December 21, 2015
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Lindberg, 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 Spano, to approve
the EDA agenda as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
It was moved by Commissioner Lindberg, seconded by Commissioner Sanger, to approve
the EDA Disbursements.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Old Business - None
Economic Development Authority Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2016
7. New Business
7a. Electing 2016 Economic Development Authority Officers.
Commissioner Sanger nominated President Mavity as President and Commissioner Hallfin
as Vice President.
Commissioner Spano stated that he served as Treasurer in 2015; however, due to his
increase in duties as Mayor, he respectfully steps down from the position of Treasurer.
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve a
Motion to elect Anne Mavity as President, and Steve Hallfin as Vice-President to the
Economic Development Authority for the 2016 term.
The motion passed 7-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Hallfin, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to approve a
Motion to elect Gregg Lindberg as Treasurer to the Economic Development Authority for
the 2016 term.
The motion passed 7-0.
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:23 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Anne Mavity, President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution requesting the City Council to
call for a public hearing relative to the establishment of the Wayzata Blvd Tax Increment Financing
District within Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 (a redevelopment district).
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA wish to request that the City Council hold a public
hearing on March 7, 2016 to consider the establishment of a Redevelopment Tax Increment
Financing District to facilitate future redevelopment on 9920 & 9808 Wayzata Blvd?
SUMMARY: In early 2012, the City's Inspection Dept. declared the former Santorini restaurant
building located at 9920 Wayzata Blvd as Structurally Unsafe and ordered its repair or removal.
Later in the year, prior to the building’s demolition, the EDA adopted a resolution citing the
property as blighted and pre-qualified it for a potential Redevelopment TIF District should a
project that met the City's vision for the property emerge. The restaurant building was then
demolished in February 2013.
By law, the City has three years after the completion of demolition to create a TIF district on the
property. The period for creating a TIF district on the subject property will soon sunset. In order
for the EDA to preserve its ability to utilize tax increment to facilitate redevelopment on the subject
property, it would need to create a TIF district in short order. The first step would be to formally
call for a public hearing for the establishment of the proposed TIF district. The public hearing
would be scheduled for March 7th.
The primary difficulty of redeveloping the subject site is that it has poor structural soils and any
multi-story building will likely require excavation and exportation of the poor soils, importation
of clean fill, and pilings. These expenses will prove financially challenging to most projects and
likely result in a request for financial assistance. The need for the proposed Wayzata Blvd TIF
District was discussed at the January 11th Study Session where it received favorable support.
Authorizing the establishment of the TIF District would not, in itself, commit the EDA to providing
any financial assistance to a proposed project on the subject site. Procedurally, it would simply
create the funding vehicle to reimburse an eventual redeveloper for a portion of its qualified project
costs should the EDA agree to do so. Once established, the EDA would have approximately four
years to commit tax increment to a qualified project before the District must be decertified.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost to create the proposed TIF District
would be approximately $25,000 and would be paid by the Development Fund. Such costs could
be reimbursed by the eventual redeveloper of the site through a Redevelopment Contract.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
TIF Schedule
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 January 19, 2016 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST.
LOUIS PARK CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MODIFICATION OF
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WAYZATA BOULEVARD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”) as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the
“City”) established Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, inclusive, as amended (the “EDA Act”), in an effort to encourage
the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City, and transferred
the administration of the Project to the EDA; and
WHEREAS, the EDA is proposing a modification of the Redevelopment Plan for the Project
and the establishment of the Wayzata Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District within the
Project, pursuant to and in accordance with the EDA Act and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174
to 469.1794, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows:
1. The EDA hereby requests that the Council call for a public hearing on March 7, 2016 to
consider the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Project
and the proposed adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wayzata Boulevard
Tax Increment Financing District (collectively, the “Plans”) and cause notice of said public
hearing to be given as required by law.
2. The EDA directs the Executive Director to transmit copies of the Plans to the Planning
Commission of the City and requests the Planning Commission's written opinion indicating
whether the proposed Plans are in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, prior
to the date of the public hearing.
3. The Executive Director of the EDA is hereby directed to submit a copy of the Plans to the
Council for its approval.
4. The EDA directs the Executive Director to transmit the Plans to the County and the School
District in which the Wayzata Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District is located not later
than February 5, 2016.
5. Staff and consultants are authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to prepare the
Plans and related documents and to undertake other actions necessary to bring the Plans before
the Council.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority January 19, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President
Attest:
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WAYZATA BLVD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(a redevelopment district)
ASAP Project information (property identification numbers and legal
descriptions, detailed project description, maps, but/for statement, and
list of sources and uses of funds) for drafting necessary documentation
sent to Ehlers.
January 19, 2016 EDA requests that the City Council call for a public hearing.
January 19, 2016 City Council calls for a public hearing.
January 19, 2016 Ehlers confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued
on the property to be included in the TIF District.
N/A County receives TIF Plan for review for County Road impacts (at least 45
days prior to public hearing). *The County Board, by law, has 45 days to
review the TIF Plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by
the development. Because the City staff believes that the proposed tax
increment financing district may require county road improvements, the
TIF Plan will be forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior to the public
hearing.
January 26, 2016 Letter received by County Commissioner giving notice of a potential
redevelopment tax increment financing district (at least 30 days prior to
publication of public hearing notice). [Ehlers will fax and mail on or before
January 26, 2016]
February 5, 2016 Fiscal/economic implications received by School Board Clerk and County
Auditor (at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers will fax and mail
on or before February 5, 2016.]
February 15, 2016 Ehlers conducts internal review of the Plans.
February 17, 2016 Planning Commission reviews Plans to determine if they are in compliance
with City's comprehensive plan and adopts a resolution approving the
Plans.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS – PAGE 2
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 2
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WAYZATA BLVD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(a redevelopment district)
February 25, 2016 Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not
more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Ehlers will submit notice & map to
the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on or before February 18, 2016 at
sunlegals@ecm-inc.com]
March 7, 2016 EDA adopts a resolution approving the Plans.
March 7, 2016 City Council holds public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on the modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the
establishment of the Wayzata Blvd Tax Increment Financing District and
passes resolution approving the Plans. [Ehlers will email Council packet
information to the City on or before February 29, 2016]
March 8, 2016 City can issue building permits.
___________ Ehlers requests certification of the TIF District from the state and county.
An action under subdivision 1, paragraph (a), contesting the validity of a determination by an authority under section 469.175,
subdivision 3, must be commenced within the later of:
(1) 180 days after the municipality’s approval under section 469.175, subdivision 3; or
(2) 90 days after the request for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177, subdivision1.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Recognition of Donations
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the
following donations being accepted at the meeting and listed on the Consent Agenda:
From Amount For
Lola Sletten, Joe &
Arlyce Wiersma, Julie
Masonsmith and the
Church of St. Therese
Total of
$135
Program Supplies for Westwood Hills Nature Center
in memory of Ray Knighton, Bill Skewes and Gerrie
Nassen.
Jason Wallestad, Sonja
Sauders and Iris
Wallestad
$1000 Program supplies for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Jeffrey Raison and
Marilyn Reiter $250 Program supplies for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Discover St. Louis Park $2,200
Registration and travel expenses for Recreation
Superintendent Jason West to attend the 2016 National
Association of Sports Commission Symposium.
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
DECEMBER 21, 2015
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro Tem Lindberg called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Gregg Lindberg, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director
(Ms. Deno), Solid Waste Program Coordinator (Ms. Fisher), Economic Development Coordinator
(Mr. Hunt), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Operations and Recreation Director (Ms. Walsh),
Communications & Marketing Manager (Ms. Larson), Communications Specialist (Ms.
Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra).
Guests: Deb McMillian (Director of Government Affairs, TwinWest Chamber of Commerce)
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Meeting Minutes November 16, 2015
Councilmember Sanger requested a revision on page 9 in the paragraph which begins,
“Councilmember Mavity also asked if the neighborhood also supports sidewalks …” In the
response Councilmember Mavity received, there are some words missing. For clarity, the
sentence should also include “there are sidewalks currently on the 2900 block of Ottawa.”
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes November 23, 2015
Councilmember Mavity requested a revision to the top of Page 3, in the sentence that states
“Councilmember Mavity stated the City needs to ensure that sufficient support and
incentives are provided to the local businesses …” The word “other” needs to be added
before local businesses.
Councilmember Brausen requested a revision to Page 2, third paragraph, fourth line down.
The minutes should state “Councilmember Brausen stated that he might volunteer for the
FOTA Board …”
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
Councilmember Brausen requested a revision to that same paragraph, the third to last
sentence, which should instead state “[h]e explained that he wants to see the City’s support
of the arts through this organization grow as it’s work benefits the entire community.”
Councilmember Brausen requested a revision to Page 6, topic number 5, to the sentence
that states “Councilmember Brausen stated that both sides are equally supported and it’s a
safety issue.” It should instead read “both sides are equally vocal, but that he feels there’s
an overriding safety issue here.”
Councilmember Brausen requested a revision to that same paragraph, third to last line, the
word “preliminary” should be added before the word “support.”
Councilmember Brausen requested a revision to Page 7, the top line. The word
“preliminary” should be added before the word “consensus.”
The minutes were approved with changes.
3c. City Council Meeting Minutes December 7, 2015
Councilmember Spano requested a revision to the bottom of Page 7, second sentence. The
sentence should read “which is once every 11 weeks.”
Councilmember Spano requested a revision to the same paragraph, last sentence. The
sentence should instead state that “the design was deficient,” not “structurally deficient.”
Councilmember Brausen requested two revisions to Page 7, the paragraph that starts with
“Councilmember Brausen.” The second sentence should read “He noted he lives in Ward
4, has travelled through the area hundreds of time, including today, and fully understands
the competing interests here for access, safety, traffic, and noise.” In addition, before the
sentence which starts “[h]e explained it’s a difficult problem to balance” the end of that
sentence should include “and he apologized for that in advance to those unhappy
residents.”
The minutes were approved with changes.
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.
4a. Moved to 8f.
4b. Moved to 8g.
4c. Approve authorization for the City Manager to enter into fiber strand and/or conduit
lease agreements with other organizations for purposes of promoting economic
development in
the City of St. Louis Park.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 15-198 authorizing fund equity and operating transfers.
4e. Approve the second reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2484-15 amending St. Louis
Park City Code Chapter 3, Section 57 to provide for microdistillery cocktail room
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
licenses and microdistillery off-sale licenses and to approve the summary ordinance for
publication.
4f. Approve entering into a service agreement with the Hennepin County Department of
Corrections for continuing to use their crews from the Sentencing to Service Program
(STS Program)
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 15-199 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
sewer service line at 4140 Utica Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. - P.I.D. 07-028-24-
32-0010.
4h. Approve for filing Telecommunication Commission Minutes August 12, 2015.
4i. Approve for filing Telecommunication Commission Minutes September 23, 2015.
4j. Approve for filing Environment & Sustainability Commission Minutes November 4,
2015.
Councilmember Brausen requested that Consent Calendar item 4a and 4b be removed and
placed on the Regular Agenda to 8f and 8g, respectively.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended to move Consent
Calendar item 4a to the Regular Agenda as item 8f and Consent Calendar item 4b to the
Regular Agenda as item 8g; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
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. 2016 Budget, Final City and HRA Property Tax Levies, and 2016-2025 Capital
Improvement Plan. Resolution Nos. 15-200, 15-201 and 15-202.
Mr. Swanson presented the staff report regarding the 2016 Budget, the Final City and HRA
Property Tax Levies, and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). He noted this topic has been
discussed by the Council since June to add and remove budget considerations as the
Council worked towards the property tax levy. At the Truth in Taxation public hearing,
the focus is typically on the General Fund; however, there are many other budgets that City
staff manages and prepares for Council approval.
Mr. Swanson stated the policy consideration is if the Council desires to set the 2016 Final
Property Tax Levy at $28,604,474, an increase of $1,619,097 or approximately 6% over
the 2015 Final Tax Levy. This increase has been discussed throughout the year and was
also reviewed at the public hearing held on December 7, 2015. For a median valued
residential home, this results in an approximate increase of $16.47 for the City portion of
the property taxes.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
Mr. Swanson stated the next policy consideration is if the Council desires to levy the
maximum 2016 HRA Levy allowed, $1,011,208, which is an increase of $57,970 or
approximately 6.08% over the 2015 Final HRA Levy. He explained this levy was
originally implemented in 2001 and has been used to fund the City’s infrastructure
improvements in redevelopment areas. Presently, the levy is committed to funding
Highway 7 and Louisiana until 2021 based on the current Long Range Financial
Management Plan.
Mr. Swanson explained the final policy consideration is if the Council desires to approve
the 2016-2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). He stated the City Council reviewed the
CIP at study sessions throughout the 2016 budget process. He explained the CIP considers
the capital needs in the community for the next ten years. He noted that only those projects
included in the CIP for 2016 are authorized during the next year. Years 2017 – 2025 are
for planning purposes only and do not represent a commitment to construct or purchase
any specific assets until authorized by the City Council. He added any projects estimated
to cost more than $100,000 will be formally bid and brought back for acceptance by the
City Council.
It was moved by Councilmember Spano, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-200, approving the 2016 Budgets and 2016 Final Property Tax Levy;
Resolution No. 15-201, approving the authorization of the 2016 Final HRA Levy; and
Resolution No. 15-202, approving the 2016 - 2025 Capital Improvement Program.
Councilmember Spano stated there have been many discussions on this topic and directed
everyone to the City’s website for more detailed budget information.
Councilmember Brausen stated the final budget is the result of hundreds of hours of work
on the part of City staff. He explained that the Council takes this responsibility very
seriously and encouraged community members to contact Council or staff directly with
questions on the budget.
Councilmember Sanger stated it may look like the Council is voting without discussing
these topics, but that is not accurate because there was a public hearing held on
December 7, 2015, where the details of the 2016 budget were presented and community
members had a chance to speak and ask questions about it. In addition to the City’s
website, she directed community members to the video recording of the meeting from two
weeks ago that anyone can access to learn the details.
Councilmember Hallfin stated that the presentation during the hearing two weeks ago
included the details of the budget and levies. Councilmember Mavity stated that she hopes
the fact that not many people were in attendance at the meeting is a sign of confidence from
the community that the Council is maintaining a high level of service at an affordable price.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindberg stated it is important that the Council provide a high level of
service at a good price. He explained that the Council is doing a good job at balancing that
need as evidenced by the process that was started in June. He noted that the Council has
reduced the original levy amount that was proposed.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
8b. Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance (Second Reading). Ordinance No. 2485-15.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
Ms. Fisher presented the staff report regarding the Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance. She
explained the ordinance was developed over the past year with input from both industry
and business and stakeholders, most recently at the October 12, 2015 listening session and
the December 7, 2015 public hearing. The ordinance would increase traditional recycling
and organics recycling by requiring licensed food establishments to use zero waste
packaging. Ms. Fisher stated the effective date of the ordinance would be January 1, 2017,
which would allow time for education and outreach to affected businesses.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2485-15, for Zero Waste Packaging and to
authorize publication of an ordinance summary.
Deb McMillian, Twin West Chamber of Commerce, stated small businesses, which are
defined as less than 50 employees, make up approximately 82% of all local businesses.
She asked the City to consider the amendments outlined in the letter that was sent to City
Council and included in the packet. She explained that the cost of operating a business in
the City is now higher than surrounding cities due to the requirements of the ordinance.
She requested the City reinstate the economic hardship provision which would exempt a
business if the cost to abide by the ordinance is greater than a 10% increase. In addition,
she asked the Council to reconsider adding polystyrene to the list of recyclable products as
soon as it can be processed locally.
Councilmember Brausen stated he supports the resolution as written. He noted that the
business community continues to lobby the Council with concerns about the competitive
cost of complying with the proposed resolution. However, the suggestion to amend the
resolution to exempt any substitute product that exceeds 10% of the cost is not workable.
He noted that this ordinance is not about cheap and easy, but is about sustainable and
healthy. He stated the initiative was both healthy and good business practice and fits with
the new State requirement for businesses to recycle effective January 1, 2016. He
encouraged the community to embrace this ordinance and consider it a unique opportunity
to allow and encourage new ways to do business such as bringing your own food container
like you would bring a coffee cup to a coffee shop. He stated the community can all share
in the effort to act in a heathy and less wasteful manner.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
8c. 2016 Employee Compensation. Resolution No. 15-203.
Ms. Deno presented the staff report regarding the proposed 2016 employee compensation.
Staff is recommending the Council approve the recommended 2.5% standard adjustment
for all non-union employees. The pay range for the City Manager will also increase 2.5%
upon successful completion of the performance evaluation and in compliance with the
salary cap. Also, to approve continuance of the Volunteer Firefighter Benefit Program and
Paid-On-Call Bonus Program to increase by 2.5%. The funding for this is in the 2016
Budget.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-203, confirming a 2.5% general increase for non-union employees
effective 1/1/16; approving the City Manager’s salary for 2016, continuing participation
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
in the Volunteer Firefighter Benefit Program; and increasing performance program pay
by 2.5% for Paid-On-Call Firefighters for 2016.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
8d. 2016 International Association of Firefighters Local #993 Labor Agreement.
Resolution No. 15-204.
Ms. Deno presented the staff report regarding the 2016 contract with International
Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local #993. The City and the union participated in
active negotiations earlier this year. After lengthy discussions in negotiation, the Fire
Union requested a one-year, rather than two-year, contract proposal, and there was
agreement. The proposal is very basic and allows for a 2.5% wage increase; a health
insurance contribution that is the same as other employee groups; and folds in the Paid
Parenting Leave Program adopted mid-contract last period. She stated she is pleased with
the outcome and stated the discussions were very productive.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-204, approving a Labor Agreement between the City and the IAFF
Local #993, establishing terms and conditions of employment for one year, from 1/1/16 –
12/31/16.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
8e. 2016-2017 International Union of Operating Engineers Local #49
(Maintenance) Labor Agreement. Resolution No. 15-205.
Ms. Deno presented the staff report regarding the proposed two-year contract with
International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49. She explained that IUOE
Local #49 is the City’s maintenance group. She stated that negotiations were lengthy, with
difficult and productive discussions with agreement on this two-year contract. The
proposed contract includes a wage pattern of a 2.5% increase for 2016 and 2.75% increase
for 2017. In addition, the employer contribution is the same as other employee groups for
both years. She explained the contract also includes, effective 2016, some new certification
classifications for utilities’ employees, which would encourage these employees to receive
certifications as outlined in the staff report. The contract also contains adjustments to pager
pay lead worker and traffic assignments, and incorporates the Paid Parental Leave Program
as agreed midway through the last contract. Finally, the contract adds some minor
adjustments to the language on seasonal/temporary employees. She stated she is very
pleased with the cooperation and discussions of all parties involved.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-205, approving a Labor Agreement between the City and Local 49
Union, establishing terms and conditions of employment for two years, from 1/1/16–
12/31/17.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
8f. Amendment No. 1 to the 2015 Contract with Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. for
Consultant Services related to the Implementation of the Reilly Tar and
Chemical Corporation Remedial Action Plan.
and
8g. Amendment No. 2 to the 2015 contract with Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. for
Consultant Services related to the Implementation of the Reilly Tar &
Chemical Corporation Remedial Action Plan.
Councilmember Brausen explained he requested these items be removed from the consent
agenda to note to the community that the City is spending a significant amount on
consultant services related to ongoing testing and reporting regarding the Reilly Tar
Chemical Corporation Remedial Action Plan. He explained that this cost reflects testing
and monitoring of this site. Due to concerns on the safety of the area and water supply, he
wanted to assure the community that the City is actively addressing this to guarantee that
the City’s drinking water is safe and the ground water is healthy.
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, adopt
Amendment No. 1 to the 2015 Contract with Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. for Consultant
Services related to the Implementation of the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation
Remedial Action Plan; and to adopt Amendment No. 2 to the 2015 contract with Summit
Envirosolutions, Inc. for Consultant Services related to the Implementation of the Reilly
Tar & Chemical Corporation Remedial Action Plan..
Councilmember Mavity stated that the City responded to this issue decades ago and has
safeguards in place that have led to some of the most highly tested water in the State. She
stated that she has noticed some chatter online expressing concern, but this issue is not new
and the City has been proactive and ahead of the game in terms of addressing the problem.
She clarified the City is not responding because of a new problem that has arisen, but the
matter is continually addressed. She assured the community that the water is healthy and
some of the best water in the State. Mr. Harmening stated the City has been diligent and
working on this action plan for 30 years. He also explained that the City enters into a
contract with a consultant every year for technical assistance because the City doesn’t have
the resources internally to complete the required reporting to various agencies.
Councilmember Sanger noted the cost associated with these two contracts for technical
assistance to ensure water quality is over a half a million dollars, in addition to all of the
staff time dedicating to making sure our water is safe. She stated this is a large expense in
our budget, but is something the City supports to ensure the water is clean, potable, and
safe.
