Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/05/16 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA MAY 16, 2016 6:45 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Items 1. 15 min. Boards & Commissions Appointments Discussion (Verbal) 2. 30 min. Xcel and CenterPoint Franchise Agreement Renewal Written Reports 3. Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Construction Update 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. Retirement Recognition of Firefighter Eric Curran-Bakken 2b. Recognition of Donations 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Special Study Session Minutes April 18, 2016 3b. City Council Meeting Minutes April 18, 2016 3c. City Council Meeting Minutes May 2, 2016 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. Approve Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions Recommended Action: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and Commissions as listed in Exhibit A. 6. Public Hearings 6a. First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Public Right of Way and Drainage and Utility Easements and set the Second Reading of Ordinance for June 6, 2016. (Note that this action requires five affirmative votes of the Council.) Meeting of May 16, 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. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Climate Inheritance Resolution Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Climate Inheritance Resolution. 8b. Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution to accept the Southwest Corridor- wide Housing Strategy as a means to inform future housing planning and policy in the station areas. 8c. Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to permit two principal buildings on one property with conditions as recommended by staff (this action requires four affirmative votes of the Council). 8d. 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Recommended Action: Motion to approve the first reading of an Ordinance amending the subdivision code, and to set the second reading for June 6, 2016. 8e. Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for the Sale of $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A. (Since these are Charter Bonds, the recommended action will require approval by at least 6 of the 7 City Councilmembers). 8f. Approval of Reimbursement Resolution for Rec Center Projects Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Declaring the Official Intent of the City of St. Louis Park to Reimburse Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of Bonds to be Issued by the City (four affirmative votes are required to approve this action). 9. Communications – None Meeting of May 16, 2016 City Council Agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Adopt Resolution confirming the appointment of Timothy Simon as City Treasurer, effective May 16, 2016. 4b. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the zoning code relating to microdistilleries and cocktail rooms, and to approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. 4c. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of wood-based, raised garden beds for the Summer Playground Edible Garden Program at Louisiana Oaks Park from the St. Louis Park Home Depot ($7,000 value). 4d. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a grant from the Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety in the amount of $1,000 for the purchase of Safety Camp t- shirts as a part of the annual Safety Camp event. 4e. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a canoe from George Hagemann to Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. 4f. Approve for filing Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of March 16, 2016. 4g. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of April 20, 2016. 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: May 16, 2016 Discussion Item: 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Xcel and CenterPoint Franchise Agreement Renewal RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: No action at this time. The purpose of this report and study session discussion is to inform the City Council of the need and process associated with the renewal of these two franchise agreements with CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council have questions about the franchise agreement renewal? SUMMARY: Since 2013, the City has been working on renewing the franchise agreements with CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy. The City has approved two extensions, one in 2012 and one in 2015. The latest extension is set to expire on December 31, 2016. City staff has been in contact with both utilities regarding this upcoming deadline, and there is mutual interest in working on this new agreement. The approval for these agreements through the City Council and Public Utilities Commission takes approximately 5 months. The City has been working with Xcel since March on the terms of the agreement renewal. City Attorney, Soren Mattick, has been involved in the discussions and has reviewed and commented on the proposed agreement. The two utility companies are currently considering city staff/ attorney comments on the draft agreements. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City’s Pavement Management Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected by both Xcel and CenterPoint Energy. Based on the current fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $2.3 million annually (CenterPoint - $889,524; Xcel - $1,420,116). VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director Reviewed by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Xcel and CenterPoint Franchise Agreement Renewal DISCUSSION Background: The City currently has franchise agreements with Xcel Energy and with CenterPoint Energy. City staff approached staff from these two utilities earlier this year to begin discussing renewal of their respective franchise agreements. At that time staff discussed issues/ concerns with each respective utility. Since then each utility has provided us a proposed agreement for consideration. City Attorney, Soren Mattick, has been involved in the renewal discussions and has reviewed and commented on the proposed agreements. The most recent conversations held during the past several weeks involved discussing the adoption process, schedule, issues, and proposed agreements. Each utility is currently considering city staff/ attorney comments to the proposed agreements. Xcel Energy (Xcel) City staff has identified and has been discussing the following issues with Xcel with the expectation these are satisfactorily addressed either in the new agreement or separately outside the agreement: 1. Poor responsiveness associated with utility coordination and relocation needs on city infrastructure projects. 2. Permit fees for work in the city right of way. 3. Reducing the term of the agreement from 20 to 10 years. Staff is proposing to adopt the new Xcel Franchise Agreement and Franchise Fee increase at the same time utilizing the process, steps, and schedule shown below. CenterPoint Energy (CPE) City staff has not identified any issues associated with adoption of a new franchise agreement with CPE. Staff is proposing to revise the CPE agreement to make it consistent with the Xcel agreement. CPE generally seems amenable to these proposals. Staff is proposing to adopt the new CPE Franchise Agreement and Franchise Fee increase utilizing the same process, steps, and schedule as that proposed for Xcel. Adoption Process and Schedule The following adoption process applies to each of the franchise agreements: 1. Ordinances must contain all the terms and conditions of the franchise 2. These ordinances require a public hearing 3. Hearing notice must be published at least once in the City's official newspaper at least twenty (20) days prior to the public hearing. 4. At least seven days must pass between first reading (public hearing) and 2nd reading 5. At second reading motion will be “Motion to adopt the ordinance, approve the summary and authorize summary publication” 6. Ordinance becomes effective 15 days following summary publication OR date certain specified (must be a minimum of 15 days following summary publication) 7. Utility requires a 90 day review / notice period after Council adoption in order to implement the ordinance and franchise fees and notify the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) Special Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Xcel and CenterPoint Franchise Agreement Renewal Based on the above process, staff has developed the following steps and schedule for adopting the franchise agreements and franchise fees: Study Session - Discussion May 16, 2016 Study Session - Discussion July 25, 2016 Submit Public Hearing Notice to Sun Sailor Aug 4, 2016 Public Hearing Notice Published Aug 11, 2016 First Reading and Public Hearing Sept 6, 2016 (Tuesday) Second Reading (adopt franchise and fee ordinances, approve summary, and authorize summary publication) Sept 19, 2016 Submit Summary to Sun Sailor Sept 22, 2016 Summary Publication Sept 29, 2016 Franchise Ordinance Effective Date Oct 4, 2016 Franchise Fee Ordinance Effective Date (90 day PUC submission period) Jan 1, 2016 Summary and Next Steps Staff expects to obtain feedback from Xcel and CPE on agreement terms this month. Staff intends to discuss negotiation efforts with Council at the July 25th Study Session. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS: The city’s pavement management program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected for us by both Xcel and CPE, along with some general funds. Franchise fees cannot be collected by either utility unless the city has a franchise agreement providing for this. Thus, failure to negotiate franchise agreement(s) would result in the loss of franchise fee revenues for our pavement management program. Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Written Report: 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Construction Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the construction of the Outdoor Recreation Facility and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement projects. No formal action required by Council at this time. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUMMARY: Construction is currently underway on the Outdoor Recreation Facility project and Rec Center indoor refrigeration replacement. The indoor project began in early March with the removal of the west rink floor and shut down of the west rink refrigeration system (original 1971 system). Construction also began during this time on the new refrigeration room that will house the new refrigeration equipment for all three sheets of ice (two indoor and one outdoor). Once the west rink is finished and the new refrigeration system is operational, the east rink and refrigeration system will be removed. The goal is to have both rinks back in service by mid-October of 2016. The outdoor recreation facility began construction in early April. The project began with the grading of the site and the removal of 13,000 tons of earth to prepare the site for the new facility. Construction continues to date with the installation of footings and columns for the glulam beams. Project completion date is estimated for early January 2017. The grading of the outdoor facility went as planned. The one remaining excavation/grading piece that needs to be done is the below ground storm water storage. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The approved budgets for each of the projects are expected to cover the costs of the projects. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Picture of Outdoor Recreation Facility Project Picture of West Arena Prepared by: Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Construction Update DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Indoor Refrigeration Project The Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Project includes the replacement of both existing ice arena refrigeration systems, both rink floors, both sets of dasher boards, a new west arena dehumidification system, waste heat reclaim equipment for pre-heating of domestic hot water, low-e ceiling, a water treatment system, duct work painting and LED light upgrades for both rinks. This project was necessary due to the age of our current systems and the refrigeration systems dependency on R-22. The EPA is phasing out the production of R-22 and no longer will allow production of R-22 starting in 2020. The indoor project began on March 1 with the shutting down of the original 1971 west rink refrigeration system. Ice was removed along with the removal of the dasher boards and demolition of the west rink floor. Construction also began during this time on the new refrigeration room that will house the new refrigeration equipment for all three sheets of ice. The new dehumidification unit for the west rink was installed in mid-April. Presently the new piping for the west rink floor is installed and the concrete is scheduled to be poured on May 12. Once poured, the concrete will need to cure for 28 days. During this cure time the interior of the west rink will be painted. After the 28 day cure period new LED lighting will be installed followed by the installation of the low- e ceiling. Once the west rink is finished and the new refrigeration system operational, the east rink and refrigeration system will be removed. The goal is to have both rinks back in service by mid- October of 2016. There have been change orders issued for this project and any cost increases associated with these have been covered by the contingency funds included in the project budget. Outdoor Facility The construction of the outdoor recreation facility project is well underway. The project began with the grading of the site and the removal of 13,000 tons of earth to prepare the site for the new facility. The only remaining earth work yet to be completed is the storm water vault under the proposed parking lot. Footings have been poured for the columns that will support the fabric roof structure. The columns began to be formed and poured the week of May 9; this work will continue for approximately two weeks. After the footings are poured, foundations will be poured for the locker rooms, storage area and resurfacer room. This project is anticipated to be complete and available for use beginning January of 2017. There have been change orders issued for this project and any cost increases associated with these are being covered by the contingency funds included in the project budget. Special Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Construction Update Page 3 Special Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3) Title: Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Construction Update Page 4 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Presentation: 2a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Retirement Recognition of Firefighter Eric Curran-Bakken RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Mayor is asked to read the certificate and recognize Eric Curran-Bakken for his 19 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over 10 years of service will be presented with a framed certificate from the Mayor, City Manager and City Council. Eric Curran-Bakken is retiring on May 24, 2016 after 19 years of service to the city. Eric will be in attendance at this meeting. The Mayor is asked to read the certificate and present it to him in recognition of his years of service. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Not applicable. Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Coordinator Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Presentation: 2b 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 St. Louis Park Home Depot $7000 Value Wood-based, raised garden beds for the Summer Playground Edible Garden Program at Louisiana Oaks Park. Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety $1000 The purchase of Safety Camp t-shirts as a part of the annual Safety Camp event. George Hagemann A Canoe A Canoe to be used at the Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Minutes: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 2016 The meeting convened at 6:33 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano. Gregg Lindberg, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity , Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra). Guest: Mr. Griffin and Ms. Harris (Environment and Sustainability Commission Members), iMatter Representatives, Roots and Shoots Representatives, and Ron Mehl (Senior Developer, Millennium Development). 1. Partners in Energy Climate Action Plan (Energy Work Group of E&S Commission) Mr. Harmening presented the update on the Partners in Energy Climate Action Plan. Ms. Harris introduced the Partners in Energy Climate Action Plan. Tonight, the focus is on one of the three key goals shared at the annual meeting. She directed the council to the handout that explains the three key goals. These key goals include the Climate Action Plan, Integrating Sustainability into the Comp Plan, and Green Steps Cities. Mr. Harmening stated the iMatter team from the school is also in attendance. Mr. Griffin, Partners in Energy team, discussed all of the participants who make up this organization. The Roots and Shoots team also introduced themselves to the council. Mr. Griffin explained that the four focus areas are partnership with youth; promoting adoption of renewable energy; energy efficiency in business; and the Climate Action Plan. .Mr. Griffin stated that climate change is the greatest problem that has ever been faced environmentally. In order to get below 2 degrees Celsius, which is the tipping point, global average emissions must be reduced to under 2.0 tons of CO2 emissions. Councilmember Hallfin asked how that figure was calculated. Mr. Griffin displayed the Berkeley Cool Climate Calculator, which shows specific areas in detail. He displayed the regional indicators, which provide the hard data such as vehicle miles traveled; natural gas readings from meters; and electricity usage. The reason why electricity is focused on first is that it is 39% of the make up for climate change risk factors. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 The commercial/industrial sector has the most responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. One of Partners in Energy’s goals is to adopt renewable energy, and this could be accomplished through the Energy Action Plan, which is forthcoming. Mr. Griffin explained that 70% of electricity is used by the commercial sector, and 30% is used by residential. Commercial includes apartment complexes when not individually metered. If electricity is individually metered, it is categorized as residential. Mr. Griffin stated that the business leaders along with a crew of experts came together to draft the Climate Action Plan. Several cities, including San Diego, Seattle, New York, Atlanta, and San Francisco, have a Climate Action Plan, which is a long-term plan to work towards Net Zero in carbon emissions. The city could reach Net Zero emissions in 2040 and Net Zero for electricity in 2025. Mr. Griffin explained that the plan is a broad based commitment that would drive the city towards these defined goals. Community members, energy providers, council, and non-profits would all need to join together to accomplish the goals. Mayor Spano asked if Xcel has given any recommendations or tools to help engage the business community. Mr. Griffin stated that Partners in Energy has received participation of some of the lead businesses in the city. In turn, these businesses would receive good publicity. In addition, the cause is currently driven by Xcel so this also helps business involvement. Councilmember Brausen asked about Xcel’s investment because it doesn’t make sense that they would want to drive energy prices down since they profit from energy use. Mr. Griffin stated that Xcel signed on for 18 months but beyond that their participation is not guaranteed. Mr. Griffin explained that the city is no longer increasing greenhouse gas emissions, which can be attributed, in part, to conservation efforts. The city needs to be at a 9% annual reduction and is currently at a 2.5% reduction. Net zero is defined as all electricity beinggenerated from renewable sources. According to the plan, the city should achieve this goal by 2025. The reason that emissions is set to 2040 is because items such as cars may still be on the road and every resident may not be able to update current energy systems in their homes. Councilmember Mavity arrived at the Special Study Session at 6:53 p.m. Mr. Griffin stated that he is asking Council to recognize the city’s responsibility to immediately and fully address contributions to climate change. He went over in detail the items that he is asking the Council to consider and what motions need to be approved to accomplish the organization’s goals to achieve Net Zero status. One of these goals includes making a commitment to switch to 100% renewable electricity purchases beginning in 2016 for every city-managed electricity account. Councilmember Sanger asked Mr. Harmening if staff resources are available to dedicate to this plan. Mr. Harmening stated that the city could strive to meet that goal in the future, and more resources and information is needed on planning this type of project. Councilmember Lindberg stated that it is important to quantify these goals. He explained that, when thinking back to issues relating to the environment, one of the things that he has requested is measurable and quantifiable steps to accomplish the goals. He explained that he thinks this is a City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 very important commitment to step forward and help care for the environment for future generations. He stated that he wants to move forward. Councilmember Sanger stated her agreement with Councilmember Lindberg and stated that she would like move forward. She asked Mr. Harmening to define the dollar amount and dedicate staff resources. Mr. Harmening stated that he doesn’t know what is needed, and analysis is needed for planning so he can dedicate staff resources. He would like the Environment and Sustainability Commission to work together to quantify the resources needed. Mr. Griffin stated the Environment and Sustainability Commission could work the figures up and give Mr. Harmening an estimate on the approximate amount of time needed. Councilmember Miller asked for a roadmap to get to these goals such as an example from another city or something that’s further developed that has more detail and outlines the steps. Mr. Griffin responded that San Diego would be a good city to look at. In addition, the Department of Commerce will have a new template ready in June. Councilmember Brausen stated that he fully supports this cause, and that he doesn’t think there is a choice in the matter. Councilmember Mavity stated that she is also in favor of moving forward. She stated that the Environment and Sustainability Commission has exceeded her vision. She asked if these goals can all be addressed at once or if there are priorities that need to be addressed first. Mr. Griffin responded that the commitment can be accomplished immediately; however, the plan itself is more long-term. Mr. Miller asked if there is a service that will help residents understand and become educated about climate change. Mr. Griffin responded that he agrees there is a lot of information and a lot of mixed messages. He stated if everyone can work together on the same plan, this could become the resource. Ms. Harris stated that there is a Facebook page that can be used as a portal to convey information to residents. Mr. Harmening stated that he is interested in the three focus points that the Environment and Sustainability Commission has developed and wants to make sure that the focus points are included in the Comp Plan. Mayor Spano suggested that Mr. Harmening also consider review of existing contracts and work to obtain information on resources needed to move toward sustainable energy. Councilmember Lindberg asked if the Environment and Sustainability Commission has done any work on goals around solid waste or water consumption. Mr. Griffin stated that the city is already a leader on the solid waste portion, and solid waste is a small sliver compared to natural gas, electricity and vehicles. He explained that he does agree that water consumption should be addressed; however, there are no goals or recommendations as of yet. The meeting recessed at 7:25 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:16 p.m. 2. Excelsior & Monterey Redevelopment (Bridgewater/Dominium) Mr. Walther introduced the topic of the Excelsior & Monterey Redevelopment. In July of 2014, the Council heard a presentation from Bridgewater. At that meeting the concept plan was City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 addressed, which included the proposal for a 6-story building, allowing higher density through a PUD, and selling the EDA lot to facilitate redevelopment. Also, a TIF request was expected, but a formal amount is not defined at this time. He discussed the history of the process of this prospective development. Mr. Walther explained that additional traffic studies were completed by staff in response to Council concerns. There was a study more specifically around the area of Park Commons Drive and Monterey Avenue, which is one area that showed traffic would be impacted near Trader Joes. There would be a slight decrease in