Councilmember Spano stated Mr. Harmening recently met with some residents regarding
this topic. One of the takeaways from the meeting was that the City has been dealing with
this issue for 30 years, but for people that just moved here, it’s a new issue. The Council
wants to make sure accurate information is given out and if any community members have
questions, the City will be happy to answer them. Mayor Pro Tem Lindberg stated his
agreement and that he is happy to answer any questions as the Ward 3 representative. He
directed community members looking for more information to visit the City’s website or
the websites for the Minnesota Department of Health or the EPA.
The motion passed 6-0. (Mayor Jeff Jacobs absent.)
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 8
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015
9. Communications
Councilmember Mavity noted the City has decided to participate with The League of
Minnesota Cities in looking at race equity issues to learn how the City can be more
responsive as a community on these issues.
Councilmember Mavity stated the Metropolitan Council is currently accepting applications
for a new committee they are forming called the Equity Advisory Committee. The
committee will be divided up by district and she encouraged the City’s residents to apply
before January 4, 2016, if interested. If interested, please visit MetroCouncil.org to get
more information about the committee and how to submit an application.
Councilmember Brausen stated that on behalf of the Council and City staff, he would like
to wish all residents a happy holidays and happy New Year.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Gregg Lindberg, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JANUARY 4, 2016
1. Call to Order
Councilmember 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. Mattick), Deputy City
Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow),
and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra).
1a. Elected Officials Oath of Office
Judge Allen Oleisky administered the oath of office to the newly elected officials, Mayor
Spano, Councilmember Hallfin and Councilmember Miller.
1b. Pledge of Allegiance
1c. Roll Call
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special City Council Meeting Minutes December 14, 2015
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the Special City Council Meeting Minutes of December 14, 2015, as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes December 14, 2015
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to
approve the Study Session Meeting Minutes of December 14, 2015, as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3c. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes December 21, 2015
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2015, as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
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.
4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of November 28, 2015 through
December 25, 2015.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 16-001 designating the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as the City’s
Official Newspaper for 2016.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 16-002 Declaring 2016 City Council Meeting Dates.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 16-003 appointing the following Councilmembers to the Office of
Mayor Pro Tem for the year 2016:
Councilmember Term of Appointment
Susan Sanger January – April 2016
Anne Mavity May – August 2016
Steve Hallfin September – December 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to
approve the Agenda as presented on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all
resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
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 - None
9. Communications
Councilmember Hallfin stated that it is a pleasure to see all those in attendance to witness tonight’s
formalities. He stated he is pleased and honored to serve the City.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2016
Councilmember Miller stated it is a pleasure and a privilege to serve on the Council and he
appreciates the opportunity. He explained that he is looking forward to serving the community for
the next four years.
Mayor Spano thanked former Mayor Jeff Jacobs for his service on the Council. He explained that
this is the first time in 16 years a new Mayor has been elected. Mayor Spano stated he was looking
back through the City Charter and was struck by the content in the Preamble. He read the Preamble
to the Council and audience, encouraged the Council to use the words of the Preamble to guide
their service, and stated he is looking forward to serving with the Council and the City in the
coming term.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate
Authority Membership.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to become a member of the Suburban
Rate Authority?
SUMMARY: A number of private utilities have their infrastructure located in the public right-
of- way. Problems with relocation of these utilities have caused delays for our City led
construction projects. In addition staff has been approached by cellular service providers
requesting that they be allowed to install micro cell towers within our right- of- way. The issues
of managing the right- of- way and the private users are not unique to the City of St. Louis Park.
In order to stay on top of trends and work on solutions to the challenges we have experienced with
private utility relocations, staff is recommending that the City become a member of the Suburban
Rate Authority (SRA).
By becoming a member of the Suburban Rate Authority (SRA), the City of St. Louis Park will
join forces with 29 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area suburban cities totaling over 900,000 in
population in 2014. The SRA is authorized to intervene in and otherwise address matters affecting
gas, electric and telephone services and rates charged to municipalities and their residents and
businesses. It is also authorized to address sanitary sewer matters or other utility services provided
by a governmental agency such as the Metropolitan Council. Related to that authority is SRA
involvement in utility right-of-way use, gas and electric franchises, and wireless cell phone tower
site regulation and lease agreements.
The collective voice and combined resources of Twin Cities suburban municipalities has allowed
the SRA to address utility issues most single cities would find challenging to take on.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The annual membership assessment is
$4250. This will be paid for out of the Engineering budget. This expenditure was planned for as
a part of the 2016 budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Second Amended & Restated Joint and Cooperative Agmt
Resolution
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The Suburban Rate Authority (SRA) is a joint powers organization consisting
of 29 Twin Cities Metropolitan Area suburban cities totaling over 900,000 in population in 2014.
The SRA is authorized to intervene in and otherwise address matters affecting gas, electric and
telephone services and rates charged to municipalities and their residents and businesses. It is also
authorized to address sanitary sewer matters or other utility services provided by a governmental
agency such as the Metropolitan Council. Related to that authority is SRA involvement in utility
right-of-way use, gas and electric franchises, and wireless cell phone tower site regulation and
lease agreements.
The SRA was organized in 1963, for the purpose of providing collective strength in negotiating
franchises with the Minneapolis Gas Company (later Minnegasco and now CenterPoint Energy),
which served the original SRA members. In 1974, the Legislature adopted the Public Utilities Act
to provide for state regulation of gas and electric utilities, except for cooperative electric
associations and municipal utilities. SRA assisted the state in defining the regulation and
intervened in the early gas and electric cases to provide leadership and direction in utility
regulation. Since that time, it has been active as a party in matters concerning gas, electric and
telephone rate regulation and in legislation concerning the Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
In recent years, the SRA has addressed numerous issues of importance to municipalities in utility
use of right-of-way and other public ground, as well as rates paid by suburban ratepayers, including
municipalities themselves. The SRA responds to these matters within PUC proceedings, city
ordinances, and agreements with utilities and occasionally in state legislation.
The annual membership dues for the organization is $425 per vote based on each 5,000 in
population and fraction thereof as provided in the Agreement. Since our population is 47,000, our
dues are $4,250.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
I. PARTIES
The parties to this Agreement are governmental units of the State of Minnesota. This
Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, as amended.
II. GENERAL PURPOSE
The general purpose of this Agreement is to establish and continue an organization to monitor
the operation and activities of public utilities in the metropolitan area; to conduct research and
investigation of the activities of such utilities; and to conduct such other activities authorized herein
as may be necessary to insure proper public utility right of way and public property use, equitable and
reasonable public utility rates and service levels for the citizens of the members of the organization
and for the members themselves.
III. NAME
The name of the organization is the SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY. The name may be
changed in accordance with Article XII.
IV. DEFINITIONS
Section 1. For purposes of this Agreement, the terms defined in this article have the meaning
given them.
Section 2. “Authority” means the joint and cooperative organization created by this
Agreement.
Section 3. “Board” or “Board of Directors” means the Board of Directors of the Authority
established by Article VI.
Section 4. “Council” means the governing body of a governmental unit.
Section 5. “Governmental unit” means a city or town in the metropolitan area.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Section 6. “Metropolitan area” means the metropolitan area defined and described by
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 473, as amended.
Section 7. “Member” means a governmental unit which has entered into and become a party
to this Agreement.
Section 8. “Public utility” or “utility” means an investor-owned utility supplying land-lined
or wireless telecommunication or data services to member residents or gas or electricity serving
customers within one or more governmental units; the term may include other utilities as provided in
Article XII. The term does not include municipally owned utilities; the term does include a
governmental agency supplying sanitary sewer or other utility services to governmental units in the
metropolitan area.
Section 9. “Statutory cities” means cities organized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 412.
V. MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Any governmental unit in the metropolitan area is eligible to be a member of the
Authority.
Section 2. A governmental unit desiring to become a member must execute a copy of this
Agreement and conform to the membership provisions of this Article V.
Section 3. A governmental unit wishing to become a member after the effective date of this
Agreement may be admitted only upon the favorable vote of two-thirds of the votes of the members
of the Board of Directors present and voting at any regular or special meeting. The Board may, in its
by-laws, impose conditions upon the admission of additional members.
Section 4. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish procedures for temporary membership for
governmental units for specified periods of time not exceeding one year with or without the payment
of contributions or with the payment of reduced contributions as determined under Article X. If such
memberships are authorized, the cumulative votes of all temporary members may not exceed 25% of
the total votes of the directors of permanent members.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Section 5. A change in the governmental boundaries, structure, classification or organization
of a governmental unit does not affect the eligibility of a unit to become or remain a member of the
Authority.
VI. GOVERNING BODY:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. The governing body of the Authority is its Board of Directors. Each member is
entitled to one director on the Board. Each director is entitled to one vote for each 5,000 of population
or fraction thereof, as determined by the most recent Metropolitan Council population estimates
available for a given year, of the governmental unit represented by the director; provided, however,
that each director must have at least one vote and no director may have more than 20 votes. Prior to
the April meeting of each year, the Board shall determine the population of each member in
accordance with this section and use said population to determine votes and assessments of the
member for the following year.
Section 2. A director is appointed by resolution of the council of the members for a term of
one calendar year. A director serves until a successor is appointed and qualifies. Directors serve
without compensation from the Authority, but nothing in this section is to be construed to prevent a
governmental unit from compensating its director for service on the Board if such compensation is
otherwise authorized by law.
Section 3. The Board, in its by-laws, may provide for the appointment of alternate directors
and prescribe the extent of their powers and duties.
Section 4. Vacancies in the office of director will exist for any of the reasons set forth in
Minnesota Statutes, Section 351.02, or upon a revocation of a director's appointment by a member
duly filed with the Authority. Vacancies are filled by appointment for the unexpired portion of the
term of director by the council of the member whose position on the Board is vacant.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Section 5. A majority of the votes of the Board of Directors constitutes a quorum, but a smaller
number may adjourn from time to time. The votes of temporary members authorized by Article V,
Section 4 are not to be considered in determining the presence or absence of a quorum of the Board.
VII. MEETINGS: ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Section 1. A governmental unit may enter into this Agreement by resolution of its council and
the duly authorized execution of a copy of this Agreement by its proper officers. Thereupon, the clerk
or other appropriate officer of the governmental unit must file an executed copy of the Agreement
and a certified copy of the authorizing resolution with the finance director of the City of Edina,
Minnesota. The resolution authorizing the execution of the Agreement must also designate the first
director for the governmental unit on the Board.
Section 2. This Agreement is effective on the date when executed agreements and authorizing
resolutions of the governmental units presently members of the existing Suburban Rate Authority
have been filed as provided in Section 1 of this Article.
Section 3. Within 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement, the mayor of the member
having the largest population must call the first meeting of the Board of Directors which must be held
no later than the date of the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting of the Authority.
Section 4. The first meeting of the Board will be the organizational meeting of the Authority.
At the organizational meeting, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the Board must select from
among the directors a chairman, a vice-chairman, and a secretary-treasurer.
Section 5. At the organizational meeting, or as soon thereafter as it may reasonably be done,
the Board must adopt by-laws governing its procedures, including the time, place, notice for and
frequency of its regular meetings, procedure for calling special meetings, and such other matters as
are required by this Agreement. The Board may amend the by-laws from time to time. The Board
must meet at least once each year and on such other dates as may be provided in its by-laws. The
annual meeting is held in the month of January unless otherwise provided in the by-laws.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 7
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
VIII. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. The powers and duties of the Board of Directors of the Authority are set forth in
this article.
Section 2. The Board may make such contracts and enter into such agreements as it deems
necessary to make effective any power granted to the Authority by this Agreement. It may contract
with any of its member governmental units or others to provide space, services or materials on behalf
of the Authority.
Section 3. The Board may provide for the prosecution, defense, or other participation in
actions or proceedings at law in which it may have an interest, and may employ counsel for that
purpose. It may employ such other persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its powers and duties.
Such employees may be on a full-time or part-time, or consulting basis as the Board determines, and
the Board may make any required employer contributions that local government units are authorized
or required to make by law.
Section 4. The Board may conduct such research and investigation and take such action as it
deems necessary, including participation and appearance in proceedings of state and federal
regulatory, legislative or administrative bodies, on any matter related to or affecting utility costs,
levels of service, rates or franchises, utility uses of the right of way and other public property and
advise members concerning such matters with a view toward obtaining utility compliance with
applicable law, including member ordinances and franchises granted to utilities and insuring
reasonable rates and service levels for the members and their residents. The Board may conduct the
activities authorized by this section on behalf of any governmental unit located outside the
metropolitan area at the request of such a unit, embodied in a resolution of its governing body;
provided however, that the conduct of such activities on behalf of any such governmental unit must
be specifically authorized by the Board and shall be subject to such reasonable conditions as to cost
of service and other matters as may be imposed by the Board.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 8
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Section 5. The Board may obtain from any utility and from any other source such information
relating to utility rates, costs and service levels as any of its members is entitled to obtain from such
utilities.
Section 6. The Board may accept voluntary contributions from its members or other sources
as provided in Article X. The Authority has no taxing power. It may accumulate reserve funds and
may invest and re-invest its funds not needed for current expenses in the manner and subject to the
limitations applicable by law to statutory cities. The Board may not incur obligations in excess of
funds available to the Authority.
Section 7. The Board must make a financial accounting and report to the members at least
once each year. The books and records of the Authority will be open and available for inspection by
members at all reasonable times.
Section 8. The Board may accept gifts, apply for and use grants of money or other property
from members or other governmental units or organizations, and may enter into agreements required
in connection therewith, and may hold, use, and dispose of such moneys or property in accordance
with the terms of the grant, gift or agreement relating thereto.
Section 9. The Board must establish the annual budget for the Authority as provided in Article
X.
Section 10. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish an executive committee and may delegate
duties and authority to the executive committee between Board meetings.
Section 11. The Board may purchase public liability insurance and such other security bonds
and insurance as it may deem necessary.
Section 12. The Board may, on behalf of the Authority or on behalf of a number of member
governmental units or nonmember governmental units, or both, enter into contracts, at the request of
such units, with public utilities within or without the state for the purchase and delivery of utility
products and services for those governmental units.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 9
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Section 13. The Board may exercise any other power necessary and convenient to the
implementation of the powers and duties given to it by this Agreement.
IX. OFFICERS
Section 1. The officers of the Board are a chair, a vice-chair, and a secretary-treasurer elected
by the Board for a term of one year and until their respective successors are elected and qualify, at the
annual meeting. New officers take office at the adjournment of the annual meeting at which they were
elected. An officer must be a duly qualified and appointed director. A director from a temporary
member may not be an officer.
Section 2. A vacancy in the office of chair, vice-chair, or secretary-treasurer occurs for any of
the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director occurs. Vacancies in these offices and filled
by the Board for the unexpired portion of the term.
Section 3. The chair presides at meetings of the Board. The vice-chair acts as chairman in the
absence, disqualification or disability of the chairman.
Section 4. The secretary-treasurer or its designee is responsible for keeping a record of the
proceedings of the Board, for custody of funds, for keeping of financial records of the Authority and
for such other duties as may be assigned to the Secretary-Treasurer by the Board. Persons may be
employed to perform such services under the supervision and direction of the secretary-treasurer as
may be authorized by the Board. The secretary-treasurer must post a fidelity bond or other insurance
against loss of Authority funds in the account specified by the Board. The cost of such bond or
insurance is to be paid by the Board. The Board may provide for compensation of the secretary-
treasurer for services to the Board.
X. FINANCIAL MATTERS
Section 1. The fiscal year of the Authority is the calendar year.
Section 2. Authority funds may be expended in accordance with the procedures established
by law for statutory cities. Orders, checks and drafts must be signed by the chairman and
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 10
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
countersigned by the secretary-treasurer or such other person as may be designated by the Board in
its by-laws. Other legal instruments must be executed on behalf of the Authority by the chairman and
the secretary-treasurer. Contracts must be let and purchases made in accordance with the procedures
established by law for statutory cities.
Section 3. The activities of the Authority may be financed by funds available to it under
Article VIII, from voluntary contributions from its members or from other sources, and by
contributions from members of the Authority if it is determined by the Board by a two-thirds vote, by
written action or at a regular or special meeting, of all votes of then existing members, that such
contributions are necessary. This determination must be made by the Board not later than August 1
of each year in order to obligate members to make contributions during the ensuing calendar year.
The total annual contribution by members for the ensuing year is established by the Board on the basis
of anticipated expenditures and only if the anticipated expenditures are in excess of the anticipated
funds otherwise available to the Authority. The contribution in any year by a member must be in
direct proportion to the number of votes to which the director representing the member on the Board
is entitled. Contributions must be made by the member to the Authority as follows: one-half on or
before April 1 of each year and one-half on or before September 1 of each year.
Section 4. An annual budget must be adopted by the Board at the regular meeting in July of
each year. If a quorum is not present at the regular meeting in July, the budget may be adopted by
unanimous vote of the executive committee. Copies of the budget must be mailed promptly to the
chief administrative officer of each member. The budget is deemed approved by the members except
one who, at any time prior to the annual meeting gives notice in writing to the secretary-treasurer that
it is withdrawing from the Authority.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 11
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
XI. DURATION AND DISSOLUTION
Section 1. The Authority will exist, and this Agreement is in effect, for an indefinite term until
dissolved in accordance with Section 3 of this article.
Section 2. A member may withdraw from the Authority by filing a written notice with the
secretary-treasurer by June 15 of any year giving notice of withdrawal at the end of that calendar year;
and membership shall continue until the effective date of the withdrawal. A notice of withdrawal may
be rescinded at any time by a member. If a member withdraws before dissolution of the Authority,
the member will have no claim on the assets of the Authority.
Section 3. The Authority must be dissolved whenever the withdrawal of a member reduces
total membership in the Authority to less than seven. The Authority may be dissolved at any time by
unanimous vote of all the members of the Board of Directors.
Section 4. In the event of dissolution, the Board must determine the measures necessary to
effect the dissolution and provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances
permit, subject to the provisions of this Agreement. Upon dissolution of the Authority all remaining
assets of the Authority, after payment of obligations, must be distributed among the then existing
members in proportion to the number of their votes on the Board and in accordance with procedures
established by the Board. The Authority will continue to exist after dissolution for the period, no
longer than six months, necessary to wind up its affairs but for no other purpose.
XII. TRANSITIONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
Section 1. The activities of the Authority are to be confined to matters related to utilities as
defined in article IV, section 8, provided however, that the Authority may extend and broaden its
activities to any other public utility as defined in this Agreement by a 75% majority vote of all the
votes of the Board of Directors, taken at a regular meeting of the Board. In the event the activities of
the Authority are so extended and broadened, the Authority and its Board of Directors have all of the
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 12
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
powers and duties with reference to any other public utility that they have with reference to article IV,
section 8 utilities under this Agreement.
Section 2. The name of the organization created by this Agreement may be changed when
deemed appropriate by the Board, but only upon a 75% majority vote of all the votes of the Board of
Directors taken at a regular meeting of the Board or by written action. If the name of the organization
is so changed, the Board must provide in its by-laws for necessary measures to effect the change in
official and unofficial documents, papers, and other essential respects.
Section 3. It is the intention of the parties to this Agreement that the organization created
hereby is the successor to the Suburban Rate Authority in existence on the day prior to the effective
date of this Agreement. It is further the intention of the parties that any funds made available to the
organization created by this Agreement from assets of the prior Suburban Rate Authority must be
used exclusively for the purposes of this Agreement. The adopted budget of the prior Suburban Rate
Authority remains in effect until revised and until the new annual budget is adopted. The adoption of
this Agreement does not affect or modify the obligation of members of the prior Suburban Rate
Authority to make contributions authorized by the prior Suburban Rate Authority.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental unit has caused this Agreement to
be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf.
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(Governmental unit)
Date: By:
Its Mayor
By:
Its Manager
Filed in the office of the finance director of the City of Edina this ____ day of ____________, 2016.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 13
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MEMBERSHIP IN THE SUBURBAN
RATE AUTHORITY, A JOINT POWERS ORGANIZATION UNDER
MINNESOTA STATUTES, § 471.59, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT AND
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND APPOINTING A DELEGATE AND
ALTERNATE, TO THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY BOARD.
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, §
471.59 to enter into joint and cooperative agreements with other governmental units;
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City and
its gas, electric and telecommunications ratepayers for the City to become a member of the
Suburban Rate Authority, a joint powers organization, consisting of 29 Twin Cities suburban
municipalities totaling over 900,000 in population that intervenes in utility matters before the
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, and monitors utility rates and other utility issues on behalf
of its members and their ratepayers;
WHEREAS, the Suburban Rate Authority has existed in present form since 1975 and has
a long history of successfully acting on behalf of Minneapolis/St. Paul suburban municipalities
and their ratepayers; and that, therefore, the City’s active participation in the Suburban Rate
Authority will help maintain that representation to protect the City in important utility matters
including utility rates and use of the right-of-way, and keep the City apprised of important issues
in utility regulation and matters affecting City residents and businesses who pay gas, electric and
telecommunications utility rates and receive utility services regulated by the Public Utilities
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized and directed to execute the attached
Second Amended and Restated Joint and Cooperative Agreement providing for membership of the
City in the Suburban Rate Authority, effective for 2016.