the level of service of one leg of the intersection, and mitigation should be considered. The direction of the Council was to pursue a right turn lane addition on Park Commons Drive to improve the level of service. Mr. Walther explained that there are currently three properties on this site. He reviewed the site plan to display the footprint of the proposed building. Most of the building is 6 stories tall, but it does step down in height on Monterey Drive. He discussed in detail the parking proposed and the service entrance, which would be for activities such as trash pickup and moving. The proposed development will create two new lots, and it will also accommodate the existing Bridgewater Bank site. The density is calculated as 167 units at 69.9 units per acre. The range for nearby developments is 58 to 103 units per acre. The height of the proposed development is 71.5 feet to the top of sixth floor and 76.5 feet to the highest point of the trellis. Ron Mehl, Senior Developer with Millennium Development, explained that Millennium Development is a 44-year-old company with approximately 25,000 units, primarily affordable housing, across the United States. Everything the company builds they own for the long-term, and they manage their own properties. He explained the specifics behind Bridgewater Bank, which included that the bank is closed evenings. He also explained that the building design does not include any restaurant space. The proposed development is 167 units total, with 20% of these units affordable housing. Mr. Mehl explained that there are different entrances and exits for a variety of different users and explained these entrances and exits in detail. A lot of thought was put into where these entrance and exits are constructed to meet the needs of both retail and residents. Mr. Mehl explained that the common space is a two-story lobby. On the second floor, an exercise/yoga studio, party room and an office are planned. The courtyard meets the city’s outdoor recreation requirement and the changes suggested in the shadow study have been implemented. He explained that pedestrian control to encourage pedestrians to cross at the signals and crosswalks is being worked into the plans. Councilmember Mavity stated that she has several questions. Specific to this design, which includes access and traffic control, she asked how safety for pedestrians and bikers on the new bike lane can be managed. In addition, she asked about aesthetics. The extra floor will not make a difference on traffic but may make a difference in appeal and the green space. There are a lot of mature trees on Excelsior Boulevard, and she is concerned how this development will affect the trees. She does not have any concern on the per unit/per acre because, in her opinion, it’s in line with the vision for the area. Councilmember Mavity explained that her main concern with this proposed development is the access and flow of this area. The will of the Council was not to put a stoplight or mitigation and City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 add a turn lane. She stated that this makes her question the design. The exit/entrance is primed for conflicts on Park Commons Drive. She explained that the main entrance is right there at Park Commons Drive, so everywhere someone would want to go would be going backwards, and pedestrians are just going to walk across. She noted that it is important to guide people to cross at the light. Mr. Mehl stated that, regarding Park Commons Drive and pedestrian flow, he is working on options to present to the Council. He further explained that the main entrance/lobby is there for a reason as the development is mixed use and the highest use of retail space is along Excelsior Boulevard. The entrance on Excelsior Boulevard is right in/right out, but the preference for access on Monterey Avenue is all access. Councilmember Sanger stated that she has a lot of problems with the proposal as it now stands. She stated that the main problem is access issues on Monterey Avenue. She explained that right now there will be 12 turning movements within close proximity, which is too dangerous. She explained that she cannot support a design that has two access points onto Monterey Avenue, because that just won’t work. In addition, she stated that she is not a fan of the design of the proposed building and hopes that the design can be reconfigured. Councilmember Sanger stated that her second main concern is there is no green space at ground level. She explained that her third main concern is that the footprint of the building is too large, and the development doesn’t allow for any green space or trees. For the reasons outlined above, she stated that she does not support the project as it has been presented. Councilmember Lindberg stated that this project does make sense. He noted that mixed use is the right direction. He stated that he is concerned about traffic, but traffic is the reality of this area. He explained that one of his primary concerns is access, mainly the rear access that uses the easement next to Park Rehab. He asked for clarification on how that access will be used. Mr. Mehl responded that a F.O.B. system will be used for the residents, which will be controlled at the building so it can be turned on/off. Councilmember Lindberg stated that he has issues with aesthetics. He pointed out that the proposed building looks very similar to what was just done at 4900. He explained that there is a lot of concern by residents in reference to the height of the proposed building. Councilmember Brausen stated that he is in support of the project. He noted that recycling organics should be required, and the lighting in the parking areas should be reduced to minimize the effect on neighbors. He is concerned about traffic; however, there are going to be traffic issues at times. Councilmember Miller stated that he appreciates the affordable housing component; the company as a developer; that the community is growing to keep the tax base reasonable; and staff time and resources spent on the project. He stated that he is concerned about the height and mass and the unattractive look of the proposed building. He explained that the balance of the community is at stake between growth and the attractiveness of the community, and this building shifts that vision. He stated that he understands the developer’s position; however, the job of the Council is to protect the feel of the community. Councilmember Hallfin asked for clarification regarding the amount of space between driveways. Ms. Heiser stated that access spacing is for different types of roadways, and it is a MnDOT code. In urban areas, however, it is generally not practical to space the accesses 330 feet apart. The report that was generated states that the driveways were spaced correctly. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 Mr. Walther stated that he would like to clarify the comment that Councilmember Sanger made regarding the stoplight not being feasible. He explained that the stoplight is feasible but not recommended at this time. In reference to Councilmember Lindberg’s statement about aesthetics, Councilmember Hallfin stated that the city has an ordinance for building materials. The building code needs to be changed if the Council is dissatisfied with the building materials used. Councilmember Lindberg stated that was partially his intention. Councilmember Hallfin stated that his last comment is the density question, which in his opinion, turns into a traffic study. He stated that he does not have a lot of confidence in traffic studies. He expressed his opinion that the design for the entrance/exit at Park Commons Drives needs to be changed. As the plan is now, he stated that he does not think that he will support it. Mayor Spano stated that he is pleased with the affordable housing component. He stated that he is not concerned about the height of the proposed building. He asked whether the nursing home on the north end has an opinion on the proposed development. Mr. Mehl stated that the plans were given to them for review, and no response has been received. Mayor Spano reminded the Council that aesthetics are not the Council’s priority. He explained that the reason he cannot support this proposed development is that the density is more than what is allowed for the area, which impacts traffic and access. Councilmember Sanger stated that she is thrilled that the Council is addressing aesthetics. Secondly, following up on Councilmember Hallfin’s comment regarding the number of feet between access points, she stated that she does not believe that the intersections used are comparable. Councilmember Mavity stated that she does not think the Council should be involved in design and the variability of the material adds interest, which is a good thing. She asked for clarification in reference to the art planned in the development. Mr. Mehl stated that the corner of Excelsior Boulevard is under consideration, but the impact on traffic and visibility is still being evaluated. Councilmember Mavity stated that the Council has already addressed the traffic issue so that should not hold the developer back. She noted that the access to the building and how it impacts traffic is definitely an issue. Mr. Mehl stated that he is going to address the Council’s concerns. He explained that some of these concerns will be very difficult to address; however, access, flow and greenspace can be addressed. 3. Wooddale/Hwy 7 Traffic Study Update Mr. Sullivan introduced the topic. He discussed the goals for the traffic study. These goals include increasing safety; improving traffic operations; addressing comprehensive plan growth; quality access to the transportation network while maintaining private access; and cost considerations. Mr. Sullivan explained staff is proposing new signals at the ramps in 2017. Secondly, the frontage road would be limited to a right in/right out. This has become challenging because there are uses for the East Frontage Road, so there is a concern about a U-turn movement, which presents a safety issue. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 7 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 Mr. Sullivan stated that last fall the Xenwood Avenue Extension was considered. This proposal would include new signals at the ramps, right in/right out, and full access under the railroad. This option is very expensive. The high level of cost for this alternative alerted staff to consider another option. He explained that the next option is to widen the bridge and add a southbound left turn lane. Mr. Sullivan discussed the offset buttonhook ramp design, which would relocate the frontage road to the west side of Wooddale Avenue. This would free up land adjacent to the EDA parcel and would remove an intersection from the corridor. Staff tried to find ways to move intersections around and help traffic flow in the area. Lastly, as a more aggressive approach, the single point urban intersection plan was discussed. This option is the most expensive, and would also be the most disruptive because it is a complete overhaul of the area. Staff is recommending that the bridge be widened, right in/right out of East Frontage Road as well as a left turn lane (Exhibit C in the staff report). Mr. Sullivan expressed that this would be the area’s best and most viable option. Mr. Harmening confirmed that the improvements and changes to the PLACE development scheme that are recommended would include a reduced amount of development on the EDA and McGarvey parcels. This will meet the requirements of the 2040 analysis, which added expected growth in to the Comp Plan. Councilmember Mavity stated that she hopes that the city employs creativity in the future in reference to easements to fully integrate the light rail into this area. Mr. Locke stated that they could only go so far with their planning. Through this study, it was found that action on the north side needs to be limited because the area cannot handle the increase in traffic. Councilmember Mavity stated that money was given to the consultant for the Xenwood underpass design. She explained that the city should not pay for a design that will not be used. She stated that she prefers the buttonhook design because this design creates two intersections. She explained that one of the problems with this area is that there are too many intersections all coming together. The buttonhook ramp design really brings that down into a more manageable design, especially for pedestrians. In reference to Councilmember Mavity’s question about the Xenwood design cost, Mr. Locke explained that the cost has been spent for a piece of the project that has been completed. In reference to the buttonhook ramp option, Mr. Sullivan stated that staff is not recommending this option moving forward because of the high cost and the minimal impact on traffic. Councilmember Sanger stated that this plan potentially splits the PLACE project north and south of the tracks. She doesn’t understand how this would make a difference regarding the amount of vehicle traffic over the bridge because it would be the same amount of traffic either way. She asked if all plans would include a tunnel under Wooddale Avenue for bikes and pedestrians. Mr. Sullivan explained that the base project budget does include a tunnel for bikes and pedestrians, and this plan is not impacted by any of these options. Mr. Sullivan explained that the use of Xenwood Avenue and Yosemite Avenue will be critical components of this project. In response to Councilmember Miller’s request for clarification, Mr. Sullivan explained that staff is suggesting to move the whole sidewalk and wall, adding over six feet, which would make a City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 8 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 18, 2016 more rideable and drivable surface. Councilmember Miller asked how the southbound left turn lane option reduces traffic. He suggested that the intersection at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue be examined for a traffic study. He also asked if all assumptions show that PLACE or another EDA project would have the same impact on the area. Mr. Sullivan responded that since the city has rights to both parcels, acceptable traffic will be decided prior to development to determine a benchmark that provides a proposal that gets 125 trips at the peak. Mayor Spano stated that he doesn’t know that there is a good solution for this area. He asked if MnDOT is okay with the city changing their bridge. Mr. Sullivan responded that this was presented at a workshop with MnDOT and was met favorably as it can be accomplished from a construction aspect with minimal cost. Mr. Harmening stated that the plan for signals, turn lane and bridge widening is a modest cost when discussing changes for this area. Mayor Spano stated that the city must also keep in mind the ongoing Highway 100 construction, which has made traffic flow differently in the city. Councilmember Sanger stated she was pleased to hear that the traffic lights on the bridge are planned to be installed in 2017. She suggested staff wait to see how these lights impact the area before widening the bridge. Mr. Locke responded that the city needs to keep working with PLACE and continue to move forward with the plans for the area. Councilmember Brausen stated that he is in favor of pursuing the southbound left turn lane proposal and moving towards development. Councilmember Lindberg stated his agreement as well as his satisfaction that the city is not planning to spend a lot on an underpass. Councilmember Hallfin stated his agreement with Mayor Spano that once the Highway 100 construction is complete, traffic will change. In addition, he expressed that widening the bridge is a reasonable approach. Mayor Spano stated that this intersection needs improvement even if the area is not developed. 4. Boards & Commissions Appointments (Verbal) Mayor Spano stated that a discussion was held at the last meeting, but a decision was not made on all of the candidates seeking appointment. He explained that the next round of interviews should be set for May 2. Mr. Harmening clarified that there are six total vacancies on the Environment and Sustainability Commission, with three filled and three still needing to be selected. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal) None. The meeting adjourned at 10:33 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Minutes: 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 2016 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:34 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), Inspections Director (Mr. Hoffman), Interim Controller (Mr. Heintz), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra). Guests: Julie Eddington (Attorney, Kennedy and Graven). 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. National Volunteer Recognition Day Proclamation Ms. Deno explained that this proclamation is for Volunteer Recognition Day. There are many volunteers that need to be recognized for their service to the City of St. Louis Park. Mayor Spano read the proclamation, and proclaimed April 20, 2016, as Volunteer Recognition Day in the city. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Closed Executive Session Minutes March 21, 2016 It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg and seconded by Councilmember Brausen to approve the March 21, 2016 Closed Executive Session Minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 3b. City Council Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Councilmember Sanger stated that Mayor Jacobs was mentioned on the first page of the minutes; therefore, that entry needs to be corrected to Mayor Spano. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2016 It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin and seconded by Councilmember Mavity to approve the March 21, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes with the change as noted. 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. Adopt Resolution No. 16-058 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service line at 3341 Glenhurst Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 06 -028- 24-14-0079. 4b. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2490-16 amending the zoning map, and approve the summary ordinance for publication. 4c. Designate Visu-Sewer, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $264,874.30 for the Sanitary Sewer Main Rehab Project #4016-3000. 4d. Designate Allied Blacktop Co. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $360,172.79 for Street Maintenance Project (Sealcoat Streets-Area 1– Project No. 4016-1200). 4e. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School for an event to be held on May 24, 2016, at the Sabes Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Road in St. Louis Park. 4f. Appoint Thom Miller as a City Council Representative to the Community Education Advisory Commission for a term expiring May 31, 2019. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 16-059 authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute a purchase agreement for approximately 4.77 acres of property owned by the City of Minneapolis located at 40th St. and France Ave. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, 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 6a. Mount Olivet Private Activity Revenue Bonds. Resolution No. 16-060 Mr. Heintz presented the topic regarding the issuance of revenue refunding bonds for Mount Olivet. He noted the bonds are not to exceed $33 million. Mayor Spano asked why the City of St. Louis Park is doing this rather than the City of Minneapolis. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2016 Julie Eddington, Kennedy and Graven, stated she represents the City of St. Louis Park in this matter. She explained that the City of Minneapolis has a rule that bonds be issued in at least $25,000 increments. In addition, Minneapolis charges higher fees. She explained Mt. Olivet supporters would like to buy the bonds, and not everyone can afford the higher price. She noted the City of Minneapolis gave host approval for St. Louis Park to issue the bonds. Mr. Harmening asked about the city’s obligation to repay the bonds. Ms. Eddington explained that there are certain types of borrowers who qualify for the bonds, and these borrowers should benefit by borrowing at tax exempt rates. She stated the city has no responsibility to pay the debt, and it will not affect the city’s credit rating. Councilmember Mavity asked with the city’s affordable fees, the cost of staff time and the consultant time that has gone into this project, if the fee covers the costs incurred. Ms. Eddington explained that the city receives a fee that goes into the affordable housing fund. In addition, publication is reimbursed and her attorney fees are paid by the borrower. She added the city will receive approximately $700,000 dollars over the life of these bonds. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to adopt Resolution No. 16-060 authorizing issuance of Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds for Mount Olivet. The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Adopt 2012 International Property Maintenance Code with Amendments Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report regarding the city’s property maintenance code. The property maintenance code is more than just the adopted reference model code. All buildings in the city should be in compliance with the building code requirements in effect when constructed or remodeled, and then maintained to the IPMC standards. The code does not require owners to update the property as long as the building is properly maintained. Mr. Hoffman explained that, over time, the property maintenance code has continued to evolve into its current format, which has been used as a model in some other cities. The property maintenance code applies to all buildings at all times. The expectation is that people maintain their properties, and the city’s maintenance programs, which include the property maintenance certificate, rental inspections, city-wide evaluations, and complaint response inspections, are used to verify compliance. He stated St. Louis Park’s point of sale program is unique as it ensures minimum code compliance and applies to residential and commercial properties. The city performs the inspections and lets the property owner know what, if anything, needs to be corrected. It can either be corrected by the seller or communicated to the buyer. The buyer can enter into an agreement with the city that they will fix the issue by an established deadline. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2016 He noted there is an annual license for rental inspections and they are inspected every two years to ensure that they are being properly maintained. He explained the Inspections Department uses the code when investigating resident complaints received from the “my SLP” app or the “report a problem” hotline. He noted the next cycle of the city-wide property evaluation will begin in about a month. Staff will examine all residential properties from the road to identify code issues and to be proactive in addressing deficiencies. The 2012 International Property Maintenance Code is a national model code written by the ICC. Once a code is published, the city can adopt the code by reference. Throughout the review process, amendments were prepared to make the code work effectively within the city. Mr. Hoffman discussed the proposed amendments in detail with the council, including additional nuisance provisions. Councilmember Sanger stated that she read through all of the International Property Maintenance Code and has no problems, but has a question in Code 304.13.3 regarding storm windows. She asked why the city does not require all properties to have storm windows. Mr. Hoffman explained that the city code cannot be retroactive and require energy or building code upgrades. Councilmember Lindberg asked for more definition to Code 302.2 regarding general requirements with re-grading. Mr. Hoffman explained that with something like putting in a planting bed, due to the close distance of lots, water drainage could be disrupted. The idea behind this code provision is to create a relatively simple requirement stating that a person cannot create a negative water impact on neighbors’ lots. If something were to happen, this new code language would give the city justification to request that the problem be corrected. Mayor Spano asked for clarification on Section 310 regarding outdoor storage. Mr. Hoffman explained that it is meant to ban items such as mattresses, building materials, furniture and tree waste that some people keep in their yard. In reference to Mayor Spano’s question about Bagsters, Ms. Boettcher explained that a resident is allowed to have the Bagster in the yard for a total of 14 days per year. It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the first reading of an ordinance adopting the 2012 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) with Amendments in Chapter 6 Article V – Property Maintenance Code, Chapter 12 Article II - Nuisances, and to set the second reading for May 2, 2016. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Miller stated that there is a session at the Lenox Center tomorrow addressing anxiety and mental health in adolescents. He encouraged all interested to attend. Councilmember Brausen thanked the Boy Scouts in attendance to work on earning their Citizenship in the Community Badge. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2016 Councilmember Sanger stated the Home Remodeling Tour will be held on the first Sunday in May. There are six homes open for viewing. She noted event information is available on the city’s website. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Minutes: 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MAY 2, 2016 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Papas). Guests: None. 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year Marla Destache-MacDonald one of the directors of the program attended to introduce the 2015-2016 Parktacular Ambassadors. During the ambassadors’ reign, they have participated in 40 parades and coronations and over 20 service projects throughout the city. The ambassadors introduced themselves and briefly explained their favorite event during the 2015-2016 season. Councilmember Brausen expressed his appreciation of the ambassadors and the time spent to represent the city. Mayor Spano asked if one of the ambassadors could speak about a service project. Ms. Destache-MacDonald explained that organizing a service project is one of the requirements of the young adult representatives. Both of the young adult ambassadors discussed the service projects they organized for the city. 2b. Teacher Appreciation Week Proclamation Mayor Spano invited the teachers in attendance to accept the proclamation. He read the proclamation, which proclaimed Teacher Appreciation Week from May 2-6. The teachers and staff in attendance introduced themselves. The Council thanked the teachers for their hard work and their important role in the city. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2016 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes March 28, 2016 Councilmember Sanger requested more detail be added to the sentence at the top of page 6, in the first full paragraph. The sentence should instead state, “the sidewalk on Utica Avenue south of 28th Street” to make it clear. Also on page 6, further down the page, Councilmember Sanger requested a change to the part that starts “Councilmember Sanger also asked about the following areas,” it should instead state “the area around the curve around Cedarwood Road and Parklands Road needs to be addressed.” It was moved by Councilmember Brausen and seconded by Councilmember Lindberg to approve the March 28, 2016, Study Session Meeting Minutes with the changes as noted. The motion passed 7-0. 3b. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes April 4, 2016 Councilmember Mavity requested a change to the top of page 3, the first sentence should instead state that the area has been used extensively for storm water management over the past several decades, rather than state that the area has been over used. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen and seconded by Councilmember Miller to approve the April 4, 2016 Special Study Session Meeting Minutes with the changes as noted The motion passed 7-0. 3c. City Council Meeting Minutes April 4, 2016 It was moved by Councilmember Brausen and seconded by Councilmember Hallfin to approve the April 4, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes 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 March 26 through April 22, 2016. 4b. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Finnegans Community Fund at Gamble Drive and the adjacent privately owned parking lot in West End for May 21, 2016. 4c. Designate Hardrives, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with them in the amount of $661,279.87 for the 2016 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Project No. 4016-1100. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2016 4d. Designate Century Fence Company as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with them in the amount of $125,760.40 for the Connect the Park! Bikeway Project Number 4015-2000. 4e. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2491-16 approving 2012 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) with Amendments in Chapter 6 Article V – Property Maintenance Code, Chapter 12 Article II Nuisances and to approve the summary ordinance for publication. 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 16-061 approving relocation of polling place for Precinct 16 located in Ward 4 from Sabes Jewish Community Center to St. Louis Park Middle School, 2025 Texas Ave. S. 4g. Approve the 2016/2017 Neighborhood Grants. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 16-062 approving the Third Amendment to the Contract for Private Redevelopment with Central Park West, LLC. 4i. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 Councilmember Brausen asked to make a comment regarding Consent Calendar Item 4f. He noted the polling place for Precinct 16 will be relocating to the SLP Middle School. Mr. Harmening stated that the change will be reflected on the Secretary of State’s website, and a mailing will also be sent to voters in Precinct 16. In reference to Consent Calendar Item 4g, Mayor Spano encouraged neighborhood leadership to request neighborhood grants. With one exception, all requests for neighborhood grants were accepted. He noted this grant cycle is now closed. For neighborhoods that are forming, the city does have a small amount of grant funds that can help offset costs. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, 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 Miller stated that Minneapolis is having bike week from May 16-22, 2016. For those who would like to bike to work, Mark Berg is leading from the Rec Center at 7:30 a.m. on May 20. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2016 Mayor Spano stated that this Saturday morning at Caribou Coffee, from 9 to 11 a.m., is the first “Morning with the Mayor” event. He stated he will be hosting similar events on a monthly basis at different locations and times. Councilmember Sanger stated that the Children’s First Ice Cream Social is scheduled for May 15, 2016, from 2 to 5 p.m. at Wolfe Park. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Confirm Appointment of City Treasurer RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution confirming the appointment of Timothy Simon as City Treasurer, effective May 16, 2016. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable SUMMARY: With the resignation of Controller Brian Swanson, City Manager Tom Harmening appointed Finance Supervisor Steven Heintz as the interim Controller during the recruitment process. Council also approved Steve’s appointment as interim City Treasurer at the February 16, 2016 Council meeting. We completed the recruitment process and City Manager Tom Harmening is pleased to inform Council that we have hired Timothy Simon as Controller and he will start on May 11, 2016. It is recommended that Council appoint Timothy Simon as City Treasurer effective May 16, 2016, as set out in Section 5.04 of the City Charter. The attached resolution will confirm the appointment of Timothy Simon as City Treasurer. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4a ) Page 2 Title: Confirm Appointment of City Treasurer RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF TIMOTHY SIMON CITY TREASURER, EFFECTIVE MAY 16, 2016 WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Charter Section 5.04 grants authority to the City Manager to control and direct the administration of the City’s affairs and to appoint with the consent of Council the position of City Treasurer; and WHEREAS, with the resignation of Brian Swanson, Controller and City Treasurer, on February 17, 2016, the City Council approved the appointment of Steven Heintz as interim City Treasurer during the recruitment and selection process; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has selected and hired Timothy Simon as Controller for the City of St. Louis Park effective May 11, 2016; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council to confirm the recommendation of the City Manager to appoint Timothy Simon as City Treasurer, in accordance with City Charter Section 5.04, effective May 16, 2016. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: 2nd Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Related to Distilleries and Cocktail Rooms RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the zoning code relating to microdistilleries and cocktail rooms, and to approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support the proposed changes to allow microdistilleries and cocktail rooms? SUMMARY: The City Council approved the first reading on March 21, 2016 with the stipulation that the ordinance be amended further to allow microdistilleries in the IG district to also operate a cocktail room in a similar manner as allowed in the IP district. The attached ordinance has been amended since the first reading to: 1. Allow microdistillery cocktail rooms as an accessory use in the IG – General Industrial zoning district per City Council’s direction. Staff previously proposed to exclude cocktail rooms from the IG zoning district. 2. Allow microdistillery cocktail rooms to occupy up to 25% of the gross floor area of the microdistillery. This rule will be consistent for BP, IP and IG districts. Previously, cocktail rooms were limited to 15% of the gross floor area in the IP Industrial Park district. This change was made by staff based on input from an existing microdistillery business in St. Louis Park. 3. Remove the redundant condition that a microdistillery be limited to 40,000 proof gallons in a calendar year. This condition is already contained in the definition of microdistillery. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proposed Ordinance Proposed Summary Ordinance Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Consent Agenda Item: 4b City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: 2nd Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Related to Distilleries and Cocktail Rooms ORDINANCE NO.____-16 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-4 DEFINITIONS, 36-233 BP BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT, 36-243 I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT, AND 36-244 I-G GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 16-04-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-142, 36-233, 36-243, and 36-244 are hereby amended by adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***, definitions in Sec 36-142(d) are to be inserted in alphabetical order. *** Sec. 36-142(d). Commercial Uses. *** Microdistillery means a distillery producing premium, distilled spirits in total quantity not to exceed 40,000 proof gallons in a calendar year. Microdistillery cocktail room. The on-sale sale of distilled liquor produced by the distiller on the premises of or adjacent to a microdistillery location owned by a distiller. *** Sec. 36-233. BP business park district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in any BP district may be used for one or more of the following uses if it has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 and complies with the performance standards as stated in Section 36-232 and the conditions stated below: *** (13) Microdistillery. The conditions are as follows: a. Up to 25% of the gross floor area of the microdistillery may be used for any combination of retail and a microdistillery cocktail room. *** Sec. 36-243. I-P industrial park district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an I-P district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-242 and those specified for the use permitted in this subsection: City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 Title: 2nd Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Related to Distilleries and Cocktail Rooms *** (12) Microdistillery. The conditions are as follows: a. Up to 25% of the gross floor area of the microdistillery may be used for any combination of retail and a microdistillery cocktail room. *** Sec. 36-244. I-G general industrial district. *** (c) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an I-G district. *** (16) Microdistillery. The conditions are as follows: a. Up to 25% of the gross floor area of the microdistillery may be used for any combination of retail and a microdistillery cocktail room. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 16-04-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing February 17, 2016 First Reading March 14, 2016 Second Reading May 16, 2016 Date of Publication May 26, 2016 Date Ordinance takes effect June 10, 2016 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4b) Page 4 Title: 2nd Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Related to Distilleries and Cocktail Rooms SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO.____-16 A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DISTILLERIES AND COCKTAIL ROOMS This ordinance would allow distilleries to operate cocktail rooms in the following manner: 1. Establish a Land Use Definition for Microdistilleries and Microdistillery Cocktail Rooms. 2. Allow a Microdistillery in the Business Park (BP), Industrial Park (IP), and General Industrial (IG) Zoning Districts as permitted with conditions. 3. Allow a Microdistillery in the BP, IP, and IG Zoning Districts to operate a Microdistillery Cocktail Room with conditions. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 26, 2016 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Accept Donation from St. Louis Park Home Depot ($7,000 value) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of wood- based, raised garden beds for the Summer Playground Edible Garden Program at Louisiana Oaks Park from the St. Louis Park Home Depot ($7,000 value). 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. St. Louis Park Home Depot was approached by Julie Rappaport, SEEDS Executive Director and edible garden facilitator, to provide raised garden beds for the Louisiana Oaks Edible Gardens that are part of the Summer Playground Program. The St. Louis Park Home Depot has graciously agreed to this request and will build the raised gardens and have them on site by mid- May, 2016. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be in the form of completed wood-based raised beds at the Louisiana Oaks Summer Playground Program site; these beds will substitute for City funds that would have been used to support new raised beds at this site. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Title: Accept Donation from St. Louis Park Home Depot ($7,000 value) RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF WOOD-BASED, RAISED GARDEN BEDS FOR THE SUMMER PLAYGROUND EDIBLE GARDEN PROGRAM AT LOUISIANA OAKS PARK ($7,000 VALUE) 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, St. Louis Park Home Depot will donate wood-based, raised garden beds with the approximate value of $7,000 to the City of St. Louis Park; 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 St. Louis Park Home Depot with the understanding that the wooden raised garden beds will be placed in Louisiana Oaks Park for the summer playground edible garden program. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Accept $1,000 Donation from Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety Camp RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a grant from the Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety in the amount of $1,000 for the purchase of Safety Camp t-shirts as a part of the annual Safety Camp event. 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. The Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety has graciously awarded to the Operations and Recreation Department a grant in the amount of $1,000. The grant is given for the St. Louis Park Safety Camp program to purchase t-shirts for the annual Safety Camp event. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to purchase t- shirts for Safety Camp participants. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant Lisa Abernathy, Recreation Supervisor Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Title: Accept $1,000 Donation from Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety Camp RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION FROM THE MINNEAPOLIS AUTO CLUB FOUNDATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000 TO PURCHASE T-SHIRTS FOR SAFETY CAMP PARTICIPANTS 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, the Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety awarded the city a grant in the amount of $1,000 to purchase t-shirts for safety camp participants; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the donation is hereby accepted with thanks to Minneapolis Auto Club Foundation for Safety with the understanding that it must be used to purchase t-shirts for safety camp participants. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Accept Donation from George Hagemann to Westwood Hills Nature Center RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a canoe from George Hagemann to Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. 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. George Hagemann graciously donated a canoe to Westwood Hills Nature Center. The donation is given with the restriction that it be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Carrie Mandler, Secretary / Program Aide Reviewed by: Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 4e) Page 2 Title: Accept Donation from George Hagemann to Westwood Hills Nature Center RESOLUTION NO. 16-__ RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION OF A CANOE TO BE USED AT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER FOR PROGRAM USE 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, George Hagemann donated a canoe to Westwood Hills Nature Center; 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 George Hagemann with the understanding that it must be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center for program use. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4f OFFICIAL MINUTES Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission March 16, 2016, 6:30 p.m. Meeting The Rec Center Programming Office 1. Call to Order Mr. May, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Commission members present: Elizabeth Griffin, George Hagemann, Kirk Hawkinson, Tiffany Hoffmann and Peter May. Commission members absent: Sarah Foulkes, George Foulkes and Edward Halvorson. Staff present: Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent, Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager, Jim Lombardi, Recreation Supervisor, Nate Rosa, Recreation Supervisor, Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation and Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary. Guest present: Abbey Curtis, St. Louis Park Resident; Jennifer Donahue, St. Louis Park Football President; Brian Olson, St. Louis Park Football Vice President; and Susan Schneck, Friends of the Arts. 2. Presentation a. St. Louis Park Football Association (Jennifer Donahue & Bryan Olson) Jennifer Donahue, President of the St. Louis Park Football Association, introduced herself along with Bryan Olson, Vice President. Ms. Donahue distributed information and presented an update on the association. There has been a steady decline in tackle football participation and believe it’s due to the media’s delivery regarding concussions. The association does everything it can to ensure football is a safe sport by providing extensive coaches training and assistance with uniform fitting. Another reason tackle football participation has declined, Ms. Donahue indicated, is many are moving to the Middle School football program. In 2014, they lost a 6th grade team and in 2015 lost 7th and 8th grade teams to the Middle School program which was approximately 70 participants. The flag football program, for grades K – 4 has increased. The Association provides scholarships to ensure those that want to play, can play. The highest year of scholarships provided in Flag and Tackle football was in 2013. Ms. Donahue advised the association would like to get a field that would be used solely for their practice. They currently get five hours of practice during the week but depending on the grade, they play on the fields at different times. They have viewed Ainsworth and City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 2 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 Louisiana Oaks Parks for practice and flag football. They’d like to use the High School stadium for Saturday games and tackle football. They are thankful for the shed at Louisiana Oaks to store their equipment. Ms. Donahue review various Association events which include pictures/weigh-in night, black striper event and youth recognition at a high school football game. Black striper is a weight restriction which means they cannot carry the ball for safety of the player. At the black striper event, they encourage participants from high school to join football. Other possible events include sponsoring a parent night to answer questions and encourage more involvement; a youth football camp and an Oriole bowl to gather and talk football. Jim Lombardi, Program Supervisor, and Rick Beane, Park Superintendent were introduced. Mr. Beane commended the Association on the organization in the shed. Ms. Donahue will contact Mr. Beane with ideas of installing shelving, etc. Mr. Lombardi advised he works closely on sharing the various field space. He meets with the city associations to ensure all their needs are met. Commission members, Ms. Donahue and Mr. Olson traded thanks. b. Friends of the Arts Annual Report (Susan Schneck) Susan Schneck, Friends of the Arts, introduced self to members. Friends of the Arts is a non-profit organization. Ms. Schneck reviewed the mission of the organization and various programs they provide which include an Arts for Life Scholarships (funded by private organizations), Arts & Culture Grant Program (collaborative with city and community foundation), Our Town (biennial community arts program which focuses on different medium/discipline/area within the arts), and Arts Council. FoTA is fiscal agent to five independent St. Louis Park arts groups. They are tax exempt so can provide financial structure and support through fiscal agent relationships with other community arts organizations). They serve as public art consultant to the city by providing critical, intellectual and economic impact. They provide a free monthly newsletter, have a virtual presence and serves as a resource for all community members, artists, and arts organizations. This summer the Our Town program is Our Town Sings! Individuals are invited to listen to various groups or actually sing. The program will be held at 7 p.m. on Tuesdays in the Wolfe Park Amphitheater. Ms. Schneck advised of the volunteer opportunities at the event. Friends of the Arts has an office in Lennox Community Center. They recently received a grant for a Part-time staff person in communications. Ms. Walsh thanked Ms. Schneck and Mr. Hagemann for their work on Friends of the Arts and advised the organization and city have a great relationship. Ms. Schneck indicated many volunteers participate in committees to do a lot of work on various programs. Ms. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 3 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 Schneck also commended Jim Rhodes who has been very active in the organization. He oversaw the collection and donations of instruments. Mr. Hagemann encouraged members to advise family or friends in senior complexes that they can recycle instruments. FoTA would pick up the instrument, get it fixed and provide to a student in need. Staff and members thanked one another. 3. Approval of Minutes a. February 17, 2016 It was moved by Commission member Hawkinson, seconded by Commission member Hagemann, to approve the February 17, 2016 meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 5 – 0. 4. Old Business a. Outdoor Recreation Complex Update (Jason Eisold) Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager, showed renderings of the outdoor complex to be added by the Rec Center. The work will begin shortly with anticipated completion by mid-December of this year. The complex will have ice in the winter, turf in the spring, and dry floor in the summer and fall. The area of the complex will be 200 x 85 with the overall, covered area of 210 x 100. As it is a covered venue, potential events include concerts, art shows, parties, weddings, Parktacular events, swing dance groups, etc. Ice will be in the complex early in November for the winter season. The complex will seat 300 – 100, have four locker rooms, and a 42-stall parking lot on the west side. There is no other complex of this type in the State of Minnesota. Ms. Walsh advised staff is working with the Communications Director on the naming of the complex. Ms. Griffin feels the Recreation Outdoor Complex would be a good name for the venue. Mr. Eisold reviewed the potential rental fees to be charged and asked for input from the group. The fee to rent ice mid-November to early March will be $130 per hour. The St. Louis Park Hockey Association will receive a $5 per hour reduction per their funding agreement. We currently sell 2,000 hours per rink in the Rec Center; the goal is to sell 300 hours on the outdoor rink. The City of Edina charges $145 per hour for their ice. The turf will be $25 per hour for residents and $40 per hour for non-residents. This is in the range of what other turf fields charge. The field size is consistent with a practice field for ages 12 and under and the Associations support the complex. Mr. Eisold indicated staff is aware of groups renting space in domes outside of the city, which is more expensive. The dry floor will be rented at $25 per hour with a two hour minimum, $150 for half a day and $300 for full day. The goal is to keep rental rates for the complex affordable to attract an array of events. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 4 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 The city needs to meet operating costs yet want to ensure it is not outpriced for use, Ms. Walsh indicated. The proposed ice rental fees are mid to low compared to the metro average. The current Rec Center ice rental fees are $195. Members were encouraged to keep the balance of the expenses versus revenue in mind. Ms. Griffin feels it’s better to start the rental rate low and can always increase. Ms. Walsh advised the fee can be increased depending on the use and demand. The reservations will be taken on a first-come, first-served basis. Mr. Eisold reminded the complex is an opportunity for city programming also. Ms. Hoffman feels the rates are reasonable. The University of Minnesota charges $325 for real turf. This includes a full size field for soccer and lacrosse which our facility will not have. She suggested staff consider allowing residents have priority reservations. Staff and members discussed the option and also of reducing rates to fill open times. Staff wants to ensure shared use of the facility. Ms. Hoffman inquired if there will be lines on the turf. Mr. Eisold explained none are in the plan now as there is a large cost to adding lines, plus the city wants to keep the potential open for various uses. The turf will be cleaned with a vacuum so if the city chooses to go that direction, the lines can be removed. Ms. Walsh advised customers will need to rent tables, chairs, etc. when they utilize the dry floor. Food and beverage will not be allowed on the turf field. There will be storage under the ramp to store the dasher boards, turf, etc. Mr. Hagemann inquired if the complex will have the same policy for serving alcohol as the Banquet Room. Mr. Eisold advised staff is working on the details of that item which will need to go through the City Council. Ms. Hoffman inquired what the turf is made from and Mr. Eisold advised it is not rubberized. Mr. Hawkinson asked about the lighting in the complex. Staff worked with the architect, Mr. Eisold advised, to ensure there will be good lighting yet not to disturb the neighbors. Mr. Foulkes asked if the complex will adhere to the same noise ordinance as other parks. Mr. Eisold advised the noise, lighting, etc. will be the same as in all other parks and adhere to our ordinances. Ms. Hoffman inquired on the agreement with the Hockey Association for the complex. Mr. Eisold indicated they will receive a $5 per hour discount on ice rented plus priority usage. Ms. Walsh advised the association understands the city will utilize the complex for various events and they are understanding that it be used for events other than hockey. Staff will be working with Benilde-St. Margaret’s and the St. Louis Park High School on the potential of scheduling a high school hockey game outside. With the 300 seats, plus area on the plaza, the complex could hold up to 500 people to accommodate larger events. The current west arena holds approximately 2,000 people and the east arena has a capacity of 300. Ms. Walsh feels there will be a high demand for the complex to be used for birthday parties when the turf is in place. Ms. Griffin feels FoTA, or city organizations, should get a cheaper rate for a whole day event. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 5 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 b. Rec Center Refrigeration Project Update (Jason Eisold) Mr. Eisold advised the Rec Center refrigeration project began March 1 with the removal of the floor in the West arena and the refrigeration equipment. The project will eliminate R22 by going to a single ammonia system. The new refrigeration room will be built on the north side of the Rec Center. The dehumidification system on the west arena will also be replaced, along with going to LED lighting on both rinks, pre-heating hot water used for ice making, and a low emissive ceiling on the roof of the rinks. A Mighty Ducks grant in the amount of $400,000 was received to help proceed with the energy efficient options. The city is taking advantage of many energy efficient options to reduce energy costs. Mr. Eisold advised the west rink is scheduled to be completed around the first of July then the same process will be completed on the east rink. The goal is to have the east rink completed, which would bring both rinks operational, by mid-October. Ms. Walsh advised staff would like to get as much groundwork completed as possible prior to the Aquatic Park opening. The grading outside should be completed mid to late April. Ms. Curtis voiced her concern the ice will melt if there is a warm spell. Mr. Eisold advised the roof is pulled down low on the south side to assist in keeping the sun off the rink. Logistically ice could be maintained on the outdoor rink eight months out of the year but expenses would be great if weather is warm. Ms. Hoffman asked how many Zamboni’s the Rec Center has to which Mr. Eisold indicated there are currently two. The city will purchase a used, electric machine for use on the outside recreation complex. 5. New Business a. Outdoor Recreation Complex Ground Breaking (Jason Eisold) Mr. Eisold advised the ground breaking ceremony will be held Monday, March 21 beginning at 5:30 p.m. It will be held outside on the northwest side of the Rec Center. If rain, will move to the vestibule. b. Skate Park Relocation Process (Jason Eisold / Rick Beane) Mr. Beane advised the skate park was removed from the Rec Center site to the new, temporary location on the parking lot in Nelson Park. Staff held a neighborhood meeting recently to discuss the placement of the skate park. The pavement in the hockey rink is uneven so chose the parking lot. They were able to save most, but not all, of the equipment. Portable toilets were also added to the site. Mr. Beane advised trash is the biggest complaint about the skate park. The movement of the skate park was advertised with signage and direct contact with the skateboarders. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 6 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 Ms. Walsh indicated that staff is working on a permanent location in the city for the skate park. The 2017 Capital Improvement Program includes new skate park equipment which will be placed in the permanent location. Mr. Hawkinson inquired what areas are being review for the skate park. Ms. Walsh advised staff initially looked at the Melrose site and now Carpenter Park is on the list of options. An underground storm water system may be installed in Carpenter Park. Staff has discussed the potential of placing the new skate park on the new storm water system. The park offers access from the regional trail, parking, good visibility and staff feels it’s a good location. Staff will discuss with Council and advise the Commission. c. 2016 Playground Structures (Rick Beane) Mr. Beane advised neighborhood meetings were held in Jersey, Justad and Wolfe Parks for the selection of playground structures. Members viewed the chosen structures. Approximately 13 Jersey Park neighbors attended to view the five to six designs. They chose a Little Tikes playground, one that is larger than what is currently in place. The playground has a Biba system which is a QR code on a pole. Users can scan the code and obtain information on what activities the kids can do with the adults. The goal is to have parents interact with their children. This is the only manufacture Mr. Beane is aware of that offers the Biba system. The colors of the playground will be bright. The old unit will be removed August 11, following National Night Out, and the new unit installed. The budget is $50,000. Mr. May inquired on the yellow structure shown on the picture. Mr. Beane advised it is a new, safer designed spinner. Ms. Hoffman asked if there is a fee for the phone application to which Mr. Beane replied none that he is aware. Mr. Hawkinson inquired if there will be signage on how adults can utilize for their fitness needs. Mr. Beane indicated additional signage will be added to accommodate adult fitness needs. Approximately 52 Justad Park neighbors attended the playground meeting hosted at Fire Station 1. The neighbors chose a playground by GameTime. There will be engineered wood fiber through the playground (all playground areas have engineered wood fiber). Replacement of the playground unit will be the same time frame as the Jersey Park structure. The budget is $50,000. The nine Wolfe Park neighbors that attended the meeting voted for a Little Tikes structure in primary colors. The small structure will remain as they were replaced two years ago. The big equipment will be replaced in an expanded playground area and have the Biba system. Staff would like the equipment installed immediately so the area is completed by the Children First Ice Cream Social scheduled for May 15. The budget is $100,000. The fourth playground to be replaced is at Nelson Park. The city will partner financially with Peter Hobart School; the school is spear heading that process. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4f) Page 7 Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of March 16, 2016 The new playground structures, Mr. Beane advised, will be visually accessible on the web. Mr. Beane indicated he received an email from Paul Bierhaus, Kids around the World representative, showing pictures from an old playground that was placed in a poor part of Jamaica. The city works with Kids around the World to take old playgrounds and repurpose them for placement in various countries. Blackstone Park playground, which was removed in 2015, is now located on the grounds of a school with 600 kids, in a very poor area, where there are a lot of orphans. 6. Staff Communication Nate Rosa, Recreation Supervisor, showed members the new summer brochure. He explained it is more ad oriented, user friendly and the work is done in-house. The 2015 Park and Rec brochure is up for an award. Ms. Walsh advised staff works closely with Communications staff on the publication. Mr. Beane advised 13 people showed up at a community garden meeting held at Nelson Park. Community gardens are very popular so will be expanding the gardens at Nelson Park which will be operational by the end of April. 7. Member Communication Mr. Hawkinson inquired if there will be a rededication for Elmer Dale field to which Mr. Beane replied there will not. Mr. Hagemann inquired on adding bike path / crossings to the agenda. 8. Other / Future Agenda Items The next regular meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 20. Ms. Walsh advised of the upcoming meeting to be held April 20 and will have Kala Fisher, solid waste program coordinator, present the zero waste packaging program. Also in April members will learn about the West End Festival Site and will discuss the creek clean up. 9. Adjournment It was moved by Commission member Hagemann and seconded by Commission member Griffin to adjourn at 8:01 p.m. The motion passed 5–0. Respectfully submitted, Stacy Voelker Stacy Voelker Recording Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 4g OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 20, 2016 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther OTHERS PRESENT: Soren Mattick, Campbell Knutson Amy Schutt, Campbell Knutson 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of March 16, 2016 Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes of March 16, 2016. Commissioner Peilen seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0-2 (Carper and Tatalovich abstained). Commissioner Person arrived at 6:03 p.m. 3. Public Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel Location: 9970 Wayzata Boulevard Applicant: GSH MPLS Full Service, LLC Case No.: 16-12-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that the request for conditional use permit is made to construct a second hotel on the Marriott hotel site. He discussed the existing access points. He explained that the southernmost driveway will be closed as a result of the proposal, leaving one access on Shelard Parkway, and one on the frontage road. He said at the request of the city Engineering Department the applicant has agreed to relocate the existing northern driveway 40 feet north to line up with a driveway for the office building on the other side of Shelard Parkway. This will improve safety by creating a more conventional intersection. Mr. Morrison discussed parking, bicycle parking, landscaping, Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA), exterior materials and stormwater. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4g) Page 2 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2016 Mr. Morrison spoke about the neighborhood meeting held on April 12, 2016. Topics included the generator, trees, trash and driveway relocation. He said residents of the Coach Homes development expressed concerns about visibility problems when leaving their driveway. Staff has conveyed this concern to the Engineering Dept. Mr. Morrison said residents expressed a desire to see some improvements in the park. Concern was also expressed about lights from cars entering the property from Shelard. He spoke about agreements made by the applicant to address park improvements and car lights. Commissioner Person asked about trends in parking stall width. He asked if any on-site stormwater management, such as pavers, was planned. He asked if some electric car charging stations will be installed. Mr. Morrison responded that the standard parking stall lot width is 8 ½ feet. Compact stall width is 8 feet. He said no impervious pavers are proposed for the project, but, as a result of the project the impervious surface will be decreased slightly. He added that the whole site drains to the pond in the park as part of the stormwater system. Commissioner Tatalovich asked for specifics regarding neighborhood desire for park improvements. Mr. Morrison responded that residents didn’t get into specifics. He said moving forward there will be a conversation with Operations and Recreation Dept. staff and residents to see what is desired. One conversation will be about a community garden. Commissioner Carper asked about proposed sidewalks and pathways for the site. Mr. Morrison said there is currently a trail along the east side of Shelard Parkway. A sidewalk and trail will be installed along the south property line. He illustrated connections from the frontage road and the park. Scott Peterson, Senior Director of Development, CSM, introduced the development team. Mark Kronbeck, Alliant Engineering, answered Chair Johnston-Madison’s question about bike stalls and showed the locations. Mr. Kronbeck said no electric charging stations are in the current plan. Most guests arrive using rental cars. Commissioner Carper asked about lighting. Mr. Kronbeck said the current site lighting uses halogen bulbs and currently the plan is to maintain the existing lighting. Two poles will be relocated. They are considering LED lighting, but the decision hasn’t been made. The Chair opened the public hearing. Marcia Weber, 491 Shelard Parkway, #201, asked about the two entrances into the hotel currently. Will they be moved? Will the parking lot lighting affect residents living just opposite the parking lot driveway? City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4g) Page 3 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2016 Mr. Morrison said the southern driveway will be removed and the northern driveway will be located 40 feet to the north so it lines up with the driveway for the office building across the street. He spoke about the lighting plan. He said great care was taken to greatly reduce the spillover lighting to the property to the north. He said the code does allow a little bit of spillover but the proposed plan reduces spillover such that the light level should be 0 foot candle at the curb line. Jane Dewing, 491 Shelard Parkway, said her greatest concern is the visibility problem when exiting the driveways. She said visibility has been a long standing problem for residents. She said with more traffic in the area, including bar traffic, and one driveway being eliminated and the other moved closer to the condo driveway, the visibility situation will be even worse. She said the community is older or disabled. She suggested signage indicating blind driveways. She said she has spoken with the Engineering Dept. for a plan. Jia You, 462 Ford Road, #406, said she is very concerned about construction traffic and noise. She said truck traffic and truck deliveries are already very noisy and it wakes up her baby. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said hours are limited to 7 a.m. – 10 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. weekends and holidays. He added that in general the actual construction activity does not extend that late. Mr. Peterson, CSM, said they are managing a full service hotel directly adjacent to the proposed site so they do want to keep noise down. Excavation should be minimal as construction will be slab on grade on existing grade. As no one else was present wishing to speak the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Person asked about trends in traffic counts in the area. He asked how many housing units are in the Shelard area. Mr. Walther responded that there isn’t a traffic study for the area. Traffic counts are done approximately every three years. He said he doesn’t have housing numbers but it is a high density area of multifamily and office development. Commissioner Peilen thanked the residents for their remarks and attendance. She said the concerns raised at the neighborhood meeting are included in the staff report. She said those concerns are taken seriously and are addressed by staff. She said she couldn’t support the request unless the concerns were taken seriously and addressed. Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 4. Other Business Mr. Walther noted that a letter dated March 20, 2016, from Diane Mundt, 3709 Grand Way, #216, was included in the agenda packet. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No.4g) Page 4 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2016 5. Communications 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. A study session began at 6:45 p.m. City Attorney Soren Mattick presented a Planning Commissioner training. Topics discussed included the role and responsibility of Planning Commissioners, conditional use permits, variances, crafting effective findings for recommendations, and relevant sample case studies. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Action Agenda Item: 5a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Approve Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and Commissions as listed in Exhibit A. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to appoint the citizen representatives listed in Exhibit A to serve on the boards and commissions listed for the respective terms? SUMMARY: The City Clerk’s Office has been accepting applications for Boards and Commissions since December, 2015. The City received a tremendous response from individuals interested in serving on a Board or Commission. A total of 88 applications were received, and 25 applicants were interviewed. There are more applicants than positions available, so not all candidates will be able to be appointed to a Board or Commission at this time. Applications for candidates not selected will be kept on file for the period of 1 year. Each of the individuals selected for appointment will be notified by staff and provided with orientation information from staff liaisons. Next Steps:  Attached is the listing showing appointments for Council approval.  At the time of preparing this document the ESC appointments had not been finalized. All appointments to Environment and Sustainability Commission have been listed as TBD (to be determined).  Additional information on ESC applicants including number of openings will be sent to Council prior to Monday’s meeting for consideration of appointments. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Exhibit A 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 May 16, 2016 (Item No. 5a) Page 2 Title: Approve Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions EXHIBIT A Name Board/Commission Term Expiration Justin Kaufman Board of Zoning Appeals 5/31/19 Paul Roberts Board of Zoning Appeals 5/31/19 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/18 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/18 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/17 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/19 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/19 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/19 TBD Environment & Sustainability – Business Member 5/31/18 Catherine Courtney Housing Authority 5/31/21 David Gorski Housing Authority 5/31/20 Savannah Curtin Human Rights Commission 5/31/18 Greg Glidden Human Rights Commission 5/31/17 Michelle Kornblit Human Rights Commission 5/31/19 Margaret Rog Human Rights Commission 5/31/19 Rich Bluma Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 5/31/19 George Hagemann Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Lynne Carper Planning Commission 5/31/19 Lisa Peilen Planning Commission 5/31/19 Richard Person Planning Commission 5/31/18 Kevin Curry Police Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Charles Kelly Police Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Michael Howes Police Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Tom Kukuk Police Advisory Commission 5/31/19 David Dyer Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Abraham Levine Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Andrew Reinhardt Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/19 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Public Right of Way and Drainage and Utility Easements and set the Second Reading of Ordinance for June 6, 2016. (Note that this action requires five affirmative votes of the Council.) POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council concur that the right of way and drainage utility easements located at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 are no longer needed for public purposes? SUMMARY: Staff is working with Clear Channel Outdoor to relocate its billboard in the SW corner of the Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue interchange. The City is negotiating a purchase agreement to buy portions of 7341 State Hwy 7 for right of way purposes and the remainder of the property for economic development purposes. Excess right of way and easements are located adjacent to the parcels. In order to maximize the development potential of the SW Parcel, staff is proposing to vacate the excess right of way and drainage and utility easements. These right of way drainage and utility easements are remnants from an older plat and are no longer necessary. Consistent with discussions at previous study sessions, the billboard is proposed to be relocated to the far west side of the Clear Channel parcel. The vacation of excess right of way must occur prior to closing on the purchase of the Clear Channel property and relocating the billboard to the new location. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Draft Ordinance Legal Descriptions Vacation Exhibits Location Map Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Page 2 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 DISCUSSION VACATION: As part of the negotiations for acquisition of the Clear Channel property located at 7341 State Highway 7, staff has been working with Clear Channel Outdoor to find a location for the two sided billboard on the west side of the property. Please see attached location map. While identifying a location on the property, staff determined that excess right of way could be vacated to shift the billboard west. Staff is proposing to vacate the excess right of way in order to shift the billboard thus maximizing the potential for development of this parcel. Please see attached vacation exhibit. The existing parcels at 7250 and 7341 State Highway 7 are triangular in shape making them difficult to develop separately. The City proposes to acquire the Clear Channel parcel and convey it to the EDA, which owns the property at 7250 State Highway 7 and combine the two parcels providing a larger parcel for future development. Also, combining the two parcels eliminates the need for an easement between the two properties since it will be under the same ownership. The drainage and utility easements which staff is proposing to be vacated were dedicated in the Louisiana Alignment Plat. An additional drainage and utility easement was obtained in 1975 for the installation of storm sewer through the property currently under contract by Clear Channel Outdoor. Unfortunately the storm sewer which was installed is not located within the easement. Staff is proposing to vacate this easement and dedicate a new easement prior to selling the property for future development. Legal descriptions and depictions of the subject area are included in the attached ordinance. A public hearing is required and a second reading of the ordinance will be scheduled for June 6, 2016. Five councilmembers must support the ordinance in order to vacate right-of-way or easements. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Page 3 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 ORDINANCE NO._____-16 AN ORDINANCE VACATING PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS AT 7250 and 7341 STATE HIGHWAY 7 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The City of St. Louis Park is initiating the vacation of excess right of way and drainage and utility easements. The notice has been published in the St. Louis Park Sailor and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the right of way and easements are not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best interest of the public that said right of way and easements be vacated. Section 2. The easements and right of way described on attached Exhibit “A” and depicted on Exhibit “B” and Exhibit “C” as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park are hereby vacated. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Section 4. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. First Reading May 16, 2016 Second Reading June 6, 2016 Date of Publication TBD Date Ordinance may take effect 15 days after publication Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council June 6, 2016 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney RIGHT OF WAY VACATION (KILMER LANE) Those parts of the public right of way currently known as Kilmer Lane and originally platted as FRONTAGE ROAD, in the plat of LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 5, Block 323, REARRANGEMENT OF ST. LOUIS PARK, as said corner is shown and called for on the plat of said LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT; thence easterly on a bearing of North 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds East, along the south line of said Lot 5, and along the easterly right of way line of said FRONTAGE ROAD, a distance of 22.10 feet; thence South 25 degrees 40 minutes 40 seconds East along said easterly right of way line 50.63 feet; thence northwesterly 69.54 feet on a nontangential curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 466.00 feet, a central angle of 08 degrees 33 minutes 02 seconds, and a chord which bears North 65 degrees 54 minutes 33 seconds West; thence North 11 degrees 09 minutes 45 seconds West 60.93 feet; thence North 82 degrees 39 minutes 36 seconds East 20.51 feet to the west line of said Lot 5, and the easterly right of way line of said FRONTAGE ROAD; thence southerly 46.60 feet along said line on a nontangential curve, concave easterly, having a radius of 548.70 feet, a central angle of 04 degrees 51 minutes 59 seconds, and a chord which bears South 13 degrees 27 minutes 07 seconds East, to the point of beginning, said area of vacated right of way contains 2403 square feet, more or less. AND Commencing at the Southwest corner of Lot 5, Block 323, REARRANGEMENT OF ST. LOUIS PARK as said corner is shown and called for on the plat of said LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT; thence easterly on a bearing of North 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds East, along the south line of said Lot 5, and along the easterly right of way line of said FRONTAGE ROAD, a distance of 22.10 feet; thence South 25 degrees 40 minutes 40 seconds East along said easterly right of way line 66.30 feet; thence North 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds East along said easterly right of way line 44.70 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 58 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds East along said easterly right of way line 92.06 feet to the most westerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of said LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT; thence continue South 58 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds East along said easterly right of way line 76.50 feet; thence northwesterly 103.02 feet along the northwesterly extension of the southerly curved boundary of said Lot 1, Block 1, LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT, said curve being nontangential to the last described course, and concave northeasterly, having a radius of 536.85 feet, a central angle of 10 degrees 59 minutes 42 seconds, and a chord which bears North 65 degrees 06 minutes 11 seconds West; thence North 59 degrees 36 minutes 20 seconds West, tangent to the previous curve, 89.38 feet to the easterly right of way line of said FRONTAGE ROAD; thence North 89 degrees 30 minutes 12 seconds East along said easterly right of way 27.10 feet to the point of beginning, said area of vacated right of way contains 1830 square feet, more or less. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 4 DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION Vacation of those certain drainage and utility easements located within Lot 1, Block 1, LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT, as said easements were originally dedicated by said plat of LOUISIANA ALIGNMENT, according to the plat thereof, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County Minnesota, said drainage and utility easements being vacated lie northerly of the following described line: Beginning at the most westerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1, as originally platted, thence southeasterly on a bearing of South 58 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds East along the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 76.50 feet; thence easterly 142.91 feet along said southwesterly line on a nontangential curve concave northerly, having a radius of 536.85 feet, a central angle of 15 degrees 15 minutes 09 seconds and a chord which bears South 78 degrees 13 minutes 37 seconds East to the southerly extension of the westerly line of an existing drainage and utility easement dedicated by said plat; thence North 08 degrees 12 minutes 11 seconds West along said westerly easement line 40.02 feet; thence North 77 degrees 35 minutes 59 seconds East along the north line of an existing drainage and utility easement dedicated by said plat, and along said easements’ easterly and westerly extension, a distance of 443.95 feet to the easterly line of said Lot 1 and said line there terminating. Also, vacation of that certain utility easement being 12 feet wide, originally granted by Nagele Outdoor Advertising Company of the Twin Cities, Inc., to the City of St. Louis Park, dated June 11, 1975, recorded July 10, 1975 as Torrens Doc. No. 1145376. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 5 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7Page 6 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7Page 7 ¬«7 L OUI SI ANAAVESWA LK E R ST LAKE S T W TAFTAVESW A L K E R S T LAKESTWL A K E ST W SERVICE DR HIGHWAY 7 OREGONAVES37TH ST W LOUI SI ANAAVES3730 7508 7341 7300 7401 7505 7221 7500 74093537 7105 37293715 7301 7405 7421 731773173733 7260 37253729 7330 73 0 1 75167201 3733 3736 3737 7250 37243721 3280 75257400 7420 7400 3501 371735333750 72003725 3500 7201 0 75 150 225Feet ² ProposedDouble-SidedBillboardSW Parcel Legend Approximate Billboard Location Approximate Billboard View Easement Parcels City Limits City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Title: First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements - ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 8 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Action Agenda Item: 8a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Climate Inheritance Resolution RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Climate Inheritance Resolution. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the adoption of this resolution consistent with the Council’s goals related to environmental stewardship? SUMMARY: The youth from iMatter presented their Climate Report Card to City Council at the March 21, 2016 meeting and also presented a draft Climate Inheritance Resolution which the Council was asked to adopt. In this resolution, iMatter youth ask the City Council to commit to working on creating a St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan that significantly reduces St. Louis Park’s greenhouse gas emissions levels. They also ask that actions towards completing a Climate Action Plan start within 30 days of adopting the resolution. Their final request is that a mechanism be created for the ongoing inclusion of young people in the process of creating and executing climate related policies and actions. Council discussed the iMatter Climate Inheritance Resolution at the Study Session on May 9, 2016 and informed staff to prepare the document for formal consideration. Next steps: Once the resolution is passed, staff will work on a schedule to create a climate action plan. This schedule will include contracting and working with professionals in this field, communicating with the Environment and Sustainability Commission and staff, and obtain input from the community. 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: iMatter Climate Inheritance Resolution Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: Climate Inheritance Resolution RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE COMMITMENT OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN OF THIS COMMUNITY FROM THE RISKS OF CLIMATE DESTRUCTION WHEREAS, 195 countries, including the United States and every country that is a member of the United Nations, reached an agreement in Paris, France on December 12, 2015 that recognizes the risk to our children’s and grandchildren’s future from climate change; WHEREAS, the greatest burden resulting from an inadequate response to the climate crisis will be carried by the youngest generation, and all who follow; WHEREAS, the risks from an inadequate response are potentially devastating, and include economic and environmental disruptions, many of which are already being felt such as more severe storms, longer and hotter heat waves, worsening flood and drought cycles, growing invasive species and insect problems, accelerated species extinction rates, rising sea levels, increased wildfires, and a dramatic increase in refugees from climate impacted lands; WHEREAS, leading climate scientists have indicated that further delay in significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions will rapidly push humanity past the point where disastrous consequences can be avoided; WHEREAS, numerous governmental and non-governmental bodies across the nation and the world have already adopted climate action plans to immediately and rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also stopping them entirely within 25 years; WHEREAS, youth of St. Louis Park have brought to Council a Youth Climate Report Card highlighting the gap between what we are doing today and actions that would be necessary to protect their future; WHEREAS, youth of St. Louis Park have indicated a willingness to work with City Council on such actions; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council commits to working constructively, using ingenuity, innovation, and courageous determination to create a St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan for consideration that significantly reduces St. Louis Park’s greenhouse gas emissions to levels that would protect our community’s children and grandchildren from the risk of climate destruction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council commits to start the St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan creation process within 30 days, and to complete it as soon as possible. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a mechanism will be created for the ongoing inclusion of young people in the process of creating and executing climate related policies and actions. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Title: Climate Inheritance Resolution Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Action Agenda Item: 8b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution to accept the Southwest Corridor- wide Housing Strategy as a means to inform future housing planning and policy in the station areas. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the Corridor-wide Housing Strategy as a document to inform future housing planning in the station areas, housing policy planning and comprehensive plan updates? SUMMARY: In May 2012, the Southwest Community Works Steering Committee approved a process to develop a corridor-wide housing strategy for the Southwest LRT Corridor. The outcome of the strategy is to help achieve the Southwest Community Work's vision and guiding principle for providing a full range of housing choices specifically within ½ mile of the Green Line Extension station areas. Southwest Corridor Community Works and their funding partners have been working together since 2012 to inventory existing housing options in the corridor and to understand what the future housing demand may be and the likely demographics of people interested in living along the corridor. In addition, the work includes an understanding of the current and potential local, county, state and federal technical and financial resources to support a full range of housing choices. Additionally, cities along the corridor have undertaken housing studies, outlined tools and strategies in comprehensive plans, and set individual housing goals. These efforts, along with other resources and technical assistance, including the findings in the Gaps Analysis conducted by Community Works, have been compiled and considered to form the basis for a Southwest LRT Corridor-wide Housing Strategy. At the September 28, 2015 Study Session meeting, an overview of the SWLRT Housing Gaps Analysis and the draft SW LRT Corridor-wide Housing Strategy were presented to the Council. Throughout the fall of 2015, Southwest Corridor Community Works continued to seek stakeholder input on the draft Strategy. A final draft of the Corridor-wide Housing Strategy was adopted by the Southwest Corridor Works Steering Committee at their January 2016 meeting and referred to member cities and partner organizations for individual action as appropriate. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Resolution Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, CD Deputy Director/Housing Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, CD Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The Southwest Corridor Housing Inventory was completed in November 2013 and the findings were presented to the City Council at the November 25, 2013 Study Session. The purpose of the housing inventory identified the current housing stock along the Southwest Corridor at various intervals from the specific station areas. Since the inventory did not provide future projections related to housing demand, future market supply, potential housing gaps or how those gaps could be addressed through the use of specific tools and strategies, the Housing Gaps Analysis was completed in September 2014 to specifically answer those questions and more including:  What housing types and values are missing from the Corridor?  What are the strengths and weaknesses along the SWLRT line?  Where are the optimal sites for housing development within ¼ mile of station areas?  Where is the greatest risk of gentrification?  What tools and strategies will be most useful in achieving the goal of a full range of housing choices? Additionally, cities along the corridor undertook housing studies, outlined tools and strategies in comprehensive plans and set individual housing goals. These efforts, along with other resources and technical assistance, including the findings in the Gaps Analysis, were compiled and considered to form the basis for preparing a draft Southwest LRT Corridor-wide Housing Strategy in March 2015. Throughout the fall of 2015, Southwest Corridor Community Works continued to seek input on the draft Strategy from stakeholders including the cities along the corridor and various interest groups; residents, developers, finance organizations, schools and housing advocates. The draft Strategy was revised based on the input received from stakeholders and a final draft of the Corridor-wide Housing Strategy was adopted by the Southwest Corridor Works Steering Committee at their January 2016 meeting and referred to member cities and partner organizations for individual action as appropriate. The final draft was presented as a written report to the Council at the May 9 Study Session. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: What are the housing goals of Corridor-wide Housing Strategy? The Corridor-wide Housing Strategy lays out a corridor wide goal for new construction and preservation of both market and affordable units by 2030.  New Construction: Add 11,200 new units within ½ mile of the Corridor, including 3,520 units affordable to low and moderate income households up to 100% Area Medium Income (AMI), with 2,265 of those units affordable to those households at or below 80% AMI. This target includes 1,314 new homeownership units, with 950 of those affordable to entry level and midmarket owners at income levels at or below 120% AMI.  Preservation: Preserve 3,820 unsubsidized affordable units (<60% AMI) rental units by 2030 out of 6,700 unsubsidized affordable units within ½ mile of the Corridor. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Title: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy In order to meet these goals the Housing Strategy goes on to identify four objectives, each with implementation strategies. The implementation strategies are designed as a toolbox of options available to funding partners and policy makers to achieve the housing goals. The four objectives include: 1. Develop new housing opportunities, 2. Preserve existing housing opportunities, 3. Expansion and improvement of technical, financial and regulatory tools, and 4. Market the corridor. How can the Corridor-wide Housing Strategy inform St. Louis Park’s Housing Policies? Southwest LRT Community Works envisions this Corridor-wide Strategy as a complement to other local housing planning and policy work. It provides objectives, suggested housing targets and potential implementation strategies that are options to help Corridor stakeholders work toward a full range of housing choices in the LRT station areas. The Housing Workgroup acknowledges that there are many ways for communities to meet local and regional housing goals and that each community, through its selected and appointed leaders, will have it owns legitimate priorities, funding and policy choices and may seek different housing balances at different points in time. The document provides a menu of options, similar to a toolbox; however, not all the strategies within the document will fit every city. The document does not include individual station goals or individual city goals; these will be left up to the individual communities along the corridor. St. Louis Park Housing staff participated on the SWLRT Housing Committee assisting in the review of the Housing Inventory and Gaps Analysis and providing input in the development of the draft SW Corridor-wide Housing Strategy. The SW Community Work’s guiding principal to provide a full range of housing choices along the SWLRT corridor closely aliens with the City’s overall housing vision to promote a balanced and enduring housing stock that offers a continuum of diverse life-cycle housing choices suitable for households of all income levels. Also, the objectives and many of the implementation strategies included in the Strategy are consistent with both the City’s current housing goals and housing related initiatives already being undertaken in the City. The Housing Strategy will not take the place of each City’s need to identify and implement Housing goals specific to meeting their communities housing needs, but it will guide and support communities in promoting a shared vison to create sustained healthy communities with a full range of housing choices along the corridor. By accepting the Corridor-wide Housing Strategy, the City of St. Louis Park is acknowledging that it will use the document to inform future station area planning, housing policy planning and comprehensive plan updates. City staff will consider the implementation strategies and their relative fit to St. Louis Park’s housing policies as we plan for future growth around the City’s three station areas. What are the benefits of having a Corridor -wide Housing Strategy? There are numerous benefits that may come from working collaboratively with other communities along the corridor, including increasing the corridor’s ability to be competitive, adding leverage to secure public and philanthropic resources, sending a positive message to the development community about the desire for a mix of housing choices, and aligning to achieve regional goals. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Title: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy In addition, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in its most recent New Starts Guidance, now considers policies, planning and programs that support development and retention of affordable housing along transit corridors as part of its project evaluation criteria for funding. And lastly, the Southwest Corridor Housing Strategy contains objectives that can inform housing planning, including comprehensive plan updates, in Southwest LRT Corridor communities as well as suggested implementation strategies that may assist in creation of a full range of housing choices around Southwest LRT stations, increasing LRT ridership and supporting economic development and healthy communities. The complete SW Corridor-wide Housing Strategy can be accessed on the Southwest Community Works Website at: HTTP://WWW.SWLRTCOMMUNITYWORKS.ORG/~/MEDIA/SW%20CORRIDOR/D OCUMENT%20ARCHIVE/HOUSING/SW-CORRIDOR-HOUSING-STRATEGY- FINAL-DRAFT.PDF City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Title: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR-WIDE HOUSING STRATEGY TO INFORM FUTURE HOUSING PLANNING IN THE STATION AREAS FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners adopted resolution No. 09- 0596 in 2009 to establish the Southwest LRT Community Works program in consultation with the cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Minnetonka, Hopkins, St. Louis Park, and Minneapolis, and other Southwest LRT partners, and WHEREAS, the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee, composed of Southwest LRT Community Works partners from cities and other agencies along the Southwest corridor, was formed in 2010 to provide overall guidance and direction for the Southwest LRT Community Works Project, and WHEREAS, Southwest LRT Community Works goals and guiding principles for investment call for positioning the Southwest communities as a place for all to live and providing a full range of housing choices, and WHEREAS, the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee endorsed the creation of a corridor-wide housing strategy in May 2012, consisting of a housing inventory, gaps analysis and strategy document to support housing development along the Southwest LRT corridor, and WHEREAS, representatives from the City of St. Louis Park have been active participants in the Southwest Housing Workgroup, which provided oversight and guidance for the development of the Housing Strategy, the Technical Implementation Committee, which provided feedback on the Strategy and the Community Works Steering Committee, which provided overall policy direction and guidance, and WHEREAS, the Southwest Community Works Steering Committee accepted the Corridor Housing Strategy at its January 2016 meeting and referred the document to member cities and partner organizations for individual action as appropriate, and WHEREAS, there are numerous benefits that may come from working collaboratively, including increasing the corridor’s ability to be competitive, adding leverage to secure public and philanthropic resources, sending a positive message to the development community about the desire for a mix of housing choices, and aligning to achieve regional goals, and WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in its most recent New Starts Guidance, now considers policies, planning and programs that support development and retention of affordable housing along transit corridors as part of its project evaluation criteria for funding, and WHEREAS, the Southwest Corridor Housing Strategy contains objectives that can inform housing planning, including comprehensive plan updates, in Southwest LRT Corridor communities as well as suggested implementation strategies that may assist in creation of a full City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Title: Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy range of housing choices around Southwest LRT stations, increasing LRT ridership and supporting economic development and healthy communities, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park accepts the Southwest Corridor Housing Strategy as a document to inform future station area planning, housing policy planning and comprehensive plan updates for St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to permit two principal buildings on one property with conditions as recommended by staff (this action requires four affirmative votes of the Council). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the proposal meet the conditions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance? SUMMARY: The Applicant, GSH MPLS Full Service, is proposing to construct a second hotel on the same property as the existing Marriott Hotel (“Marriott”). The new hotel will be a Courtyard by Marriott, (“Courtyard”). The zoning ordinance allows more than one principal building on a parcel by CUP, therefore, a CUP is required for the construction of a second hotel on this property. Existing Conditions: The property is improved with a seven-story Marriott hotel with 195 rooms, a restaurant, and conference center. The hotel was constructed in 1986. Proposed Hotel: If approved, the Courtyard will be constructed on the north side of the Marriott. It will be six-stories, and have 142 rooms. The Courtyard will be connected to the Marriott with an enclosed walkway that will enable guests of the Courtyard to utilize the amenities of the Marriott. Both hotels cater to business clients. The Marriott and the Courtyard will not have kitchenettes; therefore, the hotels are not marketed as extended stay hotels. The application was presented to the Planning Commission on April 20, 2016. Three people spoke at the public hearing regarding access to the hotel, traffic on Shelard Parkway, and construction noise. The Planning Commission recommended approval 7-0. Meeting minutes are attached. A neighborhood meeting was conducted on April 12, 2016. A summary of the meeting is included in the Discussion section of this report FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Aerial Photo Draft Resolution Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Applicant Letter/Development Plans Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Action Agenda Item: 8c City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 2 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. DISCUSSION REQUEST: Requested is a Conditional Use Permit to construct a second hotel on the Marriott hotel site located at 9960 Wayzata Blvd. Constructing two hotels on one property is allowed by CUP. LOCATION: Zoning Analysis: Comprehensive Plan: Office Zoning: Office Neighborhood: Shelard Park Site Plan: The property is a corner lot, and is 7.76 acres in size. It is adjacent to the Highway 394 frontage road on the south, and Shelard Parkway on the west. The Coach Homes of Shelard residential development is adjacent to the north, and Shelard Park is adjacent to the east. Access: The property has three driveway accesses. One access from the 394 frontage road and two on Shelard Parkway. The southernmost driveway will be closed as a result of the proposal, leaving one access on Shelard Parkway, and one on the frontage road. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 3 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. At the request of the City Engineering Department, the Applicant has agreed to relocate the existing northern driveway 40 feet north to line up with a driveway for the office building on the other side of Shelard Parkway. This will improve the safety for vehicles exiting both sites by creating a more conventional intersection. Relocating the driveway also provides a more direct and efficient access to the main entrance of the proposed Courtyard. Parking: The existing site has 556 parking spaces. The zoning ordinance requires 1.5 parking spaces per room for hotels. The Marriott has 195 rooms, therefore, at least 293 parking spaces are required. The Courtyard will have 142 rooms which requires an additional 213 parking spaces. The two hotels combined equals 337 rooms, which requires at least 506 parking spaces. The number of parking spaces will actually increase as a result of the proposed development. The proposal reflects a more efficient use of the parking lot with some minor reconfiguration of the parking spaces, utilizing 107 compact parking stalls, and 18 proof of parking spaces. This reconfiguration results in 560 parking spaces, which is four more spaces than existed before the Courtyard is constructed, and 54 more spaces than are required by code. The complex also has a restaurant which primarily services its guests, and a conference center. Traditionally the city requires additional parking for these amenities, however, a parking study conducted for this proposal strongly suggests more parking is not needed. The study estimates that weekend peak-hour demand is 378 +/- spaces (337 on weekday). With 560 parking spaces on-site, the study indicates there may be a surplus of 182 parking spaces. A copy of the parking study is attached. Bicycle Parking: City Code requires bicycle parking in the amount of at least 10% of the required motor vehicle parking. This equates to 56 bicycle parking spaces required. The site is showing 20 spaces located by the main entrance on the north side, and the staff entrance on the west side. The proposal is 36 spaces short. The remaining spaces will be shown as proof of bicycle parking, which will be added as needed. Staff finds that the proof of parking is acceptable since the guests staying at the hotel will be arriving primarily from out of town, and will not likely be biking to the site. It is anticipated that the spaces will be primarily used by staff. Sidewalk and Trail: The property has frontage on two roads, Shelard Parkway and Wayzata Blvd. There is an existing trail on Shelard Parkway, but there is not a sidewalk on Wayzata Blvd. As part of the project, the applicant will construct a sidewalk along Wayzata Blvd from Shelard Parkway to the east property line. The proposed sidewalk will provide pedestrian passage from the crosswalks at Wayzata Blvd and Shelard Parkway to the city trail located at the property’s east property line. The sidewalk will require the removal of four boulevard trees, but new trees will be planted in accordance with the city tree replacement regulations. Landscaping: City Code requires at least 1 tree per 1,000 square feet of floor area. The combined hotels equals a total of 217,123 square feet of floor area, which translates into 217 trees required. There are 175 existing and proposed trees, which is 42 trees short. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 4 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. In response to comments received at the neighborhood meeting, additional trees were added to the plan along the east property line to enhance the edge of the park and minimize the impact of the headlights shining on the residence to the east. The Applicant has also agreed to contribute $3,000 to the tree fund, so the City can plant additional trees in the park. The additional plantings will address comments raised at the neighborhood meeting about the need for more trees in the park and provide more screening. In addition to the trees, the Marriott and Courtyard have significant landscaping improvements that include a pond feature with a waterfall, and five outdoor plazas for recreation and dining. These improvements can be used to off-set the number of trees required through the alternative landscaping option in the City Code. Alternative landscaping is required to include amenities such as such as plazas, outdoor seating, public art, and recreational benefit. The proposal provides outdoor plazas and recreation opportunities, and a water feature. Staff finds that the landscaping requirement is met. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The DORA requirement for the development is at least 12% of the gross floor area, which equals 32,535 square feet of DORA. City Code, however, allows the DORA to be located on another parcel, if both parcels are part of the same Planned Unit Development. The Marriott property, is part of the Shelard Park Planned Unit Development. As such, it receives a credit for the Shelard Park, which is located adjacent to the hotel on the east side. Historically, the development was granted a 50% credit, which means the development needs to provide only 16,267 square feet of DORA on-site, instead of the full 32,535 square feet. The proposal will meet this requirement by providing 28,528 square feet of DORA, all of which is improved with outdoor seating, plazas, and water garden. Architecture: The exterior materials for the Courtyard are primarily stucco, glass, metal panels, and fiber cement. City Code requires each elevation to have at least 60% Class 1 materials on each elevation. Of the materials listed above, the stucco and glass are considered Class 1. The remaining materials are Class 2. All elevations meet and exceed the minimum required Class 1 materials. The material breakdown by elevation follows: Elevation: Class 1 Class 2 North (14,105 sf) 10,918 sf (75%) 3,187 sf (25%) South (14,105 sf) 11,328 sf (80%) 2,777 sf (20%) West (4005 sf) 3,126 sf (77%) 938 sf (13%) East (3900sf) 3,134 sf (73%) 1,164 sf (17%) The canopy on the north side is proposed to extend over an existing utility easement. The City Engineering Dept. has reviewed the proposal and will allow it to encroach over the easement, however, the Applicant must enter into an encroachment agreement, which allows the encroachment but also states that it must be removed at the owner’s expense if the City has to work on the utility. Staff added the encroachment agreement as a condition of approval. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 5 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. Stormwater: The site is currently 82% impervious. The proposal will slightly reduce the impervious surface to 81%. The stormwater requirements are met through the Shelard Park PUD, and the pond located in the Shelard Park. Therefore, additional stormwater treatment and control is not required. Planning Commission: The applications were presented to the Planning Commission on April 20, 2016. Three people spoke at the public hearing regarding access to the hotel, traffic on Shelard Parkway, and construction noise. A copy of the Planning Commission meeting minutes is attached. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted on Tuesday, April 12, 2016. The following was discussed: 1. Generator located on the west side of the building. It will be screened, and the noise should not impact the residents to the north. The generator is located 260 feet away from the property line. 2. Trash for both hotels will be handled at the existing trash rooms located in the Marriott. 3. The trees along the north property line were discussed. Residents were happy to see the additional landscaping. 4. Residents agreed that relocating the driveway to line up with the driveway across the street made sense. 5. Residents from the Coach Homes development to the north expressed concerns about visibility problems when leaving their driveway. The visibility problem has existed for several years, and is not a result of the proposal. Although care should be taken so the proposal does not make the visibility problem worse. Residents suggested “Hidden Driveway” signs to alert people of the problem. The city Engineering Department reviewed the concern, and found that vehicles stopped at the driveway have approximately 170 feet of visibility, which exceeds the 130 foot minimum visibility standard. The landscaping was also inspected to make sure the trees have been trimmed, and shrubs cut to preserve visibility at the bend in the road. 6. Residents expressed a desire to see some improvements in the park. Staff conveyed this desire to the Parks Dept. The Applicant is willing to have some of its required trees planted in the park, and will contribute cash for the trees. The City will plant them on their behalf. 7. Residents of Parkside Lofts expressed concerns about lights from cars entering the property from Shelard shining in their windows. The Applicant agreed to plant additional trees along the east property line to mitigate this. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 6 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. AERIAL PHOTO City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 7 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-223(d)(7) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT TWO PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS ON ONE PARCEL FOR PROPERTY ZONED O-OFFICE DISTRICT LOCATED AT 9960 WAYZATA BOULEVARD BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. GSH MPLS Full Service, LLC has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-223(d)(7) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of permitting two principal buildings on one parcel within a O–Office District located at 9960 Wayzata Boulevard for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Lot 2, Block 4, Shelard Park, except that part of said Lot 2 shown as Parcel 41 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-22, filed as Document No. 5100403, Hennepin County, Minnesota and That part of Lot 1, Block 4, Shelard Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying southerly of a line and its extensions, said line is described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence North 15 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West 140.00 feet, along the easterly line of said Lot 1, to the beginning of the line to be described; thence South 80 degrees 23 minutes 33 seconds West 558.49 feet to the westerly line of said Lot 1, and there terminating 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 16-12-CUP) and the effect of the proposed development on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the development will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 16-12-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to permit a second principal building at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 8 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. 1. The site shall be developed in accordance to the following exhibits: a. Exhibit A: Site Plan b. Exhibit B: Grading & Erosion Plan c. Exhibit C: DORA & Landscaping Plan d. Exhibit D: Exterior Elevations e. Exhibit E: Lighting f. Exhibit F: Sidewalk Plan 2. A minimum of 56 bicycle parking spaces shall be provided. Up to 36 spaces may be shown as proof-of-parking, and shall be installed by the property owner when requested by the city. 3. Three thousand dollars is to be dedicated to the tree fund for trees to be planted in Shelard Park in lieu of on the hotel property. 4. A six-foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed along Wayzata Blvd per City specifications. Boulevard trees removed as a result of the construction of the sidewalk shall be replaced as required by city code. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The developer and contractor shall follow the procedures and requirements for this development as required for Demolition and New Construction to single-family homes are required to do under City Code 6-71 Construction Management Plan. b. Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant and property owner. c. All necessary permits must be obtained. d. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (sidewalks, boulevards, landscaping, etc.). e. An encroachment agreement for the canopy extending over the utility easement be executed in a form approved by the City Attorney, and recorded with Hennepin County. 6. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 7. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. 8. Approval of a Building Permit, which may impose additional requirements. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 9 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. EXERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 20, 2016 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther OTHERS PRESENT: Soren Mattick, Campbell Knutson Amy Schutt, Campbell Knutson 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 3. Public Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel Location: 9970 Wayzata Boulevard Applicant: GSH MPLS Full Service, LLC Case No.: 16-12-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that the request for conditional use permit is made to construct a second hotel on the Marriott hotel site. He discussed the existing access points. He explained that the southernmost driveway will be closed as a result of the proposal, leaving one access on Shelard Parkway, and one on the frontage road. He said at the request of the city Engineering Department the applicant has agreed to relocate the existing northern driveway 40 feet north to line up with a driveway for the office building on the other side of Shelard Parkway. This will improve safety by creating a more conventional intersection. Mr. Morrison discussed parking, bicycle parking, landscaping, Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA), exterior materials and stormwater. Mr. Morrison spoke about the neighborhood meeting held on April 12, 2016. Topics included the generator, trees, trash and driveway relocation. He said residents of the Coach Homes development expressed concerns about visibility problems when leaving their driveway. Staff has conveyed this concern to the Engineering Dept. Mr. Morrison said residents expressed a desire to see some improvements in the park. Concern was also expressed about lights from cars entering the property from Shelard. He spoke about agreements made by the applicant to address park improvements and car lights. Commissioner Person asked about trends in parking stall width. He asked if any on-site stormwater management, such as pavers, was planned. He asked if some electric car charging stations will be installed. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 10 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. Mr. Morrison responded that the standard parking stall lot width is 8 ½ feet. Compact stall width is 8 feet. He said no impervious pavers are proposed for the project, but, as a result of the project the impervious surface will be decreased slightly. He added that the whole site drains to the pond in the park as part of the stormwater system. Commissioner Tatalovich asked for specifics regarding neighborhood desire for park improvements. Mr. Morrison responded that residents didn’t get into specifics. He said moving forward there will be a conversation with Operations and Recreation Dept. staff and residents to see what is desired. One conversation will be about a community garden. Commissioner Carper asked about proposed sidewalks and pathways for the site. Mr. Morrison said there is currently a trail along the east side of Shelard Parkway. A sidewalk and trail will be installed along the south property line. He illustrated connections from the frontage road and the park. Scott Peterson, Senior Director of Development, CSM, introduced the development team. Mark Kronbeck, Alliant Engineering, answered Chair Johnston-Madison’s question about bike stalls and showed the locations. Mr. Kronbeck said no electric charging stations are in the current plan. Most guests arrive using rental cars. Commissioner Carper asked about lighting. Mr. Kronbeck said the current site lighting uses halogen bulbs and currently the plan is to maintain the existing lighting. Two poles will be relocated. They are considering LED lighting, but the decision hasn’t been made. The Chair opened the public hearing. Marcia Weber, 491 Shelard Parkway, #201, asked about the two entrances into the hotel currently. Will they be moved? Will the parking lot lighting affect residents living just opposite the parking lot driveway? Mr. Morrison said the southern driveway will be removed and the northern driveway will be located 40 feet to the north so it lines up with the driveway for the office building across the street. He spoke about the lighting plan. He said great care was taken to greatly reduce the spillover lighting to the property to the north. He said the code does allow a little bit of spillover but the proposed plan reduces spillover such that the light level should be 0 foot candle at the curb line. Jane Dewing, 491 Shelard Parkway, said her greatest concern is the visibility problem when exiting the driveways. She said visibility has been a long standing problem for residents. She said with more traffic in the area, including bar traffic, and one driveway being eliminated and the other moved closer to the condo driveway, the visibility situation will be even worse. She said the community is older or disabled. She suggested signage indicating blind driveways. She said she has spoken with the Engineering Dept. for a plan. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Page 11 Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd. Jia You, 462 Ford Road, #406, said she is very concerned about construction traffic and noise. She said truck traffic and truck deliveries are already very noisy and it wakes up her baby. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said hours are limited to 7 a.m. – 10 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. weekends and holidays. He added that in general the actual construction activity does not extend that late. Mr. Peterson, CSM, said they are managing a full service hotel directly adjacent to the proposed site so they do want to keep noise down. Excavation should be minimal as construction will be slab on grade on existing grade. As no one else was present wishing to speak the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Person asked about trends in traffic counts in the area. He asked how many housing units are in the Shelard area. Mr. Walther responded that there isn’t a traffic study for the area. Traffic counts are done approximately every three years. He said he doesn’t have housing numbers but it is a high density area of multifamily and office development. Commissioner Peilen thanked the residents for their remarks and attendance. She said the concerns raised at the neighborhood meeting are included in the staff report. She said those concerns are taken seriously and are addressed by staff. She said she couldn’t support the request unless the concerns were taken seriously and addressed. Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 4-11-16 0 15 30 60 PROPOSED HOTEL 6-STORY EXISTING HOTEL 7-STORY SHELARD PARKWAYW. WAYZ A T A B O U L E V A R D INCREASED LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ALONG NORTH AND WEST BOARDERS MAIN ENTRY AWNING AREA NEW SITE ACCESS AND SIGNAGE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO SHELARD PARK OUTDOOR AMENITIES - PATIO SEATING AREA - SCULPTURE GLADE LANDSCAPE BUFFER MAIN ENTRY TO CONVENTION AREA MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 4-11-16 0 15 30 60 PROPOSED HOTEL 6-STORY EXISTING HOTEL 7-STORY SHELARD PARKWAYW. WAYZ A T A B O U L E V A R D INCREASED LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ALONG NORTH AND WEST BOARDERS MAIN ENTRY AWNING AREA NEW SITE ACCESS AND SIGNAGE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO SHELARD PARK OUTDOOR AMENITIES - PATIO SEATING AREA - SCULPTURE GLADE LANDSCAPE BUFFER MAIN ENTRY TO CONVENTION AREA MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 4-11-16 0 15 30 60 PROPOSED HOTEL 6-STORY EXISTING HOTEL 7-STORY SHELARD PARKWAYW. WAYZ A T A B O U L E V A R D INCREASED LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ALONG NORTH AND WEST BOARDERS MAIN ENTRY AWNING AREA NEW SITE ACCESS AND SIGNAGE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO SHELARD PARK OUTDOOR AMENITIES - PATIO SEATING AREA - SCULPTURE GLADE LANDSCAPE BUFFER MAIN ENTRY TO CONVENTION AREA City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 12 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 13 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 14 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 15 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 16 September 29, 2015 Mr. Ryan Kelley, CNU-a Planner CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Re: Minneapolis Marriott West Shared Parking Analysis Walker Project # 21-4148.00 Dear Mr. Kelley, Walker Parking Consultants (“Walker”) is pleased to submit the findings that resulted from the Shared Parking Analysis prepared for the Minneapolis Marriott West Development (the “Development”) in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. INTRODUCTION The proposed Development includes an existing 195-key Marriott Hotel, and a proposed 135- key Courtyard Hotel within the same parcel. This development will add parking demand to the property based on hotel usage, in addition to the existing restaurant and meeting space of the Marriott. We understand that additional parameters established at this time include the following: • Square footage of existing restaurant, Kips – 3,571 SF • Courtyard Bistro Coffee Bar, Not Open to the Public & lobby seating area only – size TBD • Number of existing meeting rooms - 6 meeting rooms • Total square footage of existing meeting room space = 9,586 SF • No meeting space planned in new Courtyard Understanding that this mix of uses, including hotel, meeting rooms and restaurant space, all generate parking demand differently, at different times and in different patterns, this proposed development lends itself to a shared parking analysis. This analysis enables identification of when parking demand is likely greatest for each specific use, and considers the interaction of these uses to provide appropriate parking supply for the combined parking demand of these uses without simply adding maximum levels together. 