2. In accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, the Council hereby designates
Debra Heiser, as director to the SRA Board and Jack Sullivan as the alternate director to the Board.
3. The City Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this resolution and the executed
Second Amended and Restated Joint and Cooperative Agreement to the SRA Board.
4. The City is further authorized to pay the pro rata assessment for 2016 membership
in the SRA, payable during the first half of 2016, in the total annual assessment amount at $425
per vote based on each 5,000 in population and fraction thereof as provided in the Agreement.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4a) Page 14
Title: Resolution Authorizing Suburban Rate Authority Membership
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing execution of Hennepin
County Grant Agreement for Public Space Recycling Funds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to receive assistance from the County to
pay for additional recycling containers in the city’s parks?
SUMMARY: Each year the Hennepin County Board awards grant funds through their Public
Space Recycling Grant Program to selected eligible waste abatement projects. This year eight
projects, including St. Louis Park’s, were selected to improve recycling in parks, at recreation
centers, along business districts and in other public spaces. The goal of the County’s program is to
expand opportunities for the public to recycle while on the go.
St. Louis Park has been awarded $15,190 in incentive funds to purchase, install, and service 108
recycling containers in the city’s park system during the spring of 2016. Only 16 of the 60 sites
currently have recycling and the existing recycling-to-trash container ratio is 1:4. This project will
increase the recycling-to-trash bin ratio to 3:4. Increasing the number of parks with recycling in
St. Louis Park should significantly increase the amount of recyclables collected in public spaces
within the city. Operations & Recreation staff will begin planning cart placement, order carts, and
develop and implement pubic outreach in the upcoming months.
As part of Hennepin County’s Grant Program the City is required to provide a Council Resolution
(Attachment 1) authorizing the agreement. This resolution covers the Public Spaces Recycling
Grant Agreement (Attachment 2) terminating July 31, 2017. The terms of this agreement require
that all incentive funds be used solely for project expenses relating to waste reduction and recycling
as described in the grant application (Attachment 3).
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The funding from this grant program will be
used to help pay for expansion of the City’s park recycling program. The City will be providing
$4,600 in matching funds.
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: Resolution
Contract Agreement
Grant Application
Prepared by: Kala Fisher, Solid Waste Program Coordinator
Reviewed by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 16-___
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLIC SPACE RECYCLING
GRANT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park desires to reduce waste generated in its parks and
public spaces; and
WHEREAS, the County Board approved the Hennepin County Public Space Recycling
Grant program for the period 2015 to 2016 and authorized grant funding for public space recycling
programs consistent with said grant guidelines; and
WHEREAS, in order to receive grant funds, the City must sign the agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the City Council accepts the agreement as proposed.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the Mayor, City
Manager or his designee to execute such Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement with the
County.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Contract No: A154309
PUBLIC SPACE RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
This Agreement is between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, A-
2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 (“COUNTY”), on behalf of the
Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy, 701 South Fourth Street, Suite 700,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 (“DEPARTMENT”) and City of St Louis Park, 7305 Oxford Street,
St Louis Park, MN 55426 (“GRANTEE”).
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board has established a Public Space Recycling Grant
Program to provide funding (“Incentive Funds”) to selected eligible waste abatement projects; and
WHEREAS, the GRANTEE has made an application for a waste abatement project and has
been selected for funding of said described project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement
(application copies attached as Exhibit A);
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. TERM AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall commence upon execution and terminate July 31, 2017, unless
terminated earlier in accordance with the Default and Cancellation provisions of this
Agreement.
The total cost of this Agreement, including all reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed
Fifteen Thousand One Hundred Ninety Dollars ($15,190.00).
2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED
a. The GRANTEE will operate its public space recycling project (hereinafter the
“Project”), including the proposed Project budget, as described in the application
submitted by the GRANTEE and kept on file with the COUNTY (See Exhibit A).
b. In addition to the services referred to above, the GRANTEE agrees:
1. The GRANTEE shall submit to the DEPARTMENT an interim report by
October 30, 2016, and a final report by June 15, 2017. The reports should
include at a minimum:
Project summary;
Results achieved;
Amount of material collected, recycled, and disposed;
Obstacles/challenges encountered;
Recommendations;
Detailed budget expenditures; and
Cost/benefit analysis of the Project.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 3
The COUNTY shall have full ownership and control of all reports, which
includes the right of the COUNTY to use any data and information contained in
such project report in any manner the COUNTY determines, including but not
limited to case studies or public presentations.
2. All containers funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds shall prominently display,
on all accessible sides, weather-resistant labels that designate the container for
recycling. The labels shall include at a minimum:
The preferred COUNTY symbol for recycling;
Photo images of recyclable materials; and
The preferred COUNTY terms for recyclable materials.
All labels shall be approved by the DEPARTMENT prior to production. The
GRANTEE may request customized recycling container labels from the
DEPARTMENT at no additional expense to the GRANTEE.
3. All recycling containers funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds shall be co-
located with trash containers.
4. All Incentive Funds accepted from the COUNTY over the term of the
Agreement shall be used solely for Project expenses relating to waste reduction
and recycling, as described in the Project. The GRANTEE shall not retain any
Incentive Funds in excess of actual Project expenses and shall return any such
excess Incentive Funds to the COUNTY upon completion of the Project.
5. The GRANTEE may not charge its residents through property tax, utility fees,
special fees or any other method for that portion of the costs of the Project that is
funded by COUNTY Incentive Funds.
6. The GRANTEE shall establish a separate accounting mechanism, such as a
Project number, activity number, cost center, or fund that will separate Incentive
Fund revenues and expenditures from all other GRANTEE activities.
7. Incentive Fund Project activities, revenues, and expenditures are subject to audit
by the COUNTY to ensure compliance with the purpose of this grant. Any
Incentive Fund expenditures not approved shall be returned to the COUNTY.
c. All right, title and interest in all copyrightable material which the GRANTEE may
conceive or originate either individually or jointly with others, and which arises out of
the performance of this Agreement, are the property of the COUNTY. The GRANTEE
shall assign to the COUNTY all right, title, interest and copyrights of the copyrightable
material. The GRANTEE also agrees, upon request of the COUNTY, to execute all
papers and perform all other acts necessary to assist the COUNTY to obtain and register
copyrights on those materials. Where applicable, works for authorship created by the
GRANTEE for the COUNTY in performance of this Agreement shall be considered
“works made for hire” as defined in the U.S. Copyright Act.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 4
d. The GRANTEE hereby warrants that, when legally required, the GRANTEE shall
obtain the written consent of both the owner and licensor to reproduce, publish, and/or
use any material supplied to the COUNTY including but not limited to software,
hardware, documentation, and/or any other item. The GRANTEE further warrants that
any material or item delivered by the GRANTEE will not violate the United States
Copyright Law or any property right of another and agrees that the GRANTEE shall
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents,
volunteers, and employees, at the GRANTEE’s own expense against any alleged
infringement of any copyright or property right.
3. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
The COUNTY shall pay Incentive Funds to the GRANTEE in an amount not-to-exceed
Fifteen thousand one hundred ninety dollars ($15,190.00). The first Incentive Fund
payment of Eleven thousand three hundred ninety-two dollars ($11,392.00), 75% of the
total grant amount, shall be disbursed upon execution of the Agreement. The final Incentive
Fund payment of Three thousand seven hundred ninety-eight dollars ($3,798.00), 25% of
total grant amount, or remaining funds, shall be disbursed upon approval of the final Project
report.
4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
GRANTEE shall select the means, method, and manner of performing the services.
Nothing is intended or should be construed as creating or establishing the relationship of a
partnership or a joint venture between the parties or as constituting GRANTEE as the agent,
representative, or employee of the COUNTY for any purpose. GRANTEE is and shall
remain an independent contractor for all services performed under this Agreement.
GRANTEE shall secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services
under this Agreement. Any personnel of GRANTEE or other persons while engaged in the
performance of any work or services required by GRANTEE will have no contractual
relationship with the COUNTY and will not be considered employees of the COUNTY.
The COUNTY shall not be responsible for any claims that arise out of employment or
alleged employment under the Minnesota Unemployment Insurance Law or the Workers’
Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of any personnel, including, without
limitation, claims of discrimination against GRANTEE, its officers, agents, contractors, or
employees. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any
compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind from the COUNTY, including, without
limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, workers’
compensation, unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay, and retirement
benefits.
5. INDEMNIFICATION
GRANTEE shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers,
agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments,
damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting directly
or indirectly from any act or omission of GRANTEE, a subcontractor, anyone directly or
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 5
indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be
liable in the performance of the services required by this Agreement, and against all loss by
reason of the failure of GRANTEE to perform any obligation under this Agreement.
6. INSURANCE
A. GRANTEE shall at all times during the term of this Agreement have and keep in
force the following insurance coverages:
Limits
1. Commercial General Liability on an occurrence
basis with contractual liability coverage:
General Aggregate $2,000,000
Products—Completed Operations Aggregate 2,000,000
Personal and Advertising Injury
Each Occurrence—Combined Bodily
Injury and Property Damage
1,500,000
1,500,000
2. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability:
Workers’ Compensation Statutory
Employer’s Liability. Bodily injury by:
Accident—Each Accident
500,000
Disease—Policy Limit 500,000
Disease—Each Employee 500,000
B. An umbrella or excess policy over primary liability insurance coverages is an
acceptable method to provide the required insurance limits.
The above establishes minimum insurance requirements. It is the sole
responsibility of GRANTEE to determine the need for and to procure additional
insurance which may be needed in connection with this Agreement. Upon written
request, GRANTEE shall promptly submit copies of insurance policies to the
COUNTY.
GRANTEE shall not commence work until it has obtained required insurance and
filed with the COUNTY a properly executed Certificate of Insurance establishing
compliance.
C. Duty to Notify. GRANTEE shall promptly notify the COUNTY of any claim,
action, cause of action or litigation brought against GRANTEE, its employees,
officers, agents or subcontractors, which arises out of the provisions contained in
this Agreement.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 6
7. DATA PRACTICES
GRANTEE, its officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and subcontractors
shall abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 13 (MGDPA), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
and implementing regulations, if applicable, and all other applicable state and federal laws,
rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy or confidentiality. If GRANTEE
creates, collects, receives, stores, uses, maintains or disseminates data because it performs
functions of the COUNTY pursuant to this Agreement, then GRANTEE must comply with
the requirements of the MGDPA as if it were a government entity, and may be held liable
under the MGDPA for noncompliance. GRANTEE agrees to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the COUNTY, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers from any
claims resulting from GRANTEE’s officers’, agents’, owners’, partners’, employees’,
volunteers’, assignees’ or subcontractors’ unlawful disclosure and/or use of such protected
data, or other noncompliance with the requirements of this section. GRANTEE agrees to
promptly notify the COUNTY if it becomes aware of any potential claims, or facts giving
rise to such claims, under the MGDPA. The terms of this section shall survive the
cancellation or termination of this Agreement.
8. RECORDS – AVAILABILITY/ACCESS
Subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, Subd. 5, the
COUNTY, the State Auditor, or any of their authorized representatives, at any time
during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall
have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books,
documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and
procedures of GRANTEE and involve transactions relating to this Agreement.
GRANTEE shall maintain these materials and allow access during the period of this
Agreement and for six (6) years after its termination or cancellation.
9. SUCCESSORS, SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS
A. GRANTEE binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to
the COUNTY for all covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the
contract documents.
B. GRANTEE shall not assign, transfer or pledge this Agreement and/or the services to
be performed, whether in whole or in part, nor assign any monies due or to become
due to it without the prior written consent of the COUNTY. A consent to assign
shall be subject to such conditions and provisions as the COUNTY may deem
necessary, accomplished by execution of a form prepared by the COUNTY and
signed by GRANTEE, the assignee and the COUNTY. Permission to assign,
however, shall under no circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and
obligations under the Agreement.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 7
C. GRANTEE shall not subcontract this Agreement and/or the services to be
performed, whether in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the
COUNTY. Permission to subcontract, however, shall under no circumstances
relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations under the Agreement. Further,
GRANTEE shall be fully responsible for the acts, omissions, and failure of its
subcontractors in the performance of the specified contractual services, and of
person(s) directly or indirectly employed by subcontractors. Contracts between
GRANTEE and each subcontractor shall require that the subcontractor’s services be
performed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified. GRANTEE shall
make contracts between GRANTEE and subcontractors available upon request.
10. MERGER AND MODIFICATION
A. The entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and supersedes all
oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject
matter. All items that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and
made a part of this Agreement. If there is any conflict between the terms of this
Agreement and referenced or attached items, the terms of this Agreement shall
prevail.
B. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this
Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an
amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties.
11. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION
A. If GRANTEE fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails
to administer the work as to endanger the performance of the Agreement, it shall
be in default. Unless GRANTEE’s default is excused by the COUNTY, the
COUNTY may upon written notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its
entirety. Additionally, failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall
be just cause for the COUNTY to delay payment until GRANTEE’s compliance.
In the event of a decision to withhold payment, the COUNTY shall furnish prior
written notice to GRANTEE.
B. Upon cancellation or termination of this Agreement, the GRANTEE shall itemize
any and all Incentive Fund expenditures up to the date of cancellation or
termination and return any Incentive Funds not yet expended.
C. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, GRANTEE
shall remain liable to the COUNTY for damages sustained by the COUNTY by
virtue of any breach of this Agreement by GRANTEE. Upon notice to
GRANTEE of the claimed breach and the amount of the claimed damage, the
COUNTY may withhold any payments to GRANTEE for the purpose of set-off
until such time as the exact amount of damages due the COUNTY from
GRANTEE is determined. Following notice from the COUNTY of the claimed
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 8
(Public Space Recycling Grant – 2016) 7
breach and damage, GRANTEE and the COUNTY shall attempt to resolve the
dispute in good faith.
D. The above remedies shall be in addition to any other right or remedy available to
the COUNTY under this Agreement, law, statute, rule, and/or equity.
E. The COUNTY’s failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to
exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or
waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not
constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the
Agreement.
F. This Agreement may be canceled with or without cause by either party upon
thirty (30) day written notice.
G. COUNTY may upon written notice immediately cancel or terminate this
Agreement in the event funding for this Project is withdrawn, frozen or otherwise
made unavailable, in the sole discretion of the COUNTY. COUNTY is not
obligated to further fund the Project after notice and effective date of termination.
12. SURVIVAL OF PROVISIONS
Provisions that by their nature are intended to survive the term, cancellation or
termination of this Agreement include but are not limited to: SERVICES TO BE
PROVIDED (as to ownership of property); INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR;
INDEMNIFICATION; INSURANCE; DATA PRACTICES; RECORDS-
AVAILABILITY/ACCESS; DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION; PROMOTIONAL
LITERATURE; and MINNESOTA LAW GOVERNS.
13. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
In order to coordinate the services of GRANTEE with the activities of the Hennepin
County Department of Environmental Services so as to accomplish the purposes of this
Agreement, Dave McNary, Solid Waste Division Manager or successor (Contract
Administrator), shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY and serve as
liaison between the COUNTY and GRANTEE.
Kala Fisher, Solid Waste Program Coordinator, who can be contacted at 952-924-2183
and kfisher@stlouispark.org, shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the GRANTEE.
GRANTEE may replace such person but shall immediately give written notice to the
COUNTY of the name, phone number and email address of such substitute person and of
any other subsequent substitute person.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 9
(Public Space Recycling Grant – 2016) 8
14. COMPLIANCE AND NON-DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION
A. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local statutes,
regulations, rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted.
B. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable conditions of the specific referenced
grant.
C. GRANTEE certifies that it is not prohibited from doing business with either the
federal government or the State of Minnesota as a result of debarment or
suspension proceedings.
15. NOTICES
Any notice or demand which must be given or made by a party under this Agreement or
any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail.
Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator with a copy to the
originating Department at the address given in the opening paragraph of the Agreement.
Notice to GRANTEE shall be sent to the address stated in the opening paragraph of the
Agreement.
16. MEDIA OUTREACH
CONTRACTOR shall not use the term “Hennepin County”, or any derivative thereof in
CONTRACTOR’s advertising, external facing communication and/or marketing,
including but not limited to advertisements of any type or form, promotional
ads/literature, client lists and/or any other form of outreach, without the written approval
of the Hennepin County Public Affairs/Communications Department, or their designees.
17. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN
The Laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations
concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations
between the parties and their performance. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for
any litigation will be those courts located within the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the
appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this
Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be
affected.
THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 10
(Public Space Recycling Grant – 2016) 9
Contract No: A154309
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL
Reviewed by the County COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Attorney’s Office STATE OF MINNESOTA
By: By:
Assistant County Attorney David Hough, County Administrator
Date: Date:
By:
Assistant County Administrator - Public Works
Date:
Recommended for Approval
By:
__________
Department Director of Environmental Services
Date:
GRANTEE, (City of St Louis Park)
GRANTEE warrants that the person who executed
this Agreement is authorized to do so on behalf of
GRANTEE as required by applicable articles,
bylaws, resolutions or ordinances*.
By:
Printed Name:
Printed Title:
Date:
* GRANTEE shall submit applicable documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances) that confirms the
signatory’s delegation of authority. This documentation shall be submitted at the time GRANTEE returns the
Agreement to the COUNTY.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 11
2015 Public Place Recycling Grant Program
Application Form
Application Due – 5:00 PM, Monday, September 14, 2015
(Grant applications must be submitted on this form – All sections must be completed)
E-mail Copy to: carolyn.collopy@hennepin.us
Mail Signed Copy to: Carolyn Collopy
Hennepin County Dept. of Environment and Energy
701 Fourth Avenue South, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55415-1600
(612) 596-0993
Applicant Information:
Public Entity: City of St. Louis Park
Contact Person: Kala Fisher Title: Solid Waste Program Coordinator
Address: 7305 Oxford St.
City, State, Zip: St. Louis Park, MN 55426
Phone: 952-924-2183 E-Mail: kfisher@stlouispark.org
Project Title: St. Louis Park – Increasing Recycling Opportunities in City Parks
Grant Request: $15,190.00 Matching Funds: $4,600.00 Total Project Cost: $19,790.00
Authorizing Signature: The signature of a person who has the authority to enter into a contract
with Hennepin County on behalf of your organization (e.g., City Manager, Superintendent, etc.)
Name (Typed or Printed)
Signature: Cindy Walsh Title: Director of Operations & Recreation
1. Project Description:
Provide a brief, one page or less, project description. The project description should address:
project scope and design;
expected outcomes;
current relevant practices and what practices will be changed during the project;
key individuals participating in project activities, including any project collaborators;
overall project timeline; and
why project is compelling and worthy of funding.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 12
SCOPE: This project scope is to increase the number of recycling containers available at city parks,
increase the number of parks with recycling collection, and begin recycling collection at park buildings.
This project will increase the opportunities for recycling at St. Louis Park’s (SLP) city owned and
maintained parks and public spaces.
DESIGN: This project is designed to provide both of the aforementioned increases, using the same type
of single-stream recycling containers used in residential recycling collection within the city. The
consistency is important in leveraging recycling behavior already established at home, to increase the
likelihood of recycling away from home in public spaces. Replacing old collection barrels with carts also
allows for future expansion of the program to use a collection truck with a tipping mechanism to reduce
staff labor and safety concerns with the current lifting of bagged recyclables and to collection point. Carts
will be well labeled, with in-mold labels (IML) on the cart lids (SLP residential carts currently have IML on
lids) and stickers on the cart sides to include images of recyclables. SLP will work with the County to
create stickers for the carts.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES:
Increased diversion of waste from garbage collection to recycling through increased opportunities to
recycle.
4 Tons collected annually or 100% increase in annual recycling anticipated. Current is 1.9 Tons.
Increase opportunity to recycle by increasing recycling to garbage container ratio to 3:4. Current
is 1:4.
CURRENT PRACTICES / PRACTICES TO BE CHANGED:
Current recycling opportunities: recycling is available at 16 of 60 city parks and additional public
spaces on a seasonal basis, from May through October. The City has six park buildings which do not
have containers for recycling collection. The current recycling to garbage container ratio is 1:4.
Current collection method: recycling is collected in bags inside steel barrels; one seasonal staff person
runs a recycling route during the May 15 – October 15 collection season; the bags of recycling are pulled
by staff and carried to city owned collection truck, then delivered by collection truck to recycling roll-off for
consolidation. Recycling is placed in recycle roll-off and hauled by Randy’s Sanitation. Randy’s Sanitation
de-bags and sorts recyclables at their MRF.
Current recycling data: Consistently, approximately 5 % of our park user’s waste stream is being
recycled annually; with 99% of parks recycling content made up of plastic (bottles). From 2010 through
2014 the average tons recycled were 1.9 and range from 1.8 to 2 tons each year.
KEY INDIVIDUALS: Parks Superintendent and support staff/seasonal employees, Natural Resources
Coordinator, Public Works Services Manager, Solid Waste Program Coordinator, Solid Waste Field
Inspector, Communications Coordinator, Graphic Design Specialist.
OVERALL PROJECT TIMELINE:
October 2015 – Determine cart placement
October 2015 – Collect 2015 data
November 2015 – Order carts with in mold labels
March/April 2016 – Pre implementation education campaign
April/May 2016 – Roll out carts in parks
May - September 2016 – Post implementation/ongoing education campaign
October 2016 – Data comparison 2015/2016
October 2016 – Determine additional cart placement/staffing needs
WHY: This project expands recycling in public spaces in a community that is already
conditioned to recycling well at home. St. Louis Park is home to 52 parks and 8 additional
public spaces with garbage collection, including other city buildings and 24 miles of trails used
by community members and visitors. St. Louis Park strives to be a community that leads the
way in recycling and organics recycling, this project allows the city to continue to make that
vision a reality.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 13
2. Innovation and Early Adoption:
Describe how your project is new, unique, a new twist on a current practice, or an adoption of a
new practice that is not yet widespread.
With the recent (2013) change to single-stream recycling at residences in St. Louis Park, this
project comes at a good time to expand recycling in parks and use the already “recycling-
synonymous” single-stream carts in the City’s parks. Making these carts accessible to park
visitors will make recycling easy, convenient, and second-nature through the consistency
provided in cart collection. The project is forward-thinking in that replacing current barrel and
bag method will allow for faster, safer, and more efficient collection in future years when a cart-
tipper truck can be used by the Parks Division.
3. Proposed Project Tasks, Work Plan, and Timeline:
List/describe the main tasks that your organization will undertake and the estimated timeline
for each task in the following areas: (1) project planning and design, (2) project implementation,
(3) evaluation of project outcomes for environmental benefits and waste abatement, and (4)
project reporting.
Research/Planning/Design:
October 2015 – February 2016: Plan cart placement, order carts, develop
communications plan for public outreach.
March/April 2016: Pre-implementation public outreach campaign.
Implementation:
April/May 2016: Cart roll-out in selected parks and park buildings
May - September 2016 – Post implementation/ongoing education campaign
Evaluation:
October 2016 – Data received by Randy’s for 2016 collection
October 2016 – Determine additional cart placement/staffing needs for 2017
Mid-Project and Final Reporting
October/November 2016 – Final project report including tonnages for 2016 collection
and next steps.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 14
4. Project Budget:
Provide a detailed budget -- including expenses for staff, printing, copying, mailing,
equipment, materials, etc. If the project cost is more than $10,000, you must identify the nature
and source of matching funds. (See Guidelines for more information on eligible and ineligible
expenses).
Tasks/Items Costs
Purchase/delivery of 108 recycle carts w/ In Mold Labels on lids and stickers
on cart sides
6,700.00
Hire additional seasonal staff person dedicated to Recycling route in parks 8,000.00
Bags for collection in recycle carts –100 bags/case x 30 cases = 3,000 bags 490.00
Total Grant $ $15,190.00
Match Tasks/Items Costs
Grant program coordination/education/communication 80 hrs @ $30 $2,400.00
New program employee management 50 hrs @ $34 $1,700.00
Field work/coordination between Parks and Public Works 20 hrs @ $25 $500.00
Total Match $ $4,600.00
Total Project $ $19,790.00
5. Environmental Benefits:
Describe the environmental benefits of this project. Provide as many quantitative measures as
possible (examples: project will prevent disposal of 400 lbs of styrofoam a year, 25 tons of
organic material will be composted).
This project will prevent the disposal of 4,000 lbs of additional recyclables that are
currently thrown away, annually.
This project will increase the opportunity to recycle in St. Louis Park public spaces,
three-fold.
Clarify which objective is met by the proposed project. If your project meets multiple objectives,
be sure to emphasize all the objectives that will be met.
1. Recycling opportunities at parks and business districts – This project will increase recycling
opportunities to recycle in St. Louis Park public spaces.
2. Zero-waste events and event venues – While it is not the primary objective to increase zero-
waste events through this project, it will contribute to zero waste events by increasing the ability
to recycle.
Additional environmental benefits (energy conservation, water conservation, etc.) should also be
included; these benefits will be considered in the evaluation, if the project meets one of the
aforementioned outcomes.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 15
6. Measuring and Evaluating Results
Describe how you will measure and evaluate the success of your project. Please provide a
measurement strategy for each major project goal and outcome listed in Sections 1 and 3.
4 Tons collected annually or 100% increase in annual recycling anticipated. Current is
1.9 Tons.
o This goal will be measured by collecting tonnage data provided at the end of the
season (October) by the City’s hauler, Randy’s Sanitation. The data will be
compared to tonnages collected in previous years.
Increase opportunity to recycle by increasing recycling to garbage container ratio to 3:4.
Current is 1:4.
o This goal will be measured by taking current container inventory and comparing it
to container inventory after cart roll-out.
7. Sharing the Project
Describe how you will share the results of your project externally with other relevant entities, as
well as internally.
The results of this project will be shared with Hennepin County City Recycling Coordinators,
Association of Recycling Managers, applicable Parks associations, organized sports leagues,
Park and Recreation Commission. It will be shared with residents through a quarterly print
newsletter called the Park Perspective, social media, the City’s website, neighborhood
newsletters, and work with the Environment and Sustainability Commission. It will be shared
internally through the City Manager’s Digest and weekly department update meeting.
8. Sustaining the Project
Describe how your organization will sustain the project after it is completed without additional
funding from Hennepin County.
The Operations & Recreation Department has an ongoing garbage and recycling collection
infrastructure in place to continue to collect recyclables deposited in carts during future years.
The grant funds will allow for a first year of adding additional part-time season staff for collection
of recyclables. Once staffing needs are re-evaluated in October/November 2016, the
Department will budget for the appropriate staffing levels needed to sustain the parks recycling
program.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Hennepin County – Public Space Recycling Grant Agreement Page 16
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Monetary Donations to Westwood Hills Nature Center – Sletten, Wiersma,
Masonsmith and Church of St. Therese
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of
monetary donations from: Lola Sletten in the amount of $25, Joe and Arlyce Wiersma in the
amount of $15, Julie Masonsmith in the amount of $50 and The Church of St. Therese in the
amount of $50 for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept these gifts with
restrictions on their use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Lola Sletten graciously donated $25 to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Joe and Arlyce Wiersma graciously donated $15 to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Julie Masonsmith graciously donated $50 to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
The Church of St. Therese graciously donated $50 to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
The donations are given with restrictions to be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center for
program supplies in memory of Ray Knighton, Bill Skewes (two dontaions) and Gerrie Nassen
respectively.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The donations will be for program supplies
in memory of Ray Knighton, Bill Skewes and Gerrie Nassen.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Carrie Mandler, Secretary / Program Aide
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Accept Monetary Donations to Westwood Hills Nature Center
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM LOLA SLETTEN
IN THE AMOUNT OF $25 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE FOR
PROGRAM SUPPLIES IN MEMORY OF RAY KNIGHTON
AND
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM JOE AND
ARLYCE WIERSMA IN THE AMOUNT OF $15 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS
NATURE FOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES IN MEMORY OF BILL SKEWES
AND
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM JULIE
MASONSMITH IN THE AMOUNT OF $50 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS
NATURE FOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES IN MEMORY OF BILL SKEWES
AND
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM THE CHURCH
OF ST. THERESE IN THE AMOUNT OF $50 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS
NATURE FOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES IN MEMORY OF GERRIE NASSEN.
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Lola Sletten donated $25, Joe and Arlyce Wiersma donated $15, Julie
Masonsmith donated $50, The Church of St. Therese donated $50; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gifts are hereby accepted with thanks to Lola Sletten, Joe and Arlyce Wiersma,
Julie Masonsmith, and The Church of St. Therese with the understanding that they must be used
at Westwood Hills Nature Center for program supplies in memory of Ray Knighton, Bill Skewes
and Gerrie Nassen respectively.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Monetary Donation to Westwood Hills Nature Center – Wallestad, Sauders,
Raison and Reiter
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a
monetary donation from Jason Wallestad, Sonja Saunders and Iris Wallestad in the amount of
$1,000, and Jeffrey Raison and Marilyn Reiter in the amount of $250 for Westwood Hills Nature
Center.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept these gifts with
restrictions on their use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Jason Wallestad, Sonja Saunders and Iris Wallestad graciously donated $1,000 to Westwood
Hills Nature Center. The donation is given with the restriction that it be used for Westwood Hills
Nature Center program supplies.
Jeffrey Raison and Marilyn Reiter graciously donated $250 to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
The donation is given with the restriction that it be used for Westwood Hills Nature Center
program supplies.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These donations will be used at Westwood
Hills Nature Center for program supplies.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Carrie Mandler, Secretary / Program Aide
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Accept Monetary Donation to Westwood Hills Nature Center
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM JASON
WALLESTED, SONJA SAUNDERS AND IRIS WALLESTAD
IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE
CENTER FOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES
AND
APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION FROM JEFFREY RAISON AND
MARILYN REITER IN THE AMOUNT OF $250 TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS
NATURE CENTER FOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Jason Wallestad, Sonja Saunders and Iris Wallestad donated $1,000; and
Jeffrey Raison and Marilyn Reiter donated $250; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gifts are hereby accepted with thanks to Jason Wallestad, Sonja Saunders, Iris
Wallestad, Jeffrey Raison and Marilyn Reiter with the understanding that they must be used at
Westwood Hills Nature Center for program supplies.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation from Discover St. Louis Park
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a donation
from Discover St. Louis Park for registration, hotel, airfare and cab fare for Jason West, Recreation
Superintendent to attend the 2016 National Association of Sports Commission (“NASC”)
Symposium held April 3 – 7, 2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan in an approximate amount not to
exceed $2,200.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on
its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Discover St. Louis Park is graciously donating an estimated $2,200 for registration, hotel, airfare,
and cab fare expenses for Jason West, Recreation Superintendent, to attend the upcoming 2016
NASC Symposium held April 3 – 7, 2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Jason would attend this
event with staff from Discover St. Louis Park in an attempt to bring larger sporting events to St.
Louis Park.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used toward the
expenses incurred by Jason West’s attendance to the 2016 NASC Symposium held April 3 - 7,
2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Jason West, Recreation Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation from Discover St. Louis Park
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $2,200 FROM DISCOVER ST. LOUIS PARK
FOR EXPENSES FOR JASON WEST, RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT, TO
ATTEND THE 2016 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SPORTS COMMISSION
SYMPOSIUM APRIL 3 - 7, 2016 IN GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Discover St. Louis Park will provide the National Association of Sports
Commission Symposium registration, hotel, airfare, and cab fare in an approximate amount up to
$2,200 for Jason West, Recreation Superintendent, to attend the 2016 NASC Symposium held
April 3 - 7, 2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Discover St. Louis Park with the understanding
that it must be used for registration, airfare, hotel, and cab fare expenses incurred by Jason West
to attend the 2016 NASC Symposium held April 3 - 7, 2016 in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize the execution of a contract with Short Elliott
Hendrickson Inc, (SEH) for the Wooddale Avenue Traffic Engineering Analysis.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to explore engineering options to make
improvements to the Wooddale Avenue corridor under future development scenarios and the
construction of Southwest LRT?
SUMMARY: Staff has received an engineering proposal from SEH to help the City study options
to address the current and future design challenges with the Wooddale Avenue corridor from 36th
Street to north of Highway 7, including the sight line issues at the Highway 7 off ramps.
The need for this traffic engineering review is to help staff determine future mitigation measures
to address the challenges associated with the construction and operation of the Southwest Light
Rail line that is proposed to be constructed something between 2017 to 2019.
The anticipated addition of the light rail line has helped to foster redevelopment interest in the
greater Elmwood area. There are a number parcels owned by the City, County and under private
ownership that have the potential to be redeveloped in the coming years. This redevelopment will
add traffic pressures to the area.
Staff believes this study will help to anticipate the challenges and look for opportunities to develop
safe and efficient methods for managing the various current and future users of the area.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The consultant contract for the evaluation of
the Wooddale Avenue Traffic Engineering Review is not to exceed $100,000. The funding for
this contract will be paid using the Development Fund and the Engineering Dept. budgets.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Agreement for Professional Services
Exhibit “A” – SEH Work Proposal
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: SEH’s proposal is to evaluate future design configurations to provide the most
effective interchange to accommodate the anticipated redevelopment and light rail operations.
Future Design Considerations for Wooddale and Highway 7 – 2017 and beyond
Xenwood Avenue Extension
In 2014 the City began discussions with the Southwest LRT Project Office (SPO) regarding ways
to improve traffic operations near the Wooddale Station and to increase access to South Service
Road of Highway 7 east of Wooddale Avenue. The City owns the former McGarvey Coffee
building and the vacant EDA parcel in the southeast corner of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue
and is exploring redevelopment opportunities for these parcels.
Due to the proposed roadway changes anticipated with the addition of light rail and the
implementation of a whistle quiet zone along the freight rail through St. Louis Park, the access to
the South Service Road is anticipated to become right in / right out in 2017. This right in / right
out access has the potential to limit the scale of redevelopment on the McGarvey and EDA parcels.
Therefore the City and the SPO began looking for opportunities to find additional ways to access
the South Service Road. These parcels are bordered by Highway 7 on the north, Highway 100 on
the East, the freight and LRT to the south and Wooddale Avenue to the west. This leaves little
opportunity to increase access to these sites. At that time the most viable option was to consider
extending Xenwood Avenue from W. 35th Street to the South Service Road between the former
McGarvey Coffee site and the Cityscape apartments. The City entered in to a subordinate funding
agreement with the SPO and Metropolitan Council in early 2015 for the design of three bridges
(Freight, LRT and Regional Trail) necessary to facilitate a Xenwood Avenue roadway extension.
Over the course of 2013, Staff and SPO worked on preliminary design of the Xenwood Underpass
developing more detailed cost estimates and best location for the roadway extension. The updated
cost for this improvement is around 18.5 million dollars and the roadway extension reduces the
buildable area on the McGarvey parcel by about a quarter of acre. This high cost and reduction in
buildable area are serious issues for the viability of this locally requested capital investment. In
addition, the Xenwood Underpass does very little to help safety and traffic operations along
Wooddale Avenue and at the interchange with Highway 7.
On July 6, 2015 staff brought the Xenwood Extension concept design to Council during a special
study session to ask Council if staff should continue to proceed with design of the three bridges by
the SPO. Council indicated that the City should continue with the West Xenwood Extension
(Exhibit #3). However, they also indicated that the issues related to the sight lines and traffic
operations on the Wooddale Avenue/Highway 7 bridge also need to be addressed.
Modification to the interchange of Wooddale Avenue and Highway 7
In addition to the analysis completed to date on the Xenwood Extension, Staff has begun
investigating infrastructure improvements at Wooddale Avenue and Highway 7 that would utilize
a similar (or less costly) financial investment that could address a more community wide
transportation need along Wooddale Avenue.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study
In late October of 2015 the City convened a Design Workshop that was attended by SPO, MnDOT,
Hennepin County, City staff, the PLACE development team and our consultant SEH. The goal of
this workshop was to brainstorm ideas that would address the safety issues of the corridor, sight
line issues at the Highway 7 off ramps, allow additional development potential and manage the
traffic delays and accesses changes associated with the construction of the SWLRT.
From this workshop twelve concepts were created with input from the various disciplines including
traffic engineers, planners and geometric engineers.
Staff is proposing to evaluate in greater detail the four configurations that scored the highest with
the above stated goals. None of these concepts include a Xenwood Underpass. The additional
evaluation will be related to geometrics, traffic operations, impacts to access, available
redevelopment potential, phasing opportunities and estimated cost for each option. The desired
outcome from this evaluation is to find a cost effective solution that balances the multimodal nature
of this area with the high level of safety and livability.
It will be critical to get MnDOT, Metropolitan Council (SWLRT), freight rail and other local
stakeholder buy-in to the concepts if there is any ability to implement the selected alternative.
NEXT STEPS: SEH proposal would start after authorization in late January. The vast majority
of the traffic and development data has already been collected with the advancement of the
Southwest Light Rail. This allows SEH to quickly move in to additional geometric and traffic
geometric review leading to the schedule outlined below.
Late January to late March - evaluate the 4 alternatives and select a recommend
alternative to present to council
March to June – Discuss alternative with neighborhood area, business owner and
other stakeholders
June – Report back to Council and discuss next steps.
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement is made on the 19th day of January, 2016, between the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota (“City”), a Minnesota municipal corporation, whose business address is 5005 Minnetonka
Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416, and SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC.
(“Contractor”) whose business address is 431 First Avenue North, Suite 410 Minneapolis, MN 55401
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of consultants to provide a variety of
professional services for City projects. That policy requires that person, firms, or corporations
providing such services enter into written contracts with the City. The purpose of this contract is to
set forth terms and conditions for 2015 Design, Survey, Planning and Public Engagement Services
Scope and Budget for the Wooddale Avenue Traffic Engineering Review.
The City and Contractor agree as follows:
1. Scope of Services. The Contractor agrees to provide professional services as described in
Exhibit A, attached and made a part of this Agreement.
2. Time for Performance of Services. The Contractor agrees to perform the services provided
in Exhibit A, attached and made a part of this Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall
be from January 19, 2016 through December 31, 2016, the date of signature by the parties
notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the written mutual consent of the
parties for such additional period, as they deem appropriate, and upon the terms and
conditions as herein stated.
3. Compensation for Services. The City agrees to pay the Contractor for services as described
in Exhibit A. Compensation shall be in accordance with Exhibit A, attached and made a part
of this Agreement and shall not exceed $100,000 without prior written authorization by the
City.
4. Special Contractors. The Contractor may utilize Special Contractors when required by the
complex or specialized nature of the Project and when authorized in writing by the City.
5. Extra Services. The City will pay Contractor for extra services by the Contractor or Special
Contractors only when authorized in writing by the City.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 4
6. City Services Provided. The City agrees to provide the Contractor with the complete
information concerning the scope of the Project and to perform the following services:
A. Access to the Area: The City shall obtain access to and make all provisions for the
Contractor to enter upon public and private lands as required for the Contractor to
perform such work as surveys and inspections in the development of the Project.
B. Consideration of the Contractor’s Work: The City shall give thorough consideration
to all reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, and other documents presented by the
Contractor, and shall inform the Contractor of all decisions within a reasonable time so
as not to delay the work of the Contractor.
C. Standards: The City shall furnish the Contractor with a copy of any design and
construction standards they may require in the preparation of the report for the Project.
D. Owner’s Representative: A person shall be appointed to act as the City’s
representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. He or
she shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information,
interpret, and define the City’s policy and decisions, with respect to the materials,
equipment, elements, and systems pertinent to the work covered by this Agreement.
7. Method of Payment. The Contractor shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, itemized
bills for professional services performed under Sections 1-5 of this Agreement. Bills
submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City.
A. Progress Payment: For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Contractor shall
indicate the following for each employee: name; job title; the number of hours worked;
rate of pay; a computation of amounts due; and the total amount due for each project
task. Contractor shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with
Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if
permitted in Exhibit A, the Contractor shall provide such documentation as reasonably
required by the City.
B. Abandoned or Suspended Work: If any work performed by the Contractor is
abandoned or suspended in whole or in part by the City, the Contractor shall be paid
for any services performed on account of it prior to receipt of written notice from the
City of such abandonment or suspension, all as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto
and incorporated herein by reference.
C. Payments for the Contractor’s Reimbursable Costs. The Contractor shall be
reimbursed for the work of special contractors, as described in Section 4, and for other
items when authorized in writing by the City. This shall include items such as:
transportation of principals and employees on special trips to the Project or to other
locations, materials and supplies, and reproduction of reports.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 5
8. Accuracy of Work
The Contractor shall be responsible for the accuracy of the work and the utilization of all
determinant data, and shall promptly make necessary revisions or corrections resulting from
errors and omissions on the part of Contractor without additional compensation.
9. Authorized Agents
The City shall appoint an authorized agent for the purpose of administration of this agreement.
The Contractor is notified the authorized agent for the City is as follows:
Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
952/924-2656
jsullivan@stlouispark.org
The City is notified the authorized agent for the Contractor is as follows:
Thomas A. Sohrweide, Principle
Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
431 First Avenue North, Suite 410
Minneapolis, MN 55401
612/284-9409
www.sehinc.com
10. Audit Disclosure. The Contractor shall allow the City or its duly authorized agents
reasonable access to such of the Contractor’s books and records as are pertinent to all services
provided under this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or
assembled by, the Contractor under this Agreement which the client requests to be kept
confidential shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City’s
prior written approval. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings,
maps, models, photographs, and reports prepared by the Contractor shall become the property
of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Contractor may retain copies of such
documents as records of the services provided.
11. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven (7) days’ written
notice delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under this
provision if there is no fault of the Contractor, the Contractor shall be paid for services
rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however, the
City terminates the Agreement because the Contractor has failed to perform in accordance
with this Agreement, no further payment will be made to the Contractor, and the City may
retain another contractor to undertake or complete the work identified in Section 1 (Contractor
Services). If as a result, the City incurs total costs for the work (including payments to both
the present contractor and a future contractor) which exceed a maximum Agreement amount,
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 6
if any, specified under Section 3 (Compensation for Services), then the Contractor shall be
responsible for the difference between the cost actually incurred and the Agreement amount.
12. Subcontractor. The Contractor shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed
under this agreement nor assign this agreement without the prior written approval of the
authorized agent of the City. The Contractor shall ensure and require that any subcontractor
agrees to and complies with all of the terms of this agreement. Any subcontractor of
Contractor used to perform any portion of this agreement shall report to and bill Contractor
directly. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the breach, performance or
nonperformance of any subcontractor. The Contractor shall pay any subcontractor involved in
the performance of this Agreement within ten (10) days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment
by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Contractor fails
within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Contractor has
received payment by the City, the Contractor shall pay interest to the subcontractor on the
unpaid amount at the rate of 1-1/2 percent per month or any part of a month. The minimum
monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. For an
unpaid balance of less than $100, the Contractor shall pay the actual interest penalty due to the
subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from
the Contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney’s fees,
incurred in bringing the action.
13. Independent Contractor. At all times and for all purposes herein, the Contractor is an
independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be
construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City.
14. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this contract, the Contractor shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicants for employment because of race, color, creed,
religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability,
or age. The Contractor shall post in places available to employees and applicants for
employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause and stating
that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Contractor shall
incorporate the foregoing requirements of this section in all of its subcontracts for program
work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements
in all subcontracts for program work.
15. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein,
without the written consent of the other party.
16. Services Not Provided For: No claim for services furnished by the Contractor not
specifically provided for herein shall be honored by the City.
17. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is, for
any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall
not affect the remaining provisions of the Agreement.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 7
18. Entire Agreement. The entire Agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement
supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties
relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of
the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly
signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein.
19. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Contractor
shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations, including to the extent it is
applicable the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, pertaining to the provisions of
services to be provided. Any violation shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement
and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement.
20. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not
affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.
21. Indemnification. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, and
employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses,
including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission
(including without limitation professional errors or omissions) of the Contractor, its agents,
employees, or subcontractors in the performance of the services provided by this Agreement
and against all losses by reason of the failure of said Contractor fully to perform, in any
respect, all obligations under this Agreement.
22. Insurance
A. General Liability: During the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain a
general liability insurance policy with limits of at least $1,000,000 for each person,
and each occurrence, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall
name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement
and shall provide that the Contractor’s coverage shall be the primary coverage in the
event of a loss. The policy shall also insure the indemnification obligation contained
in Section No. 21. A certificate of insurance on the City’s approved form which
verifies the existence of this insurance coverage must be provided to the City before
work under this Agreement is begun.
B. Worker’s Compensation: The Contractor shall secure and maintain such insurance as
will protect Contractor from claims under the Worker’s Compensation Acts and from
claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the
performance of Contractor’s services under this Agreement.
C. Professional Liability Insurance: The Contractor agrees to provide to the City a
certificate evidencing that they have in effect, with an insurance company in good
standing and authorized to do business in Minnesota, a professional liability insurance
policy. Said policy shall insure payment of damage for legal liability arising out of the
performance of professional services for the City, in the insured’s capacity as the
Contractor, if such legal liability is caused by an error, omission, or negligent act of
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 8
the insured or any person or organization for whom the insured is legally liable. Said
policy shall provide an aggregate limit of $1,000,000.
23. Records Access. The Contractor shall provide the City access to any books, documents,
papers, and record which are directly pertinent to the specific contract, for the purpose of
making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions, for six years after final payments and
all other pending matters related to this contract are closed.
24. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports, models, computer files
and information generated in connection with performance of the agreement shall become the
property of the City. The City may use the information for it purposes. Such use by the City
shall not relieve any liability on the part of the Contractor.
25. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota.
26. Notices. Any notices given under this Agreement will be served personally or by mail at the
addresses stated herein.
This standard agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney.
EXECUTED as to the day and year first above written.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Reviewed for Engineering:
___________________________________ ______________________________________
Mayor Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
___________________________________
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON,
INC.
By____________________________________
Attest:
Its____________________________________
__________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk By ___________________________________
Its____________________________________
O:\Pubwks\Agreements\Agmt.Professional Services2014.doc
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 9
EXHIBIT A
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Scope: The Basic Services to be provided by SEH as set forth herein is provided subject to the
attached General Conditions of the Agreement for Professional Services (General Conditions)
dated October 21, 2010, which is incorporated by reference herein and subject to Exhibits
attached to this Agreement.
Task 1-Meetings, Coordination and Project Management
Task 1.1 - Prepare for and facilitate up to 6 meetings with City of St. Louis Park Staff. Include
preparation of agendas and meeting summaries with up to 3 SEH staff (December 2015 through
March 2016, 4 months).
Task 1.2 - Conduct bi-monthly update calls with City PM (30 minutes each).
Task 1.3 - Conduct internal team meetings to review analysis, concept refinements, and technical
deliverables and prepare for upcoming Client meetings. Meetings will be conducted as
conference calls whenever possible.
Task 1.4 - Meetings with MnDOT (2), the Place team (1), and SPO (1)-SEH will send up to 2
people.
Task 1.5 - Prepare for and attend up to two meetings with Council-Council Workshop or Council
Meeting - SEH will send up to 2 people.
Task 1.6 - Provide overall project management and work direction. Includes preparing monthly
invoicing and project updates. Deliverables-Meeting attendance, notifications, agendas and
summaries, invoices and project updates.
Deliverables- Meeting attendance, notifications, agendas and summaries, invoices and project updates.
Task 2- Traffic Analysis and Evaluation
Task 2.1 - Conduct safety and crash history analysis/tabulation of crashes along Wooddale
Avenue between West 35th Street and 36th Street (2011 to 2014).
Task 2.2 - Prepare PM turning movements for the current SPO Plan without a Xenwood
underpass and 4 design year build alternatives- including TMs for one SE quadrant land
use scenario (trip generation and assignment), Daily and TM traffic forecasts for VISSIM
model intersections; including Origin-Destination patterns . AM will be prepared for
Preferred Alternative only.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 10
Task 2.3 - Conduct VISSIM modeling for 2040 design year for the current SPO Plan
without a Xenwood underpass and 4 design alternatives during the PM peak hour with
one SE quadrant land use scenario. AM peak hour will be analyzed for the preferred
Alternative only.
Task 2.4 - Sensitivity Testing- Conduct VISSIM modeling for the 2040 design year for
the maximum development option that will operate acceptably (delays and queues) in
the SE quadrant with the SPO design without a Xenwood underpass (assumes up to two
volume iterations and one design).
Task 2.5 - Sensitivity Testing- Conduct VISSIM modeling for the 2040 design year for a
moderate development option for the SE quadrant with up to two design alternatives
(assumes one volume iteration and up to two design alternatives).
Task 2.6 - Conduct VISSIM modeling for the 2040 design year for one hybrid or refinement
design alternative.
Task 2.7 - Develop and populate screening matrix for evaluation of alternatives.
Task 2.8 - Review the SPO ICE Report for Wooddale Avenue/TH 7 ramp terminal
intersections, provide the City with comments and recommendation for signing off on the
document to install traffic signals at the ramps.
Deliverables- Crash Analysis, VISS/M Analysis, PM Turning Movements, Trip Generation/
Assignment for SE quadrant scenarios described above, Screening Matrix, AM Analysis and TMs
Preferred Alternative
Task 3- Preliminary Concept Design
Task 3.1 - Refine 4 Concept Alternatives including: Concepts 5, 6, 8 and 11. These
concepts assume existing configuration of the North TH 7 ramp with the exception of
Concept 6.
Task 3.2 - Prepare planning level/order of magnitude cost estimates of 4 design
alternatives including ROW based on currently defined MnDOT ROW or updated
MnDOT ROW as provided by MnDOT and City provided cost/SF per parcel.
3.3 - Develop up to one hybrid design alternative and cost estimate.
3.4 - Structural investigation of sight distance issues at existing Wooddale Interchange.
Document findings in Memo including conceptual details of solutions.
Deliverables- 4 Concept drawings and CAD files, Structural Investigation Memo, Cost Estimates
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 11
Task 4- Alternatives Analysis Report
Task 4.1 - Prepare Draft and Final Report documenting the concept evaluation, screening,
concept designs, cost estimates and Preferred Alternative .
Deliverables- Three copies of Draft and Final Report and PDF file
Schedule: It is anticipated Tasks 2 and 3 will be conducted primarily between January 1,
2016 and March 1, 2016, identifying a preferred alternative in late February and that all
services will be complete by April 30, 2016.
Payment: A retainer in the amount of $0.00 will be paid in advance of SEH starting work
and will be applied to the final invoice(s).
The fee is hourly estimated to be $100,000 including expenses and equipment.
The estimated fee is subject to a not-to-exceed amount of$100,000 including expenses and
equipment.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Approve Contract with SEH for Wooddale Corridor Study Page 12
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Memorandum of Understanding with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Erosion
Control Permitting Authority
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed on consolidating permitting authority for Construction
Stormwater Management.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to enter into the attached MOU with
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed for Erosion and Sediment Control Permitting?
SUMMARY: The Engineering Department developed the attached MOU with the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District (MCWD) to reduce redundant construction permitting requirements.
Currently, residents seeking building permits within the City need to obtain similar Erosion and
Sediment Control permits from both the City of St. Louis Park and the MCWD. This MOU will
expedite building permit issuance, especially for single family home construction and remodeling.
In order to obtain this MOU from the MCWD, the City of St. Louis Park has demonstrated that
the existing permit application, plan review, permit issuance, and inspection processes are
consistent with MCWD regulations and are already in place.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: There are no additional financial or
budgetary considerations for obtaining construction stormwater management permitting authority,
as these processes are already in place.
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: Memorandum of Understanding
Prepared by: Erick Francis, Water Resources Manager
Reviewed by: Phillip Elkin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager;
Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
MEMORANDUM of UNDERSTANDING
Between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
and the City of St. Louis Park
for Local Water Planning and Regulation
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made this ___th day of __________, 2016 by and
between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set
forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D (“MCWD”), and the City of St. Louis park, a body
corporate and politic and a statutory city in the State of Minnesota (“City”).
Recitals and Statement of Purpose
WHEREAS, in 2007, the MCWD revised its comprehensive watershed management plan under
Minnesota Statutes § 103B.231, which details the existing physical environment, land use and
development in the watershed, and establishes a plan to regulate water resource use and management
to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding, and otherwise achieve the goals of
Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D;
WHEREAS, the MCWD’s comprehensive watershed management plan incorporates the Rules
adopted by the MCWD to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding and
otherwise achieve the goals of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D;
WHEREAS, the City has developed a local water management plan under Minnesota Statutes
§ 103B.235 that describes the existing and proposed physical environment and land use within the City
and sets forth an implementation plan for bringing local water management into conformance with the
MCWD’s comprehensive watershed management plan;
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2009, the MCWD Board of Managers conditionally approved the
City’s local water management plan by adoption of Resolution 09-087, which resolution is attached to
and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, and the City satisfied the conditions therein;
WHEREAS, the City now wishes to assume sole permitting responsibility in the area of erosion
control, but to continue to authorize MCWD to exercise permitting authority with respect to all other
areas regulated by the MCWD;
WHEREAS, MCWD approval of a local plan requires a finding that the official controls of the local
government are at least as protective of water resources as the MCWD rules;
WHEREAS, the finding by the MCWD Board of Managers in this regard with respect to
permitting areas other than erosion control, rested on the City’s authorization of the MCWD’s continued
exercise of regulatory authority within the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 103B.211,
subdivision 1(a)(3);
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4g)
Title: MOU with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Erosion Control Permitting Authority Page 2
WHEREAS the MCWD Board of Managers finds that the City’s erosion control ordinance[s],
attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit B, are at least as protective of water resources as
MCWD’s Erosion Control Rule;
WHEREAS, the MCWD and City desire to memorialize their respective roles in implementing
water resource protection and management within the City;
NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties that they enter into this
MOU in order to document the understanding of the parties as to the roles and responsibilities of each
party.
1.0 Responsibilities of the City
1.1 The City may exercise all present and future authority it otherwise may possess to issue permits
for and regulate activities affecting water resources within the City.
1.2 The City is solely responsible for permitting for purposes of erosion control within the City. The
City will regulate these activities in accordance with the City’s approved local water management plan
and the terms of this MOU.
1.3 The City will not issue a variance from an above-referenced ordinance until the MCWD has
approved the variance and proposed conditions. On receipt of a property owner’s or agent’s request for
a variance from the above-reference ordinance(s), the City promptly will transmit a copy of the variance
request and supporting documentation to the MCWD for review.
1.4 The City will maintain a log of permits it grants pursuant to this MOU, will provide the log to the
MCWD annually and will meet at least annually with the MCWD to review the implementation of the
City’s local water management plan and erosion control ordinance[s].
2.0 Responsibilities of the MCWD
2.1 The MCWD will continue to apply and enforce its Rules, as they may be amended from time to
time, within the City except for erosion control, which will not apply within the City.
2.2 The MCWD will review and issue a decision on any variance request transmitted to it by the City
in accordance with paragraph 1.3 herein within 45 days of receipt.
2.3 The MCWD will meet with the City at least annually to review the implementation of the City’s
local water management plan and erosion control ordinance[s].
2.4 The MCWD retains the right to enforce any and all of its rules in the event that the City is unable
or unwilling to carry out its obligations listed in Section 1.0 of this MOU.
2.5 The MCWD retains all authority that it may possess under Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B
and 103D or any other provision of law, except as explicitly reposed in the City under this MOU,
including but not limited to authority set forth at Minnesota Statutes § 103B.211, subd. 1(a); 103D.335
and 103D.341.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4g)
Title: MOU with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Erosion Control Permitting Authority Page 3
3.0 Amendment
This MOU may be amended only by a writing signed by both of the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
By _______________________ Date: ________ By ________________________ Date: ________
Mayor President, Board of Managers
By _______________________ Date: ________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION
By _________________________ By ___________________________
Its Attorney Its Attorney
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4g)
Title: MOU with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Erosion Control Permitting Authority Page 4
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution calling for a public hearing relative
to the establishment of the Wayzata Blvd Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment
Project Area No. 1 (a redevelopment district).
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish hold a public hearing on March 7,
2016 to consider the establishment of a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District to
facilitate future redevelopment at 9920 & 9808 Wayzata Blvd?
SUMMARY: In early 2012, the City's Inspection Dept. declared the former Santorini restaurant
building located at 9920 Wayzata Blvd as Structurally Unsafe and ordered its repair or removal.
Later in the year, prior to the building’s demolition, the EDA adopted a resolution citing the
property as blighted and pre-qualified it for a potential Redevelopment TIF District should a
project that met the City's vision for the property emerge. The restaurant building was then
demolished in February 2013.
By law, the City has three years after the completion of demolition to create a TIF district on the
property. The period for creating a TIF district on the subject property will soon sunset. In order
for the EDA to preserve its ability to utilize tax increment to facilitate redevelopment on the subject
property, it would need to create a TIF district in short order. The first step would be to formally
call for a public hearing for the establishment of the proposed TIF district. The public hearing
would be scheduled for March 7th.
The primary difficulty of redeveloping the subject site is that it has poor structural soils and any
multi-story building will likely require excavation and exportation of the poor soils, importation
of clean fill, and pilings. These expenses will prove financially challenging to most projects and
likely result in a request for financial assistance. The need for the proposed Wayzata Blvd TIF
District was discussed at the January 11th Study Session where it received favorable support.
Authorizing the establishment of the TIF District would not, in itself, commit the EDA to providing
any financial assistance to a proposed project on the subject site. Procedurally, it would simply
create the funding vehicle to reimburse an eventual redeveloper for a portion of its qualified project
costs should the EDA agree to do so. Once established, the EDA would have approximately four
years to commit tax increment to a qualified project before the District must be decertified.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost to create the proposed TIF District
would be approximately $25,000 and would be paid by the Development Fund. Such costs could
be reimbursed by the eventual redeveloper of the site through a Redevelopment Contract.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
TIF Schedule
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 January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE
CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A
MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE PROPOSED
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE WAYZATA BOULEVARD TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND THE ADOPTION
OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") for the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Public Hearing. This Council shall meet on March 7, 2016, at approximately
7:30 P.M., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, the proposed establishment of the Wayzata
Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District, and the proposed adoption of a Tax Increment
Financing Plan therefor, all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.090 to 469.1082, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to
encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and
Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing, Filing of Plans. City staff is authorized and directed
to work with Ehlers to prepare a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment
Project No. 1 and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Wayzata Boulevard Tax Increment
Financing District (collectively, the “Plans”) and to forward documents to the appropriate taxing
jurisdictions including Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 270. The Economic
Development Coordinator is authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with
an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at least once in the official newspaper of
the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days prior to March 7, 2016, and to place a copy of
the Plans on file in the Economic Development Coordinator's office at City Hall and to make such
copy available for inspection by the public.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, Clerk
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WAYZATA BLVD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(a redevelopment district)
ASAP Project information (property identification numbers and legal
descriptions, detailed project description, maps, but/for statement, and
list of sources and uses of funds) for drafting necessary documentation
sent to Ehlers.
January 19, 2016 EDA requests that the City Council call for a public hearing.
January 19, 2016 City Council calls for a public hearing.
January 19, 2016 Ehlers confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued
on the property to be included in the TIF District.
N/A County receives TIF Plan for review for County Road impacts (at least 45
days prior to public hearing). *The County Board, by law, has 45 days to
review the TIF Plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by
the development. Because the City staff believes that the proposed tax
increment financing district may require county road improvements, the
TIF Plan will be forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior to the public
hearing.
January 26, 2016 Letter received by County Commissioner giving notice of a potential
redevelopment tax increment financing district (at least 30 days prior to
publication of public hearing notice). [Ehlers will fax and mail on or before
January 26, 2016]
February 5, 2016 Fiscal/economic implications received by School Board Clerk and County
Auditor (at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers will fax and mail
on or before February 5, 2016.]
February 15, 2016 Ehlers conducts internal review of the Plans.
February 17, 2016 Planning Commission reviews Plans to determine if they are in compliance
with City's comprehensive plan and adopts a resolution approving the
Plans.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4h) Page 4
Title: Call for Public Hearing to Consider Establishment of the Wayzata Blvd TIF District
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS – PAGE 2
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
FOR THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 2
AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WAYZATA BLVD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(a redevelopment district)
February 25, 2016 Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not
more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Ehlers will submit notice & map to
the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on or before February 18, 2016 at
sunlegals@ecm-inc.com]
March 7, 2016 EDA adopts a resolution approving the Plans.
March 7, 2016 City Council holds public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on the modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the
establishment of the Wayzata Blvd Tax Increment Financing District and
passes resolution approving the Plans. [Ehlers will email Council packet
information to the City on or before February 29, 2016]
March 8, 2016 City can issue building permits.
___________ Ehlers requests certification of the TIF District from the state and county.
An action under subdivision 1, paragraph (a), contesting the validity of a determination by an authority under section 469.175,
subdivision 3, must be commenced within the later of:
(1) 180 days after the municipality’s approval under section 469.175, subdivision 3; or
(2) 90 days after the request for certification of the district is filed with the county auditor under section 469.177, subdivision1.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
October 21, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson,
Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Greg Hunt, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of September 16, 2015
Commissioner Tatalovich moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Peilen
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. (Commissioner Robertson
arrived at 6:05 p.m. Commissioner Johnston-Madison arrived at 6:14 p.m.)
3. Other Business
A. Consideration of Resolution – 4900 Excelsior TIF District Conformance with
Comprehensive Plan
Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Peilen asked if TIF would have been applied for if there had not been
extraordinary land costs.
Mr. Hunt said the developer wouldn’t have applied for TIF if there had not been such an
extraordinary amount of site preparation cost.
Commissioner Carper asked if the PUD had received approval from the City Council.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, responded that preliminary plat and
preliminary PUD have been approved by the City Council. Final plat and final PUD
requests are tentatively scheduled for City Council on November 2.
Commissioner Peilen recommended approval of Resolution No. 87 finding the Tax
Increment Financing Plans for the proposed 4900 Excelsior Tax Increment Financing
District to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of St. Louis Park.
Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
4. Hearings
A. Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezoning for Proposed Daycare
Location: 2460 Highway 100
Applicant: Alise McGregor
Case No.: 15-43-CP and 15-44-Z
Chair Person stated the application has been withdrawn by the applicant.
B. Westside Center – Preliminary and Final Plat;
Conditional Use Permit to Import Fill
Location: 5320 W. 23rd St.
Applicant: COB, LLC c/o Hillcrest Development, LLLP
Case Nos.: 15-40-CUP and 15-41-S
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Carper noted the square footage of the area is about 50,000 sq. ft. and that
the new pond area is just short of 30,000 sq. ft. surface area. He also noted the plan
indicates 2,485 cubic yards of fill and 2,498 cubic yards of flood storage capacity. He
asked if the City had estimates of volumes of flooding in the past, such as a 10-year or
100-year event.
Mr. Walther indicated the modeling done for the City considered a 100-year flood event,
which is a 1% chance in any given year of flooding to reach a certain elevation.
Commissioner Carper asked about drainage flow area.
Mr. Walther said in general the site previously drained directly to the south and south
west to the City’s land, and then east to a catch basin. The broader sub-regional drainage
includes a larger area to the west of the site that slowly drains to the east overland and in
stormwater pipes to Twin Lakes. He said after the development the broader area drainage
patterns won’t change. However, the site drainage will now be directed to the new
stormwater pond which will hold 100-year rain event and release the water at a slower
rate to a broader stormwater system.
Commissioner Carper asked if the areas of floodplain and storage pond will be fenced in.
Mr. Walther responded that no fencing is proposed.
Commissioner Carper asked if the new pond will be a standing body of water on a
continuous basis or if it will be dry.
Mr. Walther said in general it is a dry pond.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
Commissioner Carper asked for a review of the larger area, and a description of the south
part of the property, land use, foliage and the location of homes on 25 ½ St.
Mr. Walther showed an illustration and gave a review of the larger area.
Commissioner Carper mentioned comments received regarding 25 ½ St. and flooding.
He asked if the city has done anything to mitigate that in the existing area.
Mr. Walther said there haven’t been any capital improvement projects to mitigate
flooding. He noted in the past there was a larger study to explore options regarding
potential flood storage to reduce flood risk to properties. Those options have not been
pursued.
Commissioner Carper asked about mitigation at Lamplighter Pond.
Mr. Walther said that work was done before he was on staff. The city and church did
expand the Lamplighter Pond and provided additional flood storage capacity as well as
stormwater treatment.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about the correspondence received from Charles
Dahl, 5801 W. 25 ½ St., and asked if his concerns about flooding would be resolved by
the new stormwater system.
For the record Chair Person acknowledged correspondence received from Charles Dahl,
5801 W. 25 ½ St., regarding flood concern. Mr. Dahl suggested that instead of adding
fill, creating additional storage capacity would be in order. Mr. Dahl also suggested a
permeable surface parking lot.
Mr. Walther said the letter was just received and he doesn’t know if the city engineer
referred to in the letter was a current engineer or a previous engineer. Mr. Walther said if
the area referred to in the letter is an area south of 25 ½ St. it may not be the same
stormwater system currently being discussed.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the city would investigate this with the
homeowner.
Mr. Walther said the neighborhood has asked for a meeting with the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD), which had the modeling completed for this project, as well
as with the city engineer and himself. He said they have provided quite a bit of
background material previously, as well as maps and explanations with our city engineer,
but there has not been a sit down meeting for some time to review the details of the
information provided.
Scott Tankenoff, Managing Partner, Hillcrest Development, said since they have
commenced redevelopment last September they have leases with 11 tenants at the
property. 10-15% remains to be leased. He said they have hosted three neighborhood
meetings and they have interacted with the neighborhood on an ongoing basis. They have
provided additional real time site information for the community on a web page.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 4
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
Mr. Tankenoff spoke about the on-site parking need for Westside Center. He said
Hillcrest has a policy of not pushing its parking loads into neighborhoods. He said the
building has evolved into an employment center.
Chair Person and Mr. Tankenoff spoke about the desire to open up the site to the existing
bike trail.
Chair Person opened the public hearing.
Beth Chaplin, 5524 W. 25 ½ St., stated she believed she was speaking on behalf of
several of the neighbors. She stated that neighbors were not at the May 20th public
hearing for the first conditional use permit to fill in the floodplain. She said the work
covered under the CUP involved removal of 500 trees, many of which are 100 ft. from
their properties. The work added two acres of impervious surface onto the floodplain very
near their properties known to have flooding concerns. The work involved the very large
stormwater pond. Its southern border is less than 100 ft. from the Musolf property next
door. Ms. Chaplin said the work has significantly affected their property values, quality
of life and peace of mind.
Ms. Chaplin stated residents weren’t at the May 20th hearing to raise these concerns
because they didn’t know it was happening. She said a notice was sent out clearly stating
that work was being done at the building, more than two blocks from their properties.
The notice didn’t mention that the work would span an area of three acres and that it
would stretch much further to the south. She said in early July huge trees began dropping
behind their yards. She said to say they were shocked and alarmed is an understatement.
She went on to say that of even greater concern the documents for City Council omitted
their homes from the development property description. The map shows that there is a
lengthy southern border but no mention of the dozen homes there. She said she has no
idea why the address on the public notice was so misleading as to where the actual work
would occur. Residents requested a meeting on July 21st and asked city staff if their
properties had ever been considered in the preparation and discussions of the CUP by
staff or Council members. The effects on their properties were never considered. She said
there was another meeting in late July attended by about 20 residents and city staff. She
said they expressed their concerns and left the meeting with what they thought was an
agreement that staff would help residents by collaborating. She said there have been
discussions, explanations and justifications, but as yet no real solutions offered by the
city.
Ms. Chaplin said the Hillcrest development staff has been engaged, active,
communicative and empathetic to their concerns. She said Hillcrest has made some small
changes since the work commenced. She asked given Hillcrest’s engagement since work
began, had Hillcrest known, had residents known, had the Council known, about the
potential negative effects on residential properties prior to approval of the first CUP,
could Hillcrest have offered some greater solutions? She said the residents think so given
the response they’ve received from Hillcrest but they’ll never know.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 5
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
Ms. Chaplin said every resident along 25 ½ St. will say a major reason they bought their
homes was the forest, trees and habitat behind their properties. There was a beautiful,
quiet buffer between them and the industrial area to the north. She said daily they now
see and hear loud construction vehicles from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. She said even when
construction activities end next year, because of the lumberyard and new ring road, they
will continue to see and hear trucks and fork lifts pass just beyond their back yards 6 a.m.
to 7 p.m., without the buffer that might have shielded their properties. She knows she
couldn’t sell her house for the price it would have received in June. The map of the flood
plain projected the flood zone stopped at the straight line of the southern property. The
flood zone doesn’t stop there.
Ms. Chaplin stated they have been asking for someone to take into account the full extent
of the entire floodplain and drainage system. There is a very distinct slope to the west by
the apartment building parking lot. She said she’s seen the water back up in the parking
lot and the water fills in the ditch behind the houses and has come within 8-10 ft. of back
doors. She said residents have received conflicting answers to many questions. She asked
how three acres of impervious surface and stormwater pond will actually influence
stormwater discharge to the south. Do we know for sure? She said the work on the
current CUP isn’t scheduled to start until 2016. The neighbors ask to delay
recommendation. Hillcrest is doing great work at the business development but the
residents do mourn the loss of what they had and they worry about the potential flooding
effects in the future.
Ms. Chaplin stated they are asking to delay approval of the CUP until everyone is 100%
certain that the activity covered in this CUP, along with June’s CUP, won’t exacerbate
the flooding issues. They ask that the city fully commit to a more collaborative process to
generate creative solutions to restore some of the property values; to hold collaborative
discussions with residents to discern how to restore some of the quiet buffer between the
properties and the ongoing noise and disruption from the new active commercial
lumberyard. She said they do not want to battle with the city. They are asking for the
city’s help.
Nancy Gertner, 2837 Xenwood Ave. S., asked if the 531 caliper inches of trees would be
tree plantings occurring in 2016 or if that is achieved from the trees growth in the future.
Mr. Walther said 531 caliper inches are the total caliper inches of trees at the time they
are planted and not when they are full grown. He showed the overall site plan and a
variety of areas where plantings were preserved and where plantings will occur. Mr.
Walther spoke about the tree replacement ordinance and he explained the formula.
Lois Solomon, 5800 W. 25 ½ St., said she is concerned about the floodplain. She spoke
about the former Sandoz parking lot proposal. She said she believes that was denied
because the parking lot surface would have pushed water back to 25 ½ St. She asked
about the depth of the new pond. She asked if there would be protection around the pond.
Kristina Smitten, Hillcrest Development, said deciduous trees will be planted in the fall.
The remainder of the plantings will occur in the spring. Regarding floodplain she stated
that Hillcrest’s engineers focused on their site. She said Hillcrest does have permit
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 6
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
approval from MCWD for the activities. The Army Corps of Engineers also reviewed the
entire floodplain area.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if that approval process included testimony from
residents.
Ms. Smitten responded that those approvals include Hennepin County Conservation
District and the Board of Water and Soil Resources, as well as MCWD’s own rules and
regulations. That is the work they are required to do to for floodplain and impact.
Mr. Walther said the MCWD sent notices to property owners within 600 ft. of the
property. When MCWD did not receive any comments, questions or concerns within a
certain time period they did not hold a public hearing.
Bryan Ziegler, 2604 Webster, stated that he was disappointed to learn that the building
expansion permit was approved without approval for adequate parking. Hillcrest is now
removing a parking lot to expand a parking lot to take over wetland. He added that traffic
for bikers is unbearable at times and dangerous. He spoke about the curving road and
existing blind spots and the additional truck traffic to be created with the development.
He recommended the developer make a public access for the trail head.
Brian Skoog, 5500 W. 25 ½ St., asked about the length of the construction period. He
noted that his wife is a private teacher in their home. He spoke about a full year of
hardship for them due to constant noise and disruption. He asked if the upcoming CUP
construction activities will be as significant as the previous CUP activities.
Mr. Tankenoff responded that it is not expected to be as difficult and may last about
seven weeks.
Elizabeth Skoog, 5500 W. 25 ½ St., said their property would be the most affected if
something happened in the floodplain. She pointed out the stormwater drainage next to
her house. She said current construction activities and noise have come right along her
house and it is like standing next to a highway. The loud noise and lights have been
constant 24 hours a day. Ms. Skoog said this disruption has been very difficult as a piano
teacher. She spoke about the loss of the tree buffer. She said she is also concerned about
snow removal from the apartment building parking lot as snow gets moved right next to
the stormwater pond. She hopes someone can speak to the apartment management so
snow doesn’t get added to the pond.
Mr. Tankenoff said Hillcrest wishes to begin construction activities soon as they need to
complete leasing of the development. They can’t promise tenants parking if it doesn’t
exist. He said they have retained professionals; they have worked with staff,
communicated with neighbors. Through design and review they have taken into account
surface, depth of storm pond and volume of storm pond. Delaying is not a good option.
They have made changes where they can. They have taken into account what they can do
practically and legally. He said he wasn’t sure what delaying does for the expansion of
parking lot when it is provided for in the engineering, in the pond, and in the
compensatory storage. The pond is nearly completed and the compensatory storage is
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 7
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
built. These things are in place and exist on the property. Hillcrest has signed an
agreement with MCWD whereby if these systems do not function as designed or are not
maintained properly there is a bond. Delaying is not sensible.
Ms. Smitten explained why using pavers on the project was not an option.
Chair Person closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak.
Commissioner Robertson said he was sympathetic with the neighbors’ worries and
concerns. He stated he works with civil engineers and hydrologists on a daily basis. In
an era of change in environment it’s always hard to say what is the 100-year flood, what
is the 100-year cycle. He said based on the best modeling they can do he has a lot of trust
that they have taken into account the situation. He said he didn’t think delaying would
come up with any different answers. It has been engineered. The trees have already been
removed and more trees are being planted. It will take a while before the trees grow. He
said that property owner has a right to remove trees. That is the hard reality.
Commissioner Robertson said he would vote for approval.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about the number of meetings held with
neighbors and said she didn’t understand why there were still doubts about the
engineering. We know nothing can be guaranteed 100%.
Mr. Walther reviewed the meeting and communications schedule. He said he couldn’t
speculate on the reasons for neighborhood’s remaining doubts regarding the engineering
other than their past experiences with flood has been disruptive, concerning and serious.
Commissioner Carper said he would be recommending approval of the plat.
Commissioner Carper commented that the project will slightly increase by cubic yards
the holding area. He said he was sympathetic and empathetic with the neighbors
regarding trees. The property owner can remove trees. There is no control over that. The
City has ordinances regarding tree replacement.
Chair Person spoke about the recent Benilde athletic field expansion and stormwater
management. He asked Mr. Walther to discuss it.
Mr. Walther said he was not the lead staff person on the project and he was not prepared
to explain how it was designed. He said similar design and engineering went into that
project as Benilde was moving around both wooded areas and wet areas on their site to
accommodate the proposed field.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison summarized the Hillcrest design and stormwater
calculations and suggested that residents may want a copy of the staff report and
documents to review.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary and
Final Plat of Westside Center Izzie Addition, subject to conditions. Commissioner Carper
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 8
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Conditional Use
Permit to import approximately 2,785 cubic yards of fill material, including 1,229 cubic
yards of fill in the floodplain district, subject to conditions. Commissioner Peilen
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-1 (Tatalovich opposed).
5. Communications
A. Proposed City Commission Annual Meeting with Council Program
Mr. Walther explained that commissioners are being asked to provide feedback
regarding the City Council’s Annual Meeting with Commissions.
B. Correspondence
6. Adjournment
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Senior Office Assistant
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
August 5, 2015, 6:30 p.m. Meeting
Westwood Hills Nature Center
1. Call to Order
Ms. Griffin, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
Commission members present: George Foulkes, Elizabeth Griffin, George Hagemann, Edward
Halvorson, Kirk Hawkinson, and Peter May.
Commission members absent: Jim Beneke and Sarah Foulkes.
Staff present: Scott Heitkamp, Recreation Intern, Meg McMonigal, Planning/Zoning Supervisor,
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center, Sean Walther, Senior Planner, Jason
West, Recreation Superintendent, and Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary.
Guest present: Sara Maaske, Health in the Park representative.
2. Presentations
a. Health in the Park Update
Sara Maaske introduced herself to the Commission members; members introduced
themselves to her. Ms. Maaske briefly described the Park the Street 2 and Children’s
First Ice Cream Social events and shared the results of surveys conducted at both events
via interactive displays. The main idea that arose from the Children’s First Ice Cream
Social regarding Bass Lake, Lilac, Minikahda Vista, Wolfe Parks was Art followed by
Flower Gardens and Recycling Bins. Adult signage describing how adults can use
playground equipment for fitness was another prominent idea that arose. Mr. West
provided an update on potential signage.
The survey that took place at the Park the Street 2 event elicited 150 ideas / responses for
Ainsworth, Aquila, Rainbow, and Texa-Tonka Parks. Aquila Park users provided the
most ideas with the number one, overwhelmingly request, being Frisbee golf. The survey
took on the regional bike trail by Texa-Tonka Park provided a water fountain as the
second top request. The third highest response from the survey was for adult exercise
equipment.
The request for Yoga in the Park, which came out first in at the Park the Street 2 event, is
a success and received numerous resident compliments.
Ms. Griffin inquired of any questions. With no questions, the commission thanked Ms.
Maaske for her presentation.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
3. Approval of Minutes
a. May 13, 2015
It was moved by Commission member Hagemann to approve the minutes as presented;
seconded by Commission member May. The motion passed 6 – 0.
4. Tour
a. Westwood Hills Nature Center
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center, introduced himself to the
Commission. Mr. Oestreich brought out their one year old barred owl for members to see,
which Westwood has had since late September. The owl was shot and is blind in one eye.
The Raptor Center takes birds to determine if they can be rehabilitated or should be
euthanized. The owl has a four foot wing span and is out during the day. They eat mice,
voles and chipmunks. Mr. Oestreich worked exclusively with the bird at first then added
more people to assist as the owl determined who it likes. Currently two volunteers, along
with Mr. Oestreich, care for the bird. Staff hopes to increase their outreach programs with
raptors. The red tailed hawk does attend some events but likes to have more than one bird
for their one-hour programs. There also is a captive display outside. Both birds are free-
flighted in their cage at night. Wild owls in the Nature Center include Barred owls,
Screech owls, Great Horned owns and some Snowy Owls. Mr. West commented we have
a very large bird watching community.
Mr. Oestreich led staff and the Commissioners on an outdoor tour. Members toured the
outdoor water garden, owl cage and waterfall observation deck. Mr. Oestreich indicated
the factors that led to the creation of the outdoor amenities include the large deer
population, they wanted to improve the landscaping and create a demonstration site for the
Nature Center. The area consists of all native plants and recycled water. The total project
was approximately $75,000. The original deck was built in 1980’s and was replaced to
enhance the experience and make it handicap accessible. The public can rent the deck,
water garden or both. There have been eight weddings at that location to date. The system
works so well, Mr. Oestreich indicated he would like to create another BOG system with
water pumped from the lake, route under deck by the trail then back to the lake.
Wi-Fi is now available in the Nature Center, outside on the deck, by the water and in the
picnic shelter. Westwood pond is 8’ deep, created in tiers and originally was stocked with
fish. The Northern survived the winter, ate all the other fish then died in the spring.
Tree Trust, a non-profit organization in St. Louis Park, is currently working on renovating
the stairs on the hill. They have completed a patio with a fire pit using pavers that had
been removed from around the Wolfe Park building. There will not be a boardwalk built
this year.
Members toured the animal care area and staff offices. Mr. Oestreich indicated a Request
for Proposals has been completed for a master plan for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Part of the master plan encompasses a new building with an exhibit area, larger storage,
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
more office space, and larger programming area to better accommodate school groups.
Mr. West advised a report will be presented to the City Council to see if/how they would
like to move forward. Great River Greening is under contract to restore a seven acre
parcel of land, advised Mr. Oestreich, so natural resources will not be part of the RFP.
Great River Greening is volunteer driven and typically have 100 volunteers that spend a
couple days to complete each project.
Members thanked Mr. Oestreich for his report and tour.
5. Old Business
a. Discuss Annual Appreciation Luncheon
Members discussed originally chosen date for the appreciation luncheon of September 10
is the City Recognition luncheon. It was discussed and the date was changed to
Wednesday, September 9 from 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m. at the Oak Hill Park Main Shelter.
The park building at Oak Hill Park will be reserved as a back-up in the event of inclement
weather. Ms. Voelker will email the sign up list to all members.
b. Southwest Light Rail Update
Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner with City introduced herself to Commissioner’s;
members did the same. A handout describing the Southwest LRT update was provided.
The SWLRT goes through our community and will have three stations (Louisiana,
Wooddale and Belt Line) open for service in 2020. Next year federal government funding
is anticipated followed by the next phase of detailed engineering and bidding out for
construction. A substantial federal grant was received which covers approximately 80%
of the work. Recent time was spent on cost reductions and now going back through
municipal consent. Cost reductions minimally affect St. Louis Park. The Park and Ride at
Beltline Boulevard was reduced and the Park and Ride at Louisiana Avenue was
increased. Other major changes include the reduction of one station in Eden Prairie,
heavily reduced landscaping, eliminated public art, and changed the north Cedar Lake
Tail Bridge to grade versus a bridge.
A trail was added by Louisiana Station to Brunswick Avenue so users would have a
regional trail on north side and this added trail on the south side; a great way to connect
the community. Staff is currently reviewing the underpass in the Wooddale Station area to
connect the properties on north side and south side of the railway. A new roadway east of
Belt Line Boulevard is a possibility. Hennepin County may provide funding to extend the
trail bridge over the rail lines and Belt Like Boulevard.
Ms. McMonigal indicated a federal grant was received for a parking area on the south east
corner of County Road 25 and Belt Line Boulevard. There are a lot of innovative ideas for
that site. The neighborhood meeting will be held next Thursday regarding the project.
Mr. Hagemann noted there are conversations about reconfiguring Highway 25.Ms.
McMonigal agreed discussions have taken place and some background work completed
on turning Highway 25 into an urban boulevard similar to Excelsior Boulevard. There
will be a public process with that idea; funding unknown.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 4
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
One of the cost cutting ideas is to remove the trail underpass at Louisiana Avenue (east of
Sam’s Club) and to connect on south side to LRT station. Will go ahead with that with
the city’s funding. The trail needs to be convenient. There also needs to be a walkway to
Methodist Hospital from the light rail. Various plans have been created for the overall
project.
Members thanked Ms. McMonigal for her time and expertise.
6. New Business
a. Park Dedication: “Park Commons West Plat”
Sean Walther, Senior Planner, introduced himself to the Commission. Mr. Walther
reviewed the Park Commons West Plat site proposal which includes 179 apartments and
28,000 square feet of commercial use. Staff has received mixed communication from the
City Council and Planning Commission on the proposal so it is not yet approved. Mr.