1660 South Highway 100 Suite 424 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 952.595.9116 Fax: 952.595.9516 www.walkerparking.com City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 17 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 2 Figure 1: Proposed Development Site Source: City of St. Louis Park, CSM City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 18 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 3 LAND USES Based upon Walker’s discussion with the City, at full build-out the Development will contain an existing 195 room in the Marriott with 3,571 square foot restaurant, and 9,586 square feet of meeting space, and a new 135 room Courtyard. We utilized this information to develop a Shared Parking demand model that depicts the approximate parking supply of spaces needed to accommodate the projected peak-hour parking demand for the site. PARKING SUPPLY The total parking supply provided by the developer is approximately 541 spaces in surface parking that is on-site (does not include on-street or off-site parking spaces). PARKING DEMAND RATIOS The base parking demand ratios used in Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking were developed by observing hourly accumulations of vehicles around standalone land-uses during the course of a typical year (365 consecutive days) and identifying design conditions for weekdays as well as for a weekend day. At the peak-hour of the year a comparison was made between the total number of cars parked and a designated key unit of measure specific to each land-use (e.g. square footage for many land-uses, rooms for hotels or bedrooms per residence). Additionally, some ratios were supplemented through added fieldwork. To prepare this analysis we utilized the mixed use parking standards established in Shared Parking to project the approximate peak-hour parking demand; moreover, we applied both month and time of day adjustments for each land use to the individual parking ratios. The ratios used for analysis are shown in the following table. Table 1: Base Parking Demand Ratios Source: Walker Parking Consultants We used the base ratios shown above and considered the following three factors when developing the Shared Parking model: Land Use Visitor Employee Visitor Employee Unit Source Weekday Weekend Hotel-Business 1.00 0.18 0.90 0.18 /room 3 1.18 1.08 Restaurant/Lounge 10.00 10.00 /ksf GLA 3 10.00 10.00 Meeting/Banquet 30.00 30.00 /ksf GLA 3 30.00 30.00 Source: 3. Shared Parking, Second Edition. Washington DC: ULI-The Urban Land Institute Weekday Weekend Total City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 19 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 4 1) Non-captive Ratio. Non-captive ratios are typically expressed as a percentage of users who create no incremental parking demand when visiting more than one land use on the same trip (e.g. a hotel user eating dinner at the hotel restaurant). Overall, the effect of the captive market can be significant, and the use of non-captive factors ensures that patrons are not counted twice in the overall estimated parking demand. The non-captive ratios assumed for this analysis assume that 30-40% (depending on weekday vs weekend) of the patrons are captive with regard to using the meeting/banquet space, and 10-70% for restaurant space. This assumption is based on observations and shared use studies compiled over time at other mixed-use developments throughout North America. 2) Presence Factor - Presence is expressed as a percentage of the peak potential demand modified for time of day and month of year, which can have a significant effect on demand at a mixed-use development. For example, a 10,000 sf retail store has a peak demand of about 36 spaces on a weekday and 40 spaces on a weekend day during the peak-hour (11:00 AM); while the same store is unlikely to project any parking demand at 11:00 PM. 3) Driving Ratio - Driving ratio represents the percentage of users arriving at the site by means other than a personal vehicle. According to the U.S. Census “Journey to Work” statistics shown in the inset table, about eighty-seven percent (87%) of the St. Louis Park residents drive to work. Typically, adjustments made to the driving ratio mirror the “Journey to Work” statistics for the demographic area. The various adjustments made to the base parking demand ratios, in an effort to render project specific projections, are shown in the following table. Table 2: Adjustments to Base Ratios for Driving and Captive Users Source: Walker Parking Consultants Using the land-use data provided by the City, Walker developed the Shared Parking model detailed in the next section, which projects the approximate number of spaces needed to provide adequate parking on weekdays and weekend days during peak-hour demand conditions. SHARED PARKING Land Use Quantity Unit Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Hotel-Business 330 rooms 66% 66% 77% 77% 100% 100% 100% 100% Restaurant/Lounge 3,571 GLA 60% 60% 70% 70% 90% 90% 30% 30% Meeting/Banquet 9,586 GLA 75% 75% 75% 75% 60% 60% 70% 70% Employee 330 rooms 87% 87% 87% 87% 100% 100% 100% 100% Driving Ratio Weekday Weekend Non Captive Ratio Weekday Weekend Drive to Work Drive Alone 78.5% Carpool 8.7% Sub-Total - Drive 87.2% Other Means Public Transportation 6.1% Taxi 0.3% Bicycle 0.4% Walk 2.0% Work at Home 4.0% Sub Total - Other 12.8% Total 100.0% Journey to Work - St. Louis Park, MN City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 20 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 5 Walker has conducted numerous studies and consulted with leading organizations such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers, ULI and the International Council of Shopping Centers to determine appropriate parking demand ratios for use when developing Shared Parking models. Parking demand is influenced by the time of year, such as when the volume of patronage for a hotel establishment peaks during the June vacation season and decreases gradually until the winter low period. These variations by time of day and time of year were assumed for this analysis and applied to our Shared Parking model. Finally, parking demand is a fluid force, subject to variations according to the availability of alternative transportation, proximity of complimentary land uses, differences in user presence by time of day and time of year, building occupancy rates and a host of other factors. Conversely, the available parking supply tends to be a fixed quantity, limited by the amount of space that can be allocated on a given site for parking. Assuming the effects of Shared Parking, the projected weekday peak-hour parking demand for the Development is 337± spaces, on the busiest weekday annually. The peak-hour demand, which is projected to occur in June at 9:00 PM, is calculated based upon the driving and non-captive ratios as well as the presence factors (peak-hour adjustments) shown in the following table. As depicted, the projected peak-hour weekday demand represents a 53% or 376 space reduction from the unadjusted weekday parking demand projected for the site. Table 3: Peak-Hour Demand – Weekday (projected) Source: Walker Parking Consultants Weekday Unadj Month Adj Pk Hr Adj Non Captive Drive Ratio Jun Land Use Demand Jun 9:00 PM Evening Evening 9:00 PM Hotel-Business 330 100% 85% 100% 66% 185 Restaurant/Lounge 36 95% 67% 90% 60%12 Meeting/Banquet 288 100% 100% 60% 75% 130 Employee 59 100% 20% 100% 87%10 Subtotal Customer/Guest 654 327 Subtotal Employee/Resident 59 10 Total Parking Spaces Required 713 337 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 21 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 6 Assuming the effects of Shared Parking, the projected weekend day peak-hour parking demand for the Development is 378 ± spaces; on the busiest weekend day annually. The peak-hour demand, which is also projected to occur in June at 9:00 PM, is calculated using the driving and non-captive ratios and presence factors (peak-hour adjustments) shown in the following table. As shown, the projected peak-hour weekend day demand represents a 44% or 302 space reduction from the unadjusted weekend day parking demand projection. Table 4: Peak-Hour Demand – Weekend Day (projected) Source: Walker Parking Consultants PARKING ADEQUACY The term “Parking Adequacy” is defined as the ability of the parking supply to accommodate the Design Day peak-hour parking demand. A positive or negative remainder when compared to the proposed parking supply indicates a parking surplus or deficit within the system, structure or lot. Based on our analysis, when the proposed parking supply (541 spaces) is compared to the peak-hour parking demand projection (378 ± spaces), a positive surplus of 163± spaces will exist. Therefore, the parking supply proposed for the Development should adequately accommodate the peak-hour parking demand projection, as shown in the inset table. Table 5: Parking Adequacy Source: Walker Parking Consultants Weekend Unadj Month Adj Pk Hr Adj Non Captive Drive Ratio Jun Land Use Demand Jun 9:00 PM Evening Evening 9:00 PM Hotel-Business 297 100% 85% 100% 77% 194 Restaurant/Lounge 36 95% 67% 30% 70%5 Meeting/Banquet 288 100% 100% 70% 75% 151 Employee 59 100% 55% 100% 87%28 Subtotal Customer/Guest 621 350 Subtotal Employee/Resident 59 28 Total Parking Spaces Required 680 378 User Group Existing Customer/Guest, All Uses 350 Employee, All Uses 28 Parking Demand (projected)378 Supply 541 Surplus/(Deficit)163 Parking Adequacy (projected) City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 22 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 7 CONCLUSION Based upon Walker’s analysis of the land use data provided by the City, and the Shared Parking model prepared for the Marriott Development, the following summarizes the results of our analysis. o The projected weekend peak-hour parking demand is 378± spaces (337 on Weekday), on the busiest day annually. This calculation is based upon the drive ratios, non-captive ratios and peak-hour adjustments discussed throughout our report. o When the proposed parking supply (541 spaces) is compared to the peak-hour parking demand projection (378± spaces), a surplus of 163± spaces will exist. o The parking supply proposed for the Development should adequately accommodate the peak-hour parking demand projection. In closing, we hope the enclosed analysis satisfies the scope of work anticipated for the Development. Please call me at your convenience with any questions or comments regarding the material provided for review. Respectfully submitted, Jeffrey A. Colvin, AICP Parking Consultant cc: Carl Schneeman – Walker Parking Consultants City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 23 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Meet with the City’s representative via teleconference to clarify study objectives, define project parameters and review the proposed deliverable product and schedule. B. Obtain from the City’s representative detailed information regarding the land use programming (i.e. square footage, type, etc.) All land use data should be provided in square feet for retail entities or rooms for hotel development. C. Discuss with the City’s representative anticipated peak patronage, visitation or occupancy periods. D. Prepare a Shared Parking Analysis employing the mixed use parking standards established in Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking to project the approximate parking demand for the site. E. In preparing the analysis, we will apply both month and time of day adjustments for each land use to individual parking ratios to determine the approximate shared parking demand for the Development site. F. Discuss with the City’s representative general and specific parking demand ratios assumed by the analysis. G. Summarize Walker’s findings in a draft letter report and submit to the City representative and developer for review and comment. Specifically included will be estimated parking demand recommended for the shared parking usage of the Development. H. Obtain review comments from the City’s representative regarding the draft report. I. Incorporate draft report comments into a final letter report and submit to the City’s representative. J. Attend a City Planning meeting to present our findings and respond to questions related to the scope of the report. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 24 Mr. Ryan Kelley September 29, 2015 Page 9 STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. This report is to be used in whole and not in part. 2. Walker’s report and recommendations are based on certain assumptions pertaining to the future performance of the local economy and other factors typically related to individual user characteristics that are either outside Walker’s control or that of the client. To the best of Walker’s ability we analyzed available information that was incorporated in projecting future performance of the proposed subject site. 3. Sketches, photographs, maps and other exhibits are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property. It is assumed that the use of the land and improvements is within the boundaries of the property described, and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted. 4. All information, estimates, and opinions obtained from parties not employed by Walker Parking Consultants are assumed to be true and correct. We assume no liability resulting from misinformation. 5. None of this material may be reproduced in any form without our written permission, and the report cannot be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media. 6. We take no responsibility for any events or circumstances that take place subsequent to the date of our field inspections. 7. We do not warrant that the projections will be attained, but they have been prepared on the basis of information obtained during the course of this study and are intended to reflect the expectations of a typical parking patron. 8. The numeric figures presented in this report were generated using computer models that make calculations based on numbers carried out to three decimal places. In the interest of simplicity, most numbers have been rounded to the nearest thousand; therefore, these figures may be subject to small rounding errors. 9. This report was prepared by Walker Parking Consultants, and all opinions, recommendations, and conclusions expressed during the course of this assignment are rendered by the staff of Walker Parking Consultants as employees, rather than as individuals. 10. The conclusions and recommendations presented were reached based on Walker’s analysis of the information obtained from the client and our own sources. Information furnished by others, upon which portions of this study may be predicated, is believed to be reliable; however, it has not been verified in all cases. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 25 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 26 SITEMINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION COVER SHEET $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0ENGINEER DEVELOPER/OWNERSHEET INDEX LAND SURVEYORLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTVICINITY MAPPROJECT ARCHITECTCity Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 27 6ƒ :1ƒ :NORTH 235.001ƒ (1ƒ (6ƒ (6ƒ :36.061ƒ :121.901ƒ (6ƒ ( 0 135.37(P)6ƒ (171.70R=83.16L=64.14 ƒ GAS METERSIGNFIBER OPTICIRON MONUMENT FOUNDWATER VALVESANITARY MANHOLELIGHT POLEELECTRIC VAULTHYDRANTTELEPHONE BOXGAS UNDERGROUND ELECTRICSTORM SEWERWATERMAINSANITARY SEWERSTORM MANHOLEUNDERGROUND TELEPHONECHAIN-LINK FENCEMANHOLE (UNKNOWN)RIGHT-OF-WAY MONUMENTCONCRETESET MAG NAIL W/ BRASS WASHERSET IRON MONUMENTMARKED 18425FIBER OPTIC VAULTTRANSFORMERELECTRIC METERCATCH BASINSWATER SHUTOFF VALVEGROUND LIGHTTELEPHONE MANHOLEWATER MANHOLEPARKING STALL COUNTGUARD RAILWOOD FENCEBITUMINOUS TRAILPAVERSSPOT ELEVATIONDECIDUOUS TREECONIFEROUS TREEPLAT DISTANCEMEASURED DISTANCE(P)(M)CONTOURMINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION EXISTING CONDITIONS $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 28 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION PLAT MAP - 350 FT $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 29 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION DORA TREE & SHRUB INVENTORY $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 30 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 31 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 32 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION UTILITY PLAN $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 33 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION DETAILS $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 34 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 35 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION LANDSCAPE PLAN ENLARGEMENT $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 36 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION DORA PLAN $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 37 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.00.00.10.10.30.71.01.31.71.71.31.10.80.40.20.10.10.20.30.71.11.31.71.71.31.10.80.40.20.10.20.30.91.31.61.81.81.61.61.20.70.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 1.3 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.3 1.9 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.3 2.1 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.6 1.9 3.1 4.2 4.6 3.4 2.5 2.2 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.7 1.8 4.0 5.8 6.5 4.6 3.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 1.6 2.0 3.3 3.7 3.0 2.0 1.5 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.7 2.3 3.5 5.8 6.2 4.3 2.7 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.8 3.34.54.0 2.6 2.1 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.7 1.9 3.0 3.8 3.2 2.0 1.7 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.6 2.3 2.8 4.2 4.3 3.0 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 3.3 4.9 6.45.43.3 2.1 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.2 2.2 3.0 2.0 1.6 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.3 3.3 5.3 6.5 5.1 3.4 1.8 1.5 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.3 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.2 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.9 2.3 2.6 4.0 4.6 3.6 2.8 1.8 1.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.3 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.7 2.5 2.3 1.8 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.2 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.1 1.6 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.2 1.8 2.4 2.8 3.6 3.0 2.3 1.9 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.4 2.0 2.4 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.5 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.5 1.8 3.14.45.34.42.7 2.2 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.7 2.0 3.34.54.6 3.2 2.5 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.7 2.0 3.75.56.8 5.3 3.5 1.9 1.5 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 1.1 1.8 2.2 4.2 6.2 6.3 4.0 2.7 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.2 1.8 2.3 2.9 4.8 5.64.42.9 1.8 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 1.1 1.8 2.6 3.9 6.0 6.0 4.1 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.9 3.74.53.7 2.5 2.1 1.6 1.3 1.5 2.1 2.4 3.4 3.8 2.8 2.4 1.8 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.7 2.3 3.0 4.2 3.9 3.0 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.1 3.75.46.4 5.0 3.1 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.1 1.6 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.2 1.9 1.5 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.1 2.3 2.4 3.55.76.54.73.0 1.9 2.6 4.3 1.2 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.6 1.9 2.3 2.7 4.24.53.3 2.5 2.0 4.9 4.1 1.7 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.7 2.5 2.2 1.8 1.7 1.9 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.2 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.60.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.40.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.1 1.6 1.8 1.9 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.20.1 0.3 0.7 1.6 2.4 2.8 2.0 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.10.2 0.3 1.0 3.0 4.0 3.7 2.4 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 0.4 0.9 2.0 3.5 3.5 2.3 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.6 0.9 1.6 2.2 2.5 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.6 1.1 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.4 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.4 0.7 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.4 1.9 2.0 1.5 1.1 1.6 1.8 1.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.7 1.1 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.7 2.7 3.1 2.2 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.8 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.11.0 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.4 3.7 3.8 2.4 1.6 1.5 1.8 1.4 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.00.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.9 1.9 2.5 3.5 4.2 2.6 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.10.1 0.2 0.7 1.4 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.1 1.8 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.2 1.3 2.0 1.7 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.10.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.7 2.1 2.4 4.0 3.3 1.0 0.3 0.20.1 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.4 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 3.0 3.9 4.2 15.7 9.0 1.1 0.4 0.20.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.5 1.9 2.0 1.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.9 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.4 3.9 3.9 3.8 2.5 1.0 0.4 0.30.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.4 2.5 3.4 3.1 1.6 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.9 2.1 3.1 2.7 2.05.5 5.70.8 0.60.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.7 3.7 3.9 3.3 1.8 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.1 1.5 1.35.76.2 2.0 7.1 1.4 0.40.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 1.3 2.3 3.5 2.6 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.2 1.1 2.2 7.8 2.7 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.2 14.1 1.7 0.8 14.4 6.9 0.4 0.10.4 0.6 0.3 0.20.5 0.9 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.8 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.4 2.9 14.6 2.30.4 0.8 0.3 0.4 2.2 1.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 2.6 3.9 9.7 2.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.20.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.6 16.7 4.0 3.1 2.30.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.8 9.0 11.3 10.8 2.1 0.3 0.7 4.00.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.3 0.8 0.8 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 2.1 4.35.72.5 13.2 10.60.0 0.1 0.1 1.4 12.8 4.8 1.4 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.4 20.4 6.30.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.5 6.0 16.3 1.4 0.7 3.3 3.93.9 1.4 0.3 0.3 3.7 10.2 1.34.7 4.52.2 6.24.73.6 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.0 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.3 14.15.42.0 1.9 1.25.719.70.3 2.9 6.7 0.9 1.2 3.0 1.2 7.2 5.2 10.0 8.6 0.8 4.3 11.9 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.6 2.1 3.7 3.8 3.3 2.7 6.8 3.3 1.9 4.6 4.3 10.9 9.01.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.4 1.2 0.5 2.75.50.8 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 3.0 3.9 2.6 1.8 1.9 1.0 0.9 3.6 1.7 4.1 3.1 0.27.6 2.6 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 2.1 2.2 1.7 1.8 1.3 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8 5.0 2.5 0.32.9 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.4 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.6 1.3 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.2 13.0 4.6 0.4 0.20.2 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.3 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 2.67.71.10.3 1.2 1.30.2 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.5 3.0 4.3 3.9 2.6 2.2 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.8 1.7 2.4 2.7 2.0 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.7 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 3.5 11.5 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 12.1 7.1 2.3 3.8 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.7 1.3 1.8 2.94.56.15.53.3 2.3 1.7 1.0 0.6 1.2 3.3 3.9 3.6 2.3 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.2 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.6 3.4 2.95.717.6 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.5 1.9 3.2 4.9 6.6 5.6 3.8 1.9 1.7 1.0 0.8 1.1 2.1 3.7 3.4 2.2 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.7 2.2 1.1 0.7 1.2 1.6 2.2 3.1 3.4 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.2 2.0 2.4 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.6 3.7 4.8 4.2 3.1 1.9 1.6 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.8 2.3 2.4 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 2.2 4.2 3.9 1.0 1.8 2.0 2.8 3.9 3.