Walther asked the Commission if/when the proposal is approved, does the Commission
want to accept cash-in-lieu of land? Mr. Walther indicated staff will review the
comprehensive plan and park plan with each development. The Park Commons West Plat
and Arlington Row Apartments West projects each have good access to parks in nearby
locations so staff recommends cash-in-lieu of land.
It was moved by Commission member Hagemann to approve accepting cash-in-lieu of
land for the Park Commons West Plat proposal; seconded by Commission member
Foulkes seconded. The motion passed 6 – 0.
b. Park Dedication: “Arlington Row Apartments West”
Mr. Walther provided information on the Arlington Row Apartments West proposal for
the excess land parcel on the southwest corner of Texas Avenue and Wayzata Boulevard.
The City purchased the land from MnDOT then sold it to a developer. The City will
require the development to include an outdoor recreation space. The proposal consists of
two buildings, 34 unit’s total, and they are not relying on on-street parking for this
project. Since its close in proximity to Westwood Hills Nature Center, Pennsylvania Park
and Lamplighter Park, staff recommends cash-in-lieu of land at an amount of
approximately $51,000 for park dedication and $7,650 for trail dedication.
It was moved by Commission member Hagemann to approve accepting cash-in-lieu of
land for the Arlington Row Apartments West proposal; seconded by Commission member
May seconded. The motion passed 6 – 0.
Mr. Walther explained the second piece of excess land is on Wayzata Boulevard. The
developer will provide a new residential plan for that area which may be similar to the
Arlington Row Apartments. Once received, the plan will be presented to the Commission.
Thanked one another.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 5
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
7. Staff Communication
Scott Heitkamp, Programming Intern, introduced self to Members. Mr. Heitkamp
indicated communication in department has been really good and has learned what
everyone does. He indicated he will spend the following week at Westwood Hills Nature
Center. Mr. West advised the City is unique in regards to interns and really prides itself
on providing opportunities to interns. Multiple departments in the City have interns
including Communication’s, Administration, Recreation, etc.
Mr. West indicated in the month of June of this year, the Aquatic Park had its highest
grossing revenue in seven years. The month of July was the third highest in last three
years. We have great lifeguards, great staff and hardworking staff. Due to the
unseasonably nice weather, we are extending the Aquatic Park season to August 27 and
the Oak Hill Splash Pad has been extended to September 11.
Mr. West showed the Commission the newly produced fall Parks and Recreation
brochure. The brochure is provided in-house in coordination with the Communications
Department.
Mr. Oestreich passed along information from Jim Vaughan, Natural Resource
Coordinator, that St. Louis Park is one of the few “Bee Friendly” cities. Signs stating this
will be posted in the wildflower garden at the Nature Center and in other parks that are
“Bee Friendly” also.
8. Member Communication
None.
9. Other / Future Agenda Items
None.
10. Adjournment
It was moved by Commission member Foulkes and seconded by Commission member Hagemann
to adjourn at 8:02 p.m. The motion passed 6–0.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Voelker
Stacy Voelker
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
October 21, 2015, 6:30 p.m. Meeting
The Rec Center Programming Office
1. Call to Order
Ms. Griffin, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
Commission members present: George Foulkes, Sarah Foulkes, Elizabeth Griffin, George
Hagemann, Edward Halvorson, Kirk Hawkinson, and Peter May.
Commission members absent: Jim Beneke
Staff present: Rick Beane, Park Superintendent, Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator,
Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation, Jason West, Recreation Superintendent,
and Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary.
Guest present: Mike McDonald and Denise Ratzlaff, Off-Leash Dog Park guests
2. Presentations
a. Off-Leash Dog Park (Mike McDonald and Denise Ratzlaff)
Mike McDonald and Denise Ratzlaff introduced themselves to the Commission members.
Mr. McDonald provided handouts which provide an update of the two off-leash dog parks
and also items they’d like to see at the dog parks. Mr. McDonald talked to the users and
indicated he would mention it at this meeting but advised lighting is not in the budget.
Mr. Hagemann commented that one resident in the area of Cedar Knoll Dog Park was
opposed to lights; Mr. McDonald mentioned the resident had threatened some users but
they talked with the resident.
Ms. Ratzlaff indicated there is signage at both dog parks with rules posted for the safety
of users and their dogs. She recommended the sign be lowered as it currently sits ten feet
up where not many can see it.
Ms. Ratzlaff asked for additional lights on the hill. Mr. McDonald indicated many dogs
have lighted collars but still hard to see when they are on the hill. Users commented the
trail is dark; Ms. Walsh acknowledged there is no lighting on the trails. Ms. Ratzlaff also
mentioned the little dog park does not have lighting, especially in the northeast corner.
Since it’s in the back corner, lighting in that area would not affect any residents.
There are handicap users that are challenged to enter the dog parks, Ms. Ratzlaff stated. A
single gate system would work, Mr. McDonald indicated, as users assist the handicap
individuals when they enter. Another challenge is the gate at Dakota’s dog park is far
away from the parking lots. Mr. Hagemann indicated several people from Hamilton
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
House visit the Cedar Knoll dog park in wheelchairs and the grade is too steep for the
wheelchairs. He suggested taking one degree of the grade to assist in access; Mr. Beane
indicated he hopes to have that done this year.
Mr. McDonald noted dead branches were in some trees; Mr. Beane indicated a company
will trim them in the winter. Mr. McDonald feels more woodchips are needed at both dog
parks; Mr. Beane agreed and will supply.
Ms. Ratzlaff and Mr. McDonald thanked all for listening and for the dog parks. Mr.
McDonald commented that most of the issues that arise are people issues, not dog issues.
People issues resolve themselves.
The Commission thanked Mr. McDonald and Ms. Ratzlaff for attending.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. August 5, 2015
It was moved by Commission member G. Foulkes to approve the minutes as presented;
seconded by Commission member May. The motion passed 7 – 0.
4. Old Business
a. Meadowbrook Golf Course Update (Rick Beane)
Mr. Beane reviewed the City Council report which shows the proposed option for
restoration of the Meadowbrook Golf Course which is owned by the Minneapolis Park
Board. Two concepts were reviewed of which Mr. Beane described the differences
between the two. Concept B was the preferred concept that went before the City Council
October 5, 2015. The restoration is a partnership with Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District to make the Creek flow better and have deeper pools to accommodate larger rains
which would allow nine holes to remain open at all times. Addition of a driving range is
also part of the project, which would bring in $300,000 to 400,000 dollars of revenue per
year. It is expected the project will receive FEMA funding from the 2014 flood damage. It
has been discussed to add a trail/boardwalk along the creek into Edina. The
trail/boardwalk would be a nice connection and would be owned by the Watershed
District.
The hole configurations on the course would remain the same, indicated Mr. Beane.
When the course floods, there would still be nine playable holes. Currently, none are
available when it floods. Ms. Walsh added the City Council did support remeandering of
the Creek.
The schedule suggested construction would begin in May of 2016 with the project
completed by May of 2017. This would be considered a premiere course. The City of
Hopkins is also involved as they own a part of the property where the clubhouse is
located. The concept plan does not address the clubhouse. Mr. Beane added they would
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
look at different plans to reconfigure the location of the clubhouse. The last meeting was
approximately 1.5 months ago and no discussion has been held on banquet facilities being
part of the clubhouse.
Mr. Hawkinson inquired if the high school golf team would use Meadowbrook. Ms.
Griffin advised they currently use Minneapolis Golf Course. Ms. Walsh advised that
decision would be up to Andy Ewald, the School’s Athletic Director.
Commission members discussed and agreed the remeandering would help the flooding
issues and would enhance wildlife and walking potential for the area.
b. 40th & France Update (Cindy Walsh)
Ms. Walsh advised the Commission the City is in the process of finalizing a purchase
agreement with the City of Minneapolis, along with the City of Edina. The Phase I
environment testing’s came up with nothing alarming. Staff would like to do six to eight
additional borings (Phase II Environmental) to look for chemical, heavy metals, etc. with
the City of Edina and Braun Intertec. Also, there are two locations that have homes on the
northern section, along France Avenue, in St. Louis Park. The City Council has made no
commitments to proceed on the lots but it has been discussed and the hope is to sign a
purchase agreement soon. Mr. Beane mentioned tree houses, etc. would need to be
cleaned up also. The City would then own Minikahda Vista ballfield.
Ms. Walsh indicated Edina has a need for storm water ponding which would be built on
the area they own. Discussions have occurred to utilize the remainder of the area for an
off-leash dog park.
c. Rec Center Indoor Refrigeration Schedule (Jason West)
Mr. West advised staff is switching from R22 to ammonia on the two ice arenas at The
Rec Center. Ms. Walsh indicated they do not produce R22 any longer. Plus if there are
leaks, the R22 is bad for the ozone. It is mandated the system be changed.
The bids for reconstruction of the indoor rinks came back on budget and have been
awarded, Mr. West advised. Construction on the refrigeration room will begin this winter
on the north side of the building. Ice from the west rink will be removed in March and
new rink construction finished early July. The east rink will be removed once the west
rink is open with construction of the east rink finalized in mid-October of 2016. To
replace the rinks, the concrete floor and entire system must be removed. To assist in
funding, staff will apply for a Mighty Ducks Fund grant, which will be awarded in mid-
November.
Ms. Walsh indicated staff is focusing on Green enhancements which Council has
approved. There are more enhancements that would allow the project to go greener and if
grant is awarded to the City, those items will be encompassed into the project. Lower
energy bills should immerge immediately if encompassed.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 4
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
d. Outdoor Rink Update (Jason West)
Mr. West stated the outdoor rink project design is currently over budget but the project
has a lot of moving parts. The grading work was bid out and the rest of the project will be
bid out in December.
Ms. Walsh advised an environmental grant was received in the amount of $50,000 from
Met Council for soil testing. Traces of asbestos on the corner side by the pool were found
which means the project must have an asbestos trained supervisor present the entire time
of the soil grading. Clean garbage was also found, which must be removed and taken off
site to a landfill. The staff originally bid out the fill, it was stated as a “per unit cost”
including some asbestos. The grading portion of the project is now over $350,000 due to
the found asbestos. Mr. West stated the city is also applying for a Hennepin County
Youth Sports stadium grant to help deal with the cost of the asbestos removal. Ms. Walsh
indicated this delays the project as the status of the Hennepin County Grant will be
known in March of 2016. The Hockey Association knows the project is over budget but
may not know exactly why.
Ms. Griffin wondered if the Hockey Association would contribute more to which Ms.
Walsh indicated staff is unsure if they have more to contribute. Staff could discuss with
Council to research partnering with other larger companies on the project, but at this time,
they want to keep it a St. Louis Park project. Council has directed staff to do what we can
to make it work.
Ms. Walsh indicated the City Council has advised staff to move forward. They are aware
the estimates are high to allow for environmental findings. Mr. West advised December
1, 2016 is still the goal for full operation of the outdoor rink. Ms. Walsh advised staff will
provide an update in January on the project.
5. New Business
a. Westwood Hills Master Plan Update (Jason West)
Mr. West advised the Commission that the City has teamed with Miller Dunwiddie
Architecture to create a master plan for Westwood Hills Nature Center. Postcards were
distributed to members regarding the public meetings that will be held to receive public
input. Staff also collected surveys from Westwood Nature Center’s Halloween event and
the Halloween event at the Rec Center. Public input will help determine what programs
staff should create and also how the facility should be renovated.
Ms. Walsh encouraged members to distribute postcards and spread the word as would
like participation from as many people as possible. The postcard has been sent out to
2,200 residents, businesses, etc. and has been advertised on Facebook and the City’s
website. Mr. West suggested the October 27 meeting is the key to gathering input.
Staff will have more specific / focused ideas on what people are looking for at the January
meeting, commented Mr. West.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 5
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
b. Board and Commission Annual Meeting Program (Cindy Walsh)
Members reviewed the Council report of proposed changes to the annual meeting of the
Boards and Commissions. Ms. Walsh summarized that Council would like to consolidate
all Boards and Commissions into one meeting. Each Board and Commission can then
hear others and the focus will be on Boards and Commissions during that particular
meeting.
Mr. Hagemann feels it is a good idea. It is an opportunity to analyze the fit for
commissions and a good opportunity for commissions to discuss what they may be
duplicating.
The members discussed and agree to the program. The Chair and Vice chair will attend
the Council Meeting; the other members are also welcome to attend.
c. Park Dedication: “Westside Center Izzie Addition” (Sean Walther)
Ms. Walsh advised this addition is the old Nestle property. The plat would subdivide the
existing 24.8 acre property into two lots. The west lot would be 22.1 acres and the east lot
would be 2.7 acres. The larger lot is exempt from park dedication because it is over 20
acres in size. The smaller lot is subject to park dedication.
Sean Walther, Senior Planner, advised the proposed addition consists of a 300,000 square
foot building which has been under renovation for the last year or so by Hillcrest
Development. The Developer is taking a vacant building, renovating and is now
approximately 90% leased. Some of the companies in the addition include Lime and
Lumber, Zerorez, Moo Kitchen, Fish Guys and a variety of small manufacturers.
Lymon Lumber has expanded the pavement on the west side of the site for outdoor
storage. Not many customers come to their business but they do have a showroom.
Zerorez is on site and have a treatment process that is environmentally friendly. Their
fleet of vans are also stored inside. Moo Kitchen distributes kitchen aprons and oven mits
and Fish Guys distributes fresh fish. A large investment was put into the building to avoid
the odors on and off the site. There are also a variety of small manufacturers and creative
office areas. Mr. Walther explained when Nestle was operating their business, they had
550 employees. They are currently estimating 450 employees between all the businesses
in the addition.
Mr. Walther explained Hillcrest Development is attempting to get Metro Transit to serve
the site. They are very interested in taking advantage of the regional trail that runs by
property. Staff is reviewing an easement to connect with the regional trail. This would be
part of the long-term Connect the Park plan which include trail connections by Highway
100 and railroad crossings.
Mr. Hawkinson inquired why it is called the Izzie Addition. Mr. Walther advised it is
named after one of the owners daughters.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 6
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
Mr. Hawkinson inquired where park dedication fees go. Ms. Walsh advised the park
dedication fees received are deposited into the Park Improvement Fund, which is a capital
only spending fund, and it cannot go into the general City fund.
Staff recommends cash-in-lieu of land as no additional parks are designated for that site.
The Park Dedication Fee would be approximately $21,453.
It was moved by Commission member Hagemann to approve accepting cash-in-lieu of
land for the Westside Center Izzie Addition proposal; seconded by Commission member
G. Foulkes seconded. The motion passed 6 – 0.
6. Staff Communication
Mr. West advised it was nice, cool, crisp fall event for the Westwood Halloween Party that was
held October 16 & 17. There were approximately 1,100 participants between the two nights, over
600 volunteer hours for the event and collected 264 pounds of food for STEP. The volunteers
and staff do a great job transforming the Nature Center for the event. Mr. West reminded
member of the Halloween event to be held in the Rec Center Friday, October 23.
Mr. Beane indicated the Boardwalk replacement project around Wolfe Lake is coming along and
Phase II of the project will begin in a couple weeks. Tree Trust is stripping the wood and railings.
The stairway that leads to Park Nicollet will be concrete with rails. The concrete work begins
Monday.
Staff has applied for a grant through Hennepin County for recycling. Mr. Beane advised if the
grant is received, will purchase approximately 80 more recycling carts in the Parks to help
increase recycling in the parks. Bottles and cans will be recycled, not organics. Many comments
have been received asking for more recycling in parks.
Mr. Beane advised the grass is done growing and they will begin preparing for winter ice rinks.
Edgebrook Park will not have skating rink this year due to low participation. Twin Lakes Park
(south of Benilde-St. Margaret’s) and Jersey Park (north of Cedar Lake) will both have rinks this
year.
Staff is working with the Communications Department, indicated Mr. Beane, to replace Park
Rule signs throughout the park system. The goal is for consistent signage (80-100 signs)
beginning this winter.
Mr. Hawkinson inquired about signage by the playground equipment on how adults can use the
equipment for exercise. Mr. West advised communication was received from residents that
would like to see adult fitness in the parks. Staff teamed with Ramsey County to apply for a grant
with MRPF for signage on how to use playground equipment for adult exercise.
Mr. Beane advised the north parking lot at Louisiana Oaks is being expanded as more parking is
needed in the north area. Hazardous materials were found in the area. The curb will be installed
this week with paving next week.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 7
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
All water meters in the City are being replace, advised Ms. Walsh, by Ferguson (Contractor). The
replacement began in the northeast part of City and the contractor is going clockwise around the
City. Residents will get up to four notices to schedule the meter replacement. The new meters
have wireless technology that has leak detection on it, which is also beneficial for residents. Mr.
Hagemann shared an incident that occurred at his cabin and was very helpful to have the leak
detection. Members were asked to encourage neighbors and friends to schedule the replacements.
If no response after four notices and no replacement scheduled, resident will receive a note that
the water will be turned off. Comment cards are left at the residence after replacement and the
city has received 95% positive comments. Members were asked to advise staff if they hear any
other comments.
Ms. Walsh updated the Commission on the Louisiana Oaks Park site. Engineering Department
renovated the sidewalks around that area. Residents saw some issues and created messages on
Facebook. Ms. Walsh informed the members the city must get prior approval from MPCA and
other agencies. A lot of rules and regulations must be followed prior to any digging on the site.
The agencies direct the City on what can be done in the Reilly area.
7. Member Communication
Mr. Hagemann advised City Manager Tom Harmening approached Friends of the Arts a few
months ago to reach out about studying the economic impact of arts and culture in communities.
There is a national study and statewide study of all non-profit organizations (except movie
theaters, etc.). Fifteen organizations in St. Louis Park were found and their data analyzed. The
study indicated 1.5 million dollars that comes into St. Louis Park is a function of arts and culture
through the nonprofit organizations. This also provides 40 full time equivalent jobs. St. Louis
Park is the seventh largest municipality in the state, in terms of size, and ranked 14th in per capita
revenue based on the report. Mr. Hagemann mentioned the Grand Marais area is being pushed to
include more arts into their community. More important than numbers, is the benchmark this
study provides. We can review at data every several years to see if we are improving or at least
measuring. A 2008 study indicated residents said arts and culture is important in their
community. Sheila Smith presented this information to the City Council last Monday. Friends of
the Arts is hosting a town hall meeting on Thursday. Sheila Smith, Ann Mavity (representing
Council), and Stacia Goodman (artwork in Rec Center entrance) will be in attendance.
Mr. Hagemann advised the Environment and Sustainability Commission has formed a subgroup
to be new advocates for the bicycle groups. There is a scheduled meeting next Tuesday for the
Dakota Avenue area to be special bike corridor.
The Connect the Park, a ten year plan to add bike amenities, has begun, Mr. Hagemann informed
members. Changing intersections, road, gutter and bike lane stripping on Texas Avenue is the
first project to be done. Approximately 50 people signed a petition against stripping a bike lane.
The City Council unanimously approved adding bike lane stripping on Westwood Hills Drive,
Westmoreland Drive and Texas Avenue. There will be two stripped bike lanes on Texas Avenue;
one side will not allow parking.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 8
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of October 21, 2015
8. Other / Future Agenda Items
The next meeting will be held Wednesday, December 2 (combined November / December
meetings).
9. Adjournment
It was moved by Commission member Hagemann and seconded by Commission member G.
Foulkes to adjourn at 8:16 p.m. The motion passed 6–0.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Voelker
Stacy Voelker
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Boards and Commissions: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Reappointment of Stuart Williams to the Fire Civil Service Commission
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to reappoint Stuart Williams to the Fire Civil Service
Commission with a term to expire December 31, 2018.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to reappoint Stuart Williams to serve
another term on the Fire Civil Service Commission?
SUMMARY: The Fire Civil Service Commission is regulated by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 420.
Section 420.03 states that “all vacancies in the commission shall be filled by appointment by the
council within 30 days after the vacancy occurs”. Stuart Williams’ term on the Fire Civil Service
Commission expired on December 31, 2015. He has completed a Reappointment Status Form,
stating that he wishes to be reappointed to a new term on the Fire Civil Service Commission.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Reappointment Status Form for Stuart Williams
Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant – City Clerk’s Office
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 201 (Item No. 5a) Title: Reappointment of Stuart Williams to the Fire Civil Service CommissionPage 2
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC dba Pinot’s Palette - On-Sale Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor
License
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close
public hearing. Motion to approve application from Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC dba Pinot’s
Palette, for an On-Sale Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor License for the premises located at 4712
Excelsior Boulevard, with the license term through March 1, 2016.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to approve the on-sale wine and 3.2%
malt liquor licenses for Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC?
SUMMARY: The City received an application from Lifeswork Enterprises, LLC dba Pinot’s
Palette, for an on-sale wine and 3.2% malt liquor license for the property located at 4712
Excelsior Boulevard (Excelsior and Grand). The premise consists of a restaurant with an art
studio occupying approximately 2,430 square feet in size. Mila Krol is the sole owner and
manager of the business. The applicant intends to open for business the week of February 1st.
The St. Louis Park City Code states that wine licenses can only be issued to a restaurant with
seating for at least 30 people whose principal part of the business is preparation and serving of
food. The premises will have a seating capacity of 48 in the main art studio and 20 in the private
room (used for large groups booking private classes). The food selection consists of a variety of
made to order crepes in addition to other snacks and finger foods. Classes will be offered
Thursday – Sunday until 10:00 p.m. Similarly licensed establishments who provide an art studio
atmosphere are Cheers Pablo in Burnsville, Woodbury, Coon Rapids, and Minnetonka, Paint Pub
in Maple Grove, and Brush Studio in St. Louis Park.
The Police Department conducted a full background investigation, and nothing was discovered
during the course of the investigation that would warrant denial of the license. The application
and police report are on file in the City Clerk’s office, should Council members wish to review
the information. The required notice of the public hearing was published on January 7, 2016.
Should Council approve the liquor license, no actual license will be issued until all requirements
have been met with the City Inspections Department, Hennepin County, and the State Alcohol
and Gambling Enforcement Division.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Fees for this applicant include $500 for the
police background investigation and $2,750 for the On-Sale Wine and 3.2% Malt Liquor annual
license fees. Pursuant to City Code provisions, the license fee will be pro-rated for the remainder
of the license term.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close
public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution approving 2016 liquor license fees for the license
term March 1, 2016 through March 1, 2017 pursuant to M.S.A. Ch. 340A and section 3-59 of the
St. Louis Park City Code.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the proposed liquor license fees for
2016?
SUMMARY: State law requires that the City adopt liquor license fees at a public hearing and City
ordinance permits the Council to set liquor license fees by resolution. Each year City staff reviews
and completes a fee study on the costs associated with license administration and enforcement and
compares St. Louis Park’s license fees to those of surrounding cities. Based on this analysis and
review, staff is proposing no fee increases for 2016.
In 2015 two new license classifications were approved by the City Council – Microdistillery
Cocktail Room and Microdistillery Off-Sale. The proposed fees for both types of licenses have
been added to the 2016 fee schedule and reflect what was previously discussed with the Council
when the new license classifications were approved. In order to remain consistent with our current
license fees, as well as the fees being charged by surrounding cities, a $600 license fee is proposed
for a Microdistillery Cocktail Room License and a $200 license fee is proposed for a
Microdistillery Off-Sale License.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: State law sets the limits on what fees may be
charged for certain types of liquor licenses. Where there is no state restriction, the City can set the
fee at an amount to reflect the cost of issuing the license and other costs directly related to the
enforcement. License fees may not be used as a means of raising revenues.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2016 Liquor License Establishments by License Type
Resolution
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: State law requires that the city adopt liquor license fees at a public hearing and
city ordinance permits the Council to set liquor license fees by resolution. The proposed liquor
license fees have been reviewed by the Department Director and the City Manager; and reflect the
limits set forth in State law to cover costs of providing administration and enforcement. St. Louis
Park liquor fees are consistent with other metro cities fees.
Proposed 2016 Liquor License Fees
The following is a list of the current and the proposed liquor license fees. On Sale Intoxicating
fees are higher than other liquor fees due to additional staff time for police enforcement
(restaurants are open Sundays and some have 2:00 a.m. closing). Off-Sale licenses require less
police staff time due to the fact that alcohol is not consumed on the premises, and there are less
hours of operation.
Liquor License Type: 2015 Fee 2016 Fee
Effective 3/1/2016
Fee amount
set by:
Brewpub Off-Sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Brewers Off-Sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Microdistillery Cocktail Room N/A $600 City
Microdistillery Off-Sale N/A $200 City
Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor $380 $380 STATE
Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor fee per
M.S. 340A.408 Subd.3(c ) $280 $280 STATE
On Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $750 $750 City
On Sale Intoxicating Liquor $8,750 $8,750 City
On Sale Brewer’s Taproom $600 $600 City
On Sale Sunday Liquor $200 $200 STATE
On Sale Wine $2,000 $2,000 STATE
Club (per # members): 1 - 200 $300 $300 STATE
201 - 500 $500 $500 STATE
501 - 1000 $650 $650 STATE
1001 - 2000 $800 $800 STATE
2001 - 4000 $1,000 $1,000 STATE
4001 - 6000 $2,000 $2,000 STATE
6000+ $3,000 $3,000 STATE
Temporary On Sale Liquor $100/day $100/day City
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 3
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
Background
Investigation 2015 Fee 2016 Fee Fee set
by
New License Applicant
(non-refundable)
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-state
applicant may be billed up
to a maximum of $10,000.
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-state
applicant may be billed up
to a maximum of $10,000.
STATE
New Store Manager $500 $500 STATE
On Sale license renewal
per 340A.412 Subd. 2
$500 $500 STATE
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 4
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
Current Licensed Liquor Establishments by License Type
LIQUOR LICENSES
Type
2 am
close
Off sale
Brew/Pub
Off sale
3.2
On sale
Taprm
On sale
3.2
On sale
Intox
On sale
Sunday
Off sale
Intox
On sale
Wine
On sale
Club
License Issued by: State City City City City City City State State State
Applebee's Grill & Bar 8750 200
Best of India 750 2000
Blackstone Bistro 8750 200
Blaze Pizza 750 2000
Blue Fox Bar & Grill 8750 200
Bonefish Grill 8750 200
Brush Studio 750 2000
Bunny’s Bar and Grill 2 am 8750 200
Chipotle Mexican Grill 750 2000
Cooper 2 am 8750 200
Costco Wholesale #377 380
Crave 2 am 8750 200
Cub Foods 200
Cub Foods Knollwood 200
Cub Liquor 380
Doubletree Mpls. Park Place 8750 200
Frank Lundberg American
Legion Post 282
200 500
Granite City Food & Brewery 200 8750 200
Homewood Suites 750
Jennings’ Liquor Store 380
Knollwood Liquor 380
Liquor Boy 380
Lund’s & Byerly’s Wine &
Spirits
380
Lund’s & Byerly’s – St.
Louis Park
8750 200
Marriott Mpls. West 8750 200
McCoy’s Public House 2 am 8750 200
MD Liquors 380
MGM Wine & Spirits 380
Mill Valley Kitchen 8750 200
Minneapolis Golf Club 200 500
Noodles & Company – West
End
750 2000
Noodles & Company -
Knollwood
750 2000
Olive Garden 8750 200
Park Tavern Lounge & Lanes 2 am 8750 200
Pei Wei Asian Diner 750 2000
Prime Deli 750 2000
Raku Sushi & Lounge 8750 200
Rojo Mexican Grill 2 am 8750 200
Sam’s Club #6318 380
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 5
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
Current Licensed Liquor License Establishments by License Type
Continued
LIQUOR LICENSES
Type
2 am
close
Off sale
Brew/Pub
Off sale
3.2
On sale
Taprm
On sale
3.2
On sale
Intox
On Sale
Sunday
Off sale
Intox
On sale
Wine
On sale
Club
License Issued by: State City City City City City City State State State
Showplace 14 #8863 2 am 8750 200
Smashburger 750 2000
Steel Toe Brewing 200 600
St. Louis Park Liquor 380
Target Store - Knollwood 380
Taste of India 750 2000
Texa-Tonka Lanes 2 am 8750 200
Texas-Tonka Liquor 380
TGI Friday’s 2 am 8750 200
Thanh Do 8750 200
The Loop 8750 200
Top Ten Liquors 380
Trader Joe’s #710 380
Westwood Liquors 380
Wok in the Park 750 2000
Yami Yami 750 2000
Yangtze River Restaurant 8750 200
Yardhouse 8750 200
Yum! Kitchen and Bakery 750 2000
Total number 2 2 1 14 24 26 15 13 2
Fee Totals $400 $400 $600 $10,500 $210,000 $5,200 $5,700 $26,000 $1,000
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 6
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION ADOPTING 2016 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES
FOR THE LICENSE TERM
MARCH 1, 2016 – MARCH 1, 2017
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows:
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-59 authorizes the City Council to
establish annual fees for liquor licenses by resolution in amounts no greater that those set forth in
M.S.A. Chapter 340A; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the city to maintain fees in an amount necessary to cover
the cost of administration and enforcement of regulating liquor in the city; and
WHEREAS, fees called for within the Section 3-59 of the City Code and Minnesota State
Statute Chapter 340A are hereby set by this resolution for the 2016 license term effective March
1, 2016 through March 1, 2017; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, fees for 2016 liquor licenses are hereby adopted as follows:
Liquor License Type: 2016 Fee
Effective 3/1/2016
Brewpub Off-sale Malt Liquor $200
Brewers Off-sale Malt Liquor $200
Microdistillery Cocktail Room $600
Microdistillery Off-Sale $200
Off-sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $200
Off-sale Intoxicating Liquor $380
Off-sale Intoxicating Liquor fee per
M.S. 340A.408 Subd.3(c )
$280
On-sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $750
On-sale Intoxicating Liquor $8,750
On-sale Brewer’s Taproom $600
On-sale Sunday Liquor $200
On-sale Wine $2,000
Club (per # members)
1 - 200 $300
201 - 500 $500
501 - 1000 $650
1001 - 2000 $800
2001 - 4000 $1,000
4001 - 6000 $2,000
6000+ $3,000
Temporary On-sale Liquor $100/day
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 7
Title: Public Hearing – 2016 Liquor License Fees
Background Investigation Fee
New License Applicant
(non-refundable)
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-
state applicant may be
billed up to a maximum
of $10,000.
New Store Manager $500
On-sale license renewal per
340A.412 Subd. 2
$500
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: January 19, 2016
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Resolution Requesting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to Recognize Impact
of Aircraft Noise in the Community
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution requesting the FAA to develop
alternate noise metrics and recognize impact of aircraft noise beyond the current 65 Day-Night
Average Sound Level (DNL).
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council support the resolution requesting the FAA to
recognize the impact of aircraft noise in the community as a step in reducing long term noise
impacts.
SUMMARY: The high frequency of overhead aircraft and resulting noise continue to impact city
residents. An increasing number of noise complaints are being filed with the Metropolitan Airports
Commission (MAC) and received by city staff.
Establishing that a noise problem exists in St. Louis Park is a logical and important first step in
pursuing long term reductions in aircraft noise. Contour maps of noise impact surrounding
Minneapolis St. Paul (MSP) airport currently do not extend into the city. With the FAA
announcing a nationwide study on aircraft noise in communities surrounding metropolitan airports,
an opportunity exists to take positive action.
The resolution has been prepared by staff for Council consideration, requesting the FAA to:
1) Develop an alternate matrix for determining impact of aircraft noise; and
2) Extending the contours beyond the current limit to accurately reflect the area of
environmental impact.
The resulting data should then be considered when developing policies on reducing noise impact
through operational changes and quieter aircraft technologies.
Metropolitan Airports Commissioner Lisa Peilen and Dana Nelson, MAC Manager – Noise,
Environment and Planning, will be presenting with staff at the Council meeting.
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
Contour Map
Number of Complaints
Pattern of Complaints
FAA Press Release
Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the Community
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) consists of Governor
appointed members to serve as the policy board for all Twin Cities area airports, including MSP.
All areas of airport functions including buildings, runways, planning, concessions, and taxi
services, are within the scope of the Commission and managed by the MAC Executive Director.
The Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) consists of six representatives from the airline industry,
five representatives from cities bordering the airport, and one representative selected from the at-
large cities. St. Louis Park is part of the seven city at-large group and has been involved since the
NOC was formed in 2002. The committee works closely with MAC staff in cooperative efforts to
reduce aircraft noise impacts associated with MSP and offers recommendations to the MAC
Commissioners.
MSP is a public use airport and FAA regulates the type of local restrictions which can be placed
on passenger and cargo operations; including number of flights, time of flights, type of aircraft,
and flight paths. These parameters limit what MAC and other airports can implement to reduce
the noise impact on surrounding communities. Primary focus of the FAA remains managing air
traffic and safety.
Current aircraft noise monitoring metrics established by the FAA have been in use since the
1980’s. The resulting Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) metric contours maps for MSP
airport identify only a relatively small area of the Twin Cities being significantly affected by
aircraft noise. Utilized for eligibility in sound mitigation programs of homes, the DNL contours
are also referenced in planning future policies on aircraft and operations. The FAA states that in
2012, only 300,000 people nationwide were exposed to significant airport noise. This calculation
does not include large populations of communities outside of the current contour maps.
During 2013, FAA discussion of possible future changes in runway management with implementation
of Area Navigation (RNAV) began raising questions of how aircraft noise would impact certain
areas, primarily in cities located northwest of the airport. A draft piece of legislation during the
2014 session for added noise monitoring resulted in MAC developing a Noise Monitoring Study.
Temporary noise monitoring equipment was placed in Edina and St. Louis Park during
August/September of 2014 to establish a baseline for aircraft noise. Results from the temporary
monitoring site near the St. Louis Park Recreation Center clarified a significant number of aircraft
noise events exceeded 65 decibels and the two week average aircraft DNL was nearly 55.
City Council discussed a draft of the proposed resolution at the December 21, 2015 Study Session
and requested staff to present it during a regular meeting for consideration.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The 2014 Noise Contours map (attached) for MSP shows the
60 DNL line extending out only to the southeast corner of Lake Harriet. Areas within St. Louis
Park experiencing significant aircraft traffic are not identified with the current DNL contours.
However, residents being negatively impacted is a concern as aircraft noise complaints reported
to MAC and the city continue to rise, including from the northwest corner of the city. Also attached
is a report listing the number of complaints reported by city during July 2015 and a map identifying
the pattern of complaints per household during the same month. These complaints are registered
by residents directly by calling a 24 hour hotline at 612-726-9411 or file a complaint online at
www.macnoise.com.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the Community
Council and staff have repeatedly raised the question on what can be done to reduce aircraft noise
and the high frequency of flights that city residents must tolerate. The reality of having a major
airport nearby with runways aligned over the city means aircraft will be in the sky.
An important first step in pursuing solutions is to create increased awareness of the problem. Noise
contours are referenced by agencies and industry during discussion about aircraft noise.
Developing a more relevant and encompassing measurement of noise, recognizing the effect on
communities surrounding airports, can help set the stage. This is a long term effort to help reduce
the environmental impacts of aircraft noise.
The FAA press release from May 2015 is attached. Very few details, timing, or locations are being
shared by FAA to the MAC or NOC, only that most of the study work will be in 2016. This study
provides an opportune time for the city to offer comment for FAA consideration.
The actions being requested in the resolution are consistent with the general direction of the Quiet
Skies Caucus, a group of Congressional members intended to raise awareness on the issue of
aircraft noise and work to find meaningful solutions to the problem. Representative Keith Ellison
is a member of this group.
NEXT STEPS: If Council adopts the resolution, the following actions may then be pursued to
ensure the gravity of the message is received:
The Resolution would be delivered to FAA administration in Washington DC with a
cover letter from the Mayor. Copies to local and Regional FAA offices may be
appropriate.
Staff will present the resolution at the January 20, 2016 NOC meeting to inform them of
our action. Also asking if the Committee would offer a recommendation to support the
city resolution, or consider drafting a similar document for MAC to consider.
Discuss at the 2016 City Legislative Priorities Council session and direct Lockridge
Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P to actively pursue discussion with Congressional Representatives
and FAA Officials.
Mayor and Council members attending the NLC conference in Washington DC may have
an opportunity to follow up with Congress and FAA staff.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the Community
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION REGARDING FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
RECOGNITION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE IMPACTS OUTSIDE THE DAY-NIGHT
AVERAGE SOUND LEVEL (DNL) 65 DECIBEL THRESHOLD
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is committed to protecting and enhancing the
quality of life of its residents; and,
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, while outside of the Federal Aviation
Administration’s (FAA) Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) 65 decibel threshold, frequently
experiences noise from flights arriving to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP);
and,
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park seeks to reduce the impacts of aircraft noise on the
community; and,
WHEREAS, a 2014 noise study by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to
monitor aircraft noise levels in the City of St. Louis Park for a period of two weeks made the
following findings:
1. That 1,413 arriving flights and 188 departing flights registered noise events over 65
decibels; and,
2. The 65 decibel threshold was exceeded for a cumulative total time of 4 hours, 36 minutes
and 52 seconds; and,
3. The measured 2-week average aircraft DNL was 54.7 A-weighted decibels; and,
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park participates in the At-Large Community
membership of the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC), which is a balanced forum for the
discussion and evaluation of noise impacts around MSP including the identification, study, and
analysis of noise issues; and,
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park recognizes that the FAA noise metric for
determining noise exposure – the DNL metric – does not convey the magnitude of high single-
event noise levels due to the averaging over a 24-hour period and that alternative noise metrics aid
in making quantitative assessments for aircraft noise impacts and communicating those impacts to
surrounding communities; and,
WHEREAS, the NOC’s March 2011 letter to the FAA Performance Based Navigation
(PBN) Integration Group for developing a set of noise criteria for PBN flight procedure design at
MSP includes a criterion to provide a noise analysis using “other noise metrics that evaluate the
time above impact and single event noise impacts along a given [Area Navigation] track at MSP”;
and,
WHEREAS, the monthly NOC Technical Advisor’s Report incorporates noise metrics to
evaluate single event and threshold noise impacts, such as number of events above decibel
thresholds, time above decibel thresholds and top ten maximum sound levels (Lmax); and,
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the Community
WHEREAS, the FAA is currently in the process of surveying residents around many of
the largest U.S. airports regarding aircraft noise annoyance levels to take an updated look at its
established noise measurement methods; and,
WHEREAS, the successful implementation of PBN flight procedures, as part of the FAA’s
Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) initiative to modernize the national
airspace system, requires engagement with airport operators, communities and other stakeholders
to ensure the noise impact from new flight paths are conveyed and minimized.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council that the City of St. Louis
Park hereby:
1. Urges the FAA to recognize the impacts of aircraft noise beyond the current federally-
established DNL 65 decibel threshold when making policy decisions on the impacts of
aircraft noise in communities around U.S. airports and supports the use of alternative
noise metrics by the FAA to help quantify aircraft noise impacts; and,
2. Urges the FAA to utilize alternative noise metrics when evaluating noise impacts from
new PBN flight procedures and to communicate with stakeholders, including airport
operators and communities, to ensure noise impacts are conveyed and minimized.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 19, 2015
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the CommunityPage 6
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the CommunityPage 7
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the CommunityPage 8
The following press release was published by the FAA May 2015:
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
will soon begin work on the next step in a multi-year effort to update the scientific evidence on the
relationship between aircraft noise exposure and its effects on communities around airports.
“The FAA is sensitive to public concerns about aircraft noise. We understand the interest in
expediting this research, and we will complete this work as quickly as possible,” said FAA
Administrator Michael Huerta. “This Administration takes its responsibility to be responsive to
communities’ concerns over air noise seriously. Our work is intended to give the public an
opportunity to provide perspective and viewpoints on a very important issue.”
Beginning in the next two to three months, the FAA will contact residents around selected U.S.
airports through mail and telephone to survey public perceptions of aviation noise throughout the
course of a year. This will be the most comprehensive study using a single noise survey ever
undertaken in the United States, polling communities surrounding 20 airports nationwide. To
preserve the scientific integrity of the study, the FAA cannot disclose which communities will be
polled.
The FAA obtained approval from the Office of Management and Budget last week to conduct the
survey and hopes to finish gathering data by the end of 2016. The agency will then analyze the
results to determine whether to update its methods for determining exposure to noise.
The framework for this study was developed through the Airports Cooperative Research Program
(ACRP), which is operated by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies of
Sciences. This methodology will be used to determine whether to change the FAA’s current
approach, as well as consideration of compatible land uses and justification for federal expenditures
for areas that are not compatible with airport noise.
Aircraft noise is currently measured on a scale that averages all community noise during a 24-hour
period, with a ten-fold penalty on noise that occurs during night and early morning hours. The
scientific underpinnings for this measurement, known as the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL),
were the result of social surveys of transportation noise in the 1970s.
In 1981, the FAA established DNL 65 decibels as the guideline at which federal funding is available
for soundproofing or other noise mitigation. This method was reaffirmed in studies conducted during
the late 1980s and early 1990s.
During the ensuing years, aircraft manufacturers incorporated technologies that resulted in
dramatically quieter aircraft. However, residents around many of the largest U.S. airports have
expressed concerns about aircraft noise associated with the continuing growth of the aviation
industry. The FAA is taking an updated look at its approach for measuring noise as part of an
ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, including communities and leaders of a number of cities across
the nation.
If changes are warranted, the FAA will propose revised policy and related guidance and regulations,
subject to interagency coordination, as well as public review and comment.
City Council Meeting of January 19, 2016 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Resolution Requesting FAA to Recognize Impact of Aircraft Noise in the Community Page 9