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.8 2.3 1.7 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.8 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.4 1.9 1.3 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.9 1.9 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.5 2.0 2.6 3.3 3.5 2.8 2.3 1.7 1.1 0.6 0.6 0.9 1.3 1.7 1.9 1.8 2.0 3.6 1.7 0.9 1.3 1.9 2.3 3.2 3.3 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.6 2.0 3.6 3.8 3.5 2.2 1.9 1.3 0.9 1.3 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.4 1.0 0.8 1.2 1.2 0.9 1.4 1.2 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.7 1.9 3.75.4 5.43.7 2.6 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.9 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.4 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.9 1.9 2.84.42.7 1.7 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.8 2.2 4.1 6.2 6.54.42.6 1.8 1.3 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.4 2.9 4.1 3.8 2.6 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.7 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 2.1 2.7 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.8 2.5 3.2 5.15.43.7 2.3 1.8 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.8 2.84.46.05.43.3 2.2 1.7 1.0 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.8 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.5 2.1 2.6 3.3 3.5 2.6 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.9 1.4 1.8 3.2 4.9 6.75.73.9 1.8 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.4 1.9 2.8 3.44.43.7 2.6 2.3 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.1 1.6 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.3 0.7 0.8 1.4 2.0 2.6 3.8 4.94.43.2 1.9 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.8 1.6 1.8 3.5 5.1 6.1 5.1 3.2 2.2 2.0 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.7 3.0 2.7 2.3 2.0 1.3 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.6 1.1 1.7 2.2 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.4 1.9 1.3 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.6 2.0 3.65.56.7 5.1 3.4 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.9 3.8 4.8 4.1 2.8 2.3 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.5 2.2 2.7 4.2 4.8 3.8 2.8 2.0 1.9 2.0 1.9 3.3 5.0 6.65.53.6 2.0 1.6 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.2 1.8 2.3 2.6 2.5 2.2 2.1 1.6 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0 2.6 2.3 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.1 3.2 5.1 6.2 5.1 3.4 1.8 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 1.5 1.9 2.9 3.84.53.6 2.5 2.0 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.3 1.8 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.3 1.6 2.1 2.5 3.6 4.3 3.3 2.7 1.8 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.6 1.8 3.85.56.4 4.9 3.1 1.9 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.2 1.7 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.9 1.7 2.2 3.5 5.8 6.4 4.6 2.8 1.8 1.3 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.6 2.2 2.7 4.24.53.2 2.5 1.8 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.6 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Luminaire ScheduleSymbolQtyLabelArrangementTotal Lamp LumensLLFDescriptionLum. Watts11AABACK-BACK220000.750LUMARK TRIBUTE USED TO REPRESENT UNKNOWN EXISTING 250W MH2839BBSINGLE220000.750LUMARK TRIBUTE USED TO PRESENT UNKNOWN EXISTING 250W MH28328FFSINGLE85000.750MCGRAW BRC-42-100-MP-MT-BZ100Calculation SummaryLabelCalcTypeUnitsAvgMaxMinAvg/MinMax/MinPROPERTY LINEIlluminanceFc0.291.80.0N.A.N.A.SITE CALCIlluminanceFc0.3820.40.0N.A.N.A.LOT 1IlluminanceFc1.526.70.115.2067.00LOT 2IlluminanceFc0.904.20.0N.A.N.A.LOT 3IlluminanceFc1.676.80.0N.A.N.A.LOT 4IlluminanceFc1.064.00.0N.A.N.A.NOTE:LUMARK TRIBUTE TYPE 3 AND TYPE 5 250W MH SHOEBOX WITH FORMED OPTICS USED FOR LIGHT LEVELSMAY NOT MATCH WHAT IS INSTALLED ON SITENOTE:LUMARK TRIBUTE TYPE 3 AND TYPE 5 250W MH SHOEBOX WITH FORMED OPTICS USED FOR LIGHT LEVELSMAY NOT MATCH WHAT IS INSTALLED ON SITEMINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION PHOTOMETRIC PLAN $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 38 A5.21 A5.1 A5.2 A5.1 1 2 2 A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H H I I J J 11 22 33 44 55 66 77 88 ELEV E1 ELEV E2 593 SF KITCHEN 233 SF WOMEN 231 SF MEN 211 SF STAIR 169 SF MECHANICAL 146 SF GENERAL MANAGER OFFICE 131 SF OFFICE 289 SF LAUNDRY 50 SF COMPUTER / TELEPHONE 108 SF OFFICE 187 SF ADMIN 215 SF STAIR 258 SF K 251 SF K 254 SF K 322 SF QQ ACC 321 SF QQ ACC 321 SF QQ ACC 230 SF K773 SF MEETING ROOM 719 SF RECEPTION 143 SF ELECTRICAL 47 SF WC 47 SF WC 331 SF EMPLOYEE BREAK ROOM 48 SF LUGGAGE 63 SF MARKET 329 SF BUSINESS LIBRARY QUICK PRINT LOUNGE TV MEDIA PODS BISTRO CARTS 41' - 3"26' - 11"68' - 2"10' - 0 7/16"83' - 9 3/16"54' - 6 3/4"10' - 10 1/8"43' - 0 15/16"13' - 11 5/16" 1' - 0" 217' - 2 3/4"26' - 1 1/2"6' - 6 1/2"25' - 5 1/4"6' - 9 7/16"64' - 10 11/16"213' - 6 1/8"3' - 8 5/8" 217' - 2 3/4"RCSMBus: (612) 395−7000 Fax: (612) 395−7002500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 3000Minneapolis, MN 55415BUSINESS & COMMUNITIESDEVELOPING REAL ESTATE FOR PEOPLE,Architecture Engineering Planning Interiors© , DLR Group inc., a Minnesota corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDBENJAMIN TALPOSREVISIONS3/11/2016 12:56:35 PMC:\Revit\40-16121-00_AR_Central_2015_gibarra.rvt40-16121-00March 11, 2016COURTYARD MARRIOT -ST. LOUIS PARK, MNCONDITIONALUSE PERMITAPPLICATIONFLOOR PLAN, LEVEL 1A1.1NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FLOOR PLAN, LEVEL 1 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 39 A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H H I I J J 33 44 55 66 77 88 14' - 8 1/2" 12' - 8" 243 SF K 236 SF K 235 SF K 236 SF K236 SF K 271 SF QQ269 SF QQ 270 SF QQ 268 SF QQ 270 SF QQ268 SF QQ 208 SF LOBBY272 SF K 298 SF K ACC 238 SF K 244 SF K 263 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 238 SF K 238 SF HK 67 SF ELEV 67 SF ELEV 69 SF ICE/ VEND. 1243 SF CORRIDOR 211 SF STAIR 215 SF STAIR 76 SF Room 217' - 2 3/4"58' - 1 1/4"10' - 0 7/16"47' - 6 7/16"8' - 9 1/4"82' - 0 1/4"67' - 10 3/8"1' - 0"19' - 5 7/8"41' - 3"60' - 8 7/8"25' - 5 1/4"6' - 6 1/2"26' - 1 1/2"213' - 6 1/8"3' - 8 5/8" 217' - 2 3/4"RCSMBus: (612) 395−7000 Fax: (612) 395−7002500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 3000Minneapolis, MN 55415BUSINESS & COMMUNITIESDEVELOPING REAL ESTATE FOR PEOPLE,Architecture Engineering Planning Interiors© , DLR Group inc., a Minnesota corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDBENJAMIN TALPOSREVISIONS3/11/2016 12:06:58 PMC:\Revit\40-16121-00_AR_Central_2015_gibarra.rvt40-16121-00March 11, 2016COURTYARD MARRIOT -ST. LOUIS PARK, MNCONDITIONALUSE PERMITAPPLICATIONFLOOR PLAN, LEVEL 2-3A1.2NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FLOOR PLAN, LEVELS 2-3 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 40 UP A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H H I I J J 33 44 55 66 77 88 297 SF QQ 237 SF K 235 SF K236 SF K 236 SF K271 SF QQ 269 SF QQ 270 SF QQ 268 SF QQ 270 SF QQ268 SF QQ 238 SF HK 272 SF K ACC 298 SF K ACC 238 SF K 244 SF K 263 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 239 SF K 237 SF K 238 SF K 67 SF ELEV 67 SF ELEV 210 SF LOBBY 69 SF ICE/ VEND. 1243 SF CORRIDOR 211 SF STAIR 215 SF STAIR 76 SF Room 41' - 3"19' - 5 7/8"60' - 8 7/8"10' - 0 7/16"47' - 6 7/16"8' - 9 1/4"82' - 0 1/4"52' - 11 5/8"15' - 10 3/4" 217' - 2 3/4"26' - 1 1/2"34' - 7 3/8"60' - 8 7/8"213' - 6 1/8"3' - 8 5/8" 217' - 2 3/4"RCSMBus: (612) 395−7000 Fax: (612) 395−7002500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 3000Minneapolis, MN 55415BUSINESS & COMMUNITIESDEVELOPING REAL ESTATE FOR PEOPLE,Architecture Engineering Planning Interiors© , DLR Group inc., a Minnesota corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDBENJAMIN TALPOSREVISIONS3/11/2016 12:07:01 PMC:\Revit\40-16121-00_AR_Central_2015_gibarra.rvt40-16121-00March 11, 2016COURTYARD MARRIOT -ST. LOUIS PARK, MNCONDITIONALUSE PERMITAPPLICATIONFLOOR PLAN, LEVELS 4-6A1.3NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FLOOR PLAN, LEVELS 4-6 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 41 LEVEL 01 0" LEVEL 02 14' - 0" LEVEL 03 23' - 0" ABCDEFGHIJ LEVEL 04 32' - 0" LEVEL 05 41' - 0" LEVEL 06 50' - 0" ROOF 59' - 0"14' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"6' - 0"65' - 0"PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL COLOR 2 GUESTROOM WINDOW W/ PREFINISHED ALUMINUM SHADOW BOX SURROUND AND METAL PANEL INSERT COLOR 3 ALUMINUM & GLASS STOREFRONT SYSTEM CEMENT PLASTER (STUCCO) COLOR 1 CEMENT PLASTER (STUCCO) COLOR 1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL COLOR 2 PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 MECHANICAL LOUVERS PAINTED STEEL COLUMNS AND CANOPY FASCIA30' - 4"34' - 8"LIGHT FIXTURE LEVEL 01 0" LEVEL 02 14' - 0" LEVEL 03 23' - 0" A B C D E F G H I J LEVEL 04 32' - 0" LEVEL 05 41' - 0" LEVEL 06 50' - 0" ROOF 59' - 0"6' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"14' - 0"65' - 0"PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 GUESTROOM WINDOW W/ PREFINISHED ALUMINUM SHADOW BOX SURROUND AND METAL PANEL INSERT COLOR 3 ALUMINUM & GLASS STOREFRONT SYSTEM CEMENT PLASTER (STUCCO) COLOR 1 MECHANICAL LOUVERS PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 LIGHT FIXTURE LINK TO EXISTING MARRIOT BUILDING RCSMBus: (612) 395−7000 Fax: (612) 395−7002500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 3000Minneapolis, MN 55415BUSINESS & COMMUNITIESDEVELOPING REAL ESTATE FOR PEOPLE,Architecture Engineering Planning Interiors© , DLR Group inc., a Minnesota corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDBENJAMIN TALPOSREVISIONS3/11/2016 12:55:42 PMC:\Revit\40-16121-00_AR_Central_2015_gibarra.rvt40-16121-00March 11, 2016COURTYARD MARRIOT -ST. LOUIS PARK, MNCONDITIONALUSE PERMITAPPLICATIONEXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA5.1SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A5.1 1 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A5.1 2 SOUTH ELEVATION City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 42 LEVEL 01 0" LEVEL 02 14' - 0" LEVEL 03 23' - 0" 12345678 LEVEL 04 32' - 0" LEVEL 05 41' - 0" LEVEL 06 50' - 0" ROOF 59' - 0"6' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"14' - 0"65' - 0"PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL COLOR 2 CEMENT PLASTER (STUCCO) COLOR 1 34' - 8"30' - 4"LIGHT FIXTURE LEVEL 01 0" LEVEL 02 14' - 0" LEVEL 03 23' - 0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LEVEL 04 32' - 0" LEVEL 05 41' - 0" LEVEL 06 50' - 0" ROOF 59' - 0"6' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"14' - 0"65' - 0"PREFINISHED METAL PANEL COLOR 1 FIBER CEMENT PANEL COLOR 2 CEMENT PLASTER (STUCCO) COLOR 1 RCSMBus: (612) 395−7000 Fax: (612) 395−7002500 Washington Avenue South, Suite 3000Minneapolis, MN 55415BUSINESS & COMMUNITIESDEVELOPING REAL ESTATE FOR PEOPLE,Architecture Engineering Planning Interiors© , DLR Group inc., a Minnesota corporation, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDBENJAMIN TALPOSREVISIONS3/11/2016 12:56:04 PMC:\Revit\40-16121-00_AR_Central_2015_gibarra.rvt40-16121-00March 11, 2016COURTYARD MARRIOT -ST. LOUIS PARK, MNCONDITIONALUSE PERMITAPPLICATIONEXTERIOR ELEVATIONSA5.2SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A5.2 1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A5.2 2 WEST ELEVATION City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 43 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 44 MINNEAPOLIS MARRIOTT WEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION DETAILS $WU  Ä(CZ  Ä 9CUJKPIVQP#XGPWG5QWVJ5WKVG /KPPGCRQNKU/0City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 45 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 46 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8c) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.Page 47 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Consent Agenda Item: 8d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the first reading of an Ordinance amending the subdivision code, and to set the second reading for June 6, 2016. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to amend the subdivision code? A simple majority vote of the Council (4) is needed to approve the recommended motion. SUMMARY: Staff initiated a request to amend the subdivision code. The proposed ordinance was reviewed by the City Attorney. The intent of the amendments is to update the design standards and make clarifications. The ordinance was presented to the Council in a written report on March 14, 2016, and discussed by the Council in study session on April 25, 2016. The Council was supportive of the proposed amendments. The subdivision ordinance was first adopted in 1976. Since then it has seen a few minor amendments, but for the most part, remains unchanged. Staff has been keeping track of questions, variances, and discussions arising from administration of the ordinance in anticipation of amending the code. The amendment proposes policy changes to the way subdivision variances, sidewalks, and easements are reviewed and processed. The changes are summarized in the discussion, and shown in the attached proposed ordinance. The purpose of the amendments is to update the subdivision ordinance so that it is consistent with other chapters of the city code, such as Chapter 36 - Zoning, Chapter 34 – Vegetation, and Chapter 12 – Environment. The amendments will also provide consistency between the Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) and other city plans and policies. If the proposed changes are adopted, the subdivision ordinance will govern the subdivision of land and defer the specifications of stormwater management and infrastructure design and construction to the appropriate city codes and policies. The code changes will clarify the administrative process and review criteria without changing the policies for these activities. The ordinance was presented to the Planning Commission at three study sessions in January and February of 2016 before the Commission conducted a public hearing on March 2, 2016. No comments were received at the hearing, and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the changes. NEXT STEPS: If approved, the second reading will be scheduled for the June 6, 2016 Council meeting. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Draft Ordinance Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Page 2 Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code DISCUSSION REQUEST: A copy of the draft of the proposed changes is attached. The following is a summary of the proposed changes staff is prepared to discuss at this study session: (Pg 7) Exemptions from the subdivision process. The ordinance currently exempts simple lot divisions from the normal subdivision process, meaning a lot that is split into no more than two lots can be processed administratively, and does not require a hearing before the planning commission and council approval. The ordinance does not outline a process for combining two parcels, or moving a property line between two parcels. The City Attorney has advised staff to administratively review and approve these proposals before they are submitted to Hennepin County by the property owner. Staff is proposing adding a process to the ordinance that identifies the criteria by which staff administratively approves combinations and property line adjustments along with simple lot splits. The proposed language outlines the same process and circumstances staff has been using when reviewing these requests. (Pg 9) Change regulations pertaining to subdivision variances. Current regulations state four criteria that must be met. Staff is proposing to change the language to say that five criteria shall be considered when evaluating subdivision variance requests. This change will allow the Planning Commission to continue to review variances in a more comprehensive manner, yet also allow the Planning Commission to review it in the context of the unique situation confronted by the applicant. This revision is consistent with the manner in which variances are reviewed in the zoning ordinance which recently went from a similar shall be met requirement to a shall be considered review. (Pg 28-37) Remove infrastructure design standards from the ordinance, and instead refer to the Engineering Director who will apply the City Engineering Department policies and templates. (Pg 30) Continue to require sidewalks, but require them to be installed as per approved sidewalk and trail plans and policies instead of requiring them on all street frontages. (Pg 31) Create the option for the property owner to pay cash contribution to sidewalk fund in lieu of constructing a sidewalk or trailway, at the City’s discretion (not the property owner’s). (Pg 37) Revise language requiring drainage/utility (D/U) easements. The ordinance currently requires D/U easements around the perimeter of all lots, and changes to this require a variance. Staff proposes to add an exception that allows the Engineering Director to reduce D/U easements to avoid excessive and unnecessary easements and to design easements in conjunction with development proposals and the City’s long-term plans for the area. (Pg 38) Delete the erosion and sediment control requirements, and reference them in Chapter 12 of the City Code. (Pg 38) Delete the storm drainage requirements, and reference the Local Storm Water Management Plan (LSWMP), and City and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District policies. (Pg 42) Reference the tree preservation regulations that are detailed in the landscaping section of the zoning ordinance. Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO.____-16 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO SUBDIVISIONS THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 16-05-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 26 is hereby amended by deleting stricken language, and adding underscored language. Chapter 26 SUBDIVISIONS* Article I. In General Sec. 26-1. Short title. Sec. 26-2. Purpose of Cchapter. Sec. 26-3. Definitions. Sec. 26-4. Conformance with the Ccomprehensive Pplan. Sec. 26-5. Approvals necessary for acceptance of subdivision plats. Sec. 26-6. Conditions for recording. Sec. 26-7. Building permits. Sec. 26-8. Noise control requirement.Reserved. Sec. 26-9. Exceptions. Combinations, simple divisions, and property line adjustments. Sec. 26-10. Conveyance by metes and bounds. Secs. 26-11--26-40. Reserved. Article II. Administration and Enforcement Sec. 26-41. Nonplatted subdivisions. Sec. 26-42. Subdivision Variances; planning commission recommendations; standards. Sec. 26-43. Violations; penalty. Sec. 26-44. Validity of Cchapter provisions. Sec. 26-45. Amendment process. Secs. 26-46--26-80. Reserved. Article III. Procedures for Filing and Review Sec. 26-81. Sketch plan. Sec. 26-82. Preliminary plat. Sec. 26-83. Final plat. Sec. 26-84. Premature subdivisions. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 3 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 2 Secs. 26-85--26-120. Reserved. Article IV. Plat and Data Requirements Sec. 26-121. Sketch plan. Sec. 26-122. Preliminary plat. Sec. 26-123. Final plat. Sec. 26-124. Address map.Reserved. Sec. 26-125. Engineering standards for final grading, development and erosion control plans. Secs. 26-126--26-150. Reserved. ---------- *Cross reference(s)--Buildings and building regulations, ch. 6; environment and public health, ch. 12; official map, § 21-31 et seq.; utilities, ch. 32; vegetation, ch. 34; zoning, ch. 36. State law reference(s)--Authority to regulate subdivisions, M.S.A. § 462.358. Article V. Design Standards Sec. 26-151. Consistency. Sec. 26-152. Blocks and lots. Sec. 26-153. Streets and alleys. Sec. 26-154. Easements. Sec. 26-155. Erosion and sediment control. Sec. 26-156. Storm drainage. Sec. 26-157. Protected areas. Sec. 26-158. Park and trail dedication requirements. Sec. 26-159. Tree preservation and replacement. Sec. 26-160. Minimum design features. Secs. 26-161--26-190. Reserved. Article VI. Required Basic Improvements Sec. 26-191. General provisions. Sec. 26-192. Monuments. Sec. 26-193. Street improvements. Sec. 26-194. Future street improvements. Sec. 26-195. Sanitary sewer and water distribution improvements. Sec. 26-196. Public and private utilities. Sec. 26-197. Election by city to install improvements. Sec. 26-198. Railroad crossings. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 4 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 3 ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 26-1. Short title. This Cchapter shall be known as the Subdivision Ordinance of the City of St. Louis Park, and will be referred to as "this Cchapter." (Code 1976, § 14-900) Sec. 26-2. Purpose of this Cchapter. In order to safeguard the best interests of the city and to assist the subdivider in harmonizing the subdivider's interests with those of the city at large, the following regulations are adopted so that the adherence to such regulations will bring results beneficial to both parties. It is the purpose of this Cchapter to make certain regulations and requirements for the platting of land within the city pursuant to the authority contained in the state statutes, which regulations the city council deems necessary for the health, safety and general welfare of this community. (Code 1976, § 14-901) Sec. 26-3. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Cchapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. Words and terms not defined in this section shall have the same meaning as described in the Chapter 36 - zoning chapter of this Code. Base lot means a lot meeting all the specifications within its zoning district prior to being divided into a two-family or cluster housing subdivision. Block means an area of land within a subdivision that is entirely bounded by streets, or by streets and the entire boundaries of the subdivision, or a combination of such streets and subdivision boundaries with a river or lake, public park, railroad rights-of-way or municipal boundaries. Centerline gradient means the distance vertically from the horizontal in feet and tenths of a foot for each 100 feet of horizontal distance measured at the street centerline. Combination means the joining of two or more parcels. Comprehensive Pplan means the group of maps, charts and texts adopted by the city council as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act that make up the comprehensive long range plan of the city. Design standards means the specifications in this Cchapter for the preparation of plats, both preliminary and final, indicating, among other things, the required minimum or maximum dimensions of such items as rights-of-way, blocks, easements and lots. Final plat means a drawing or map of a subdivision, approved by the city council and in such form as required by the county for the purpose of recording. Lot means a parcelportion of land created by a platted subdivision for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership or possession, or for building development which is City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 5 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 4 described by a lot number, block number and subdivision name which is on file with the register of deeds of the county. Lot area, minimum, means the minimum lot area required by the Chapter 36-zoning chapter of this Code. Lot improvement means any building, structure, work of art, or other object, or improvement of the land constituting a physical betterment of real property, or any part of such betterment, or any grading of the lot to prepare for the construction of a building. Certain lot improvements shall be properly bonded as provided in the regulations of this chapter. LSWMP, means the City’s Local Surface Water Management Plan which is on file at the City Engineer’s office. Marginal access street means a local street which is parallel to and adjacent to a major thoroughfare or a railroad right-of-way and which provides access to abutting properties. Outlot means a lot remnant or parcel of land, which is intended as open space, drainage or other use, for which no private development is intended. Boundary changes of an outlot shall not be permitted except by replat. Outlot means a parcel of land subject to future platting prior to development, or a parcel of land which is designated for public or private open space, right-of-way, utilities or other similar purpose. Parcel means a legally defined section of land. Parks and playgrounds means public land and open spaces in the city dedicated or reserved for passive or active recreation purposes. Pedestrianway means a public right-of-way, public easement or private easement to provide access for pedestrians. Phased subdivision application means an application for subdivision approval where the subdivider, pursuant to a specific plan proposes to immediately subdivide the property but will develop it in one or more individual phases over a period of time. A phased subdivision application may include an application for approval of, or conversion to, horizontal or vertical condominiums, nonresidential development projects, planned unit developments, mixed-use projects and residential developments. Plat means the drawing or map of a subdivision prepared for filing of record pursuant to M.S.A. ch. 505 and containing all elements and requirements set forth in this Cchapter. Preliminary plat means a tentative drawing or map of a proposed subdivision meeting the requirements enumerated in this Cchapter. Preliminary plat application means an application submitted to the city in accordance with the provisions enumerated in this Cchapter. Premature subdivision means an application for subdivision which cannot be approved until other services are installed or improvements are made to the land. Property line adjustment, means rearranging one or more property lines in such a way that parcels are neither created nor eliminated. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 6 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 5 Protective covenants means contracts made between private parties as to the manner in which land may be used, with the view to protecting and preserving the physical and economic integrity of any given area. Public improvement means any drainage ditch, roadway, parkway, sidewalk, pedestrianway, tree, lawn, off-street parking area, lot improvement or other facility for which the city may ultimately assume the responsibility for maintenance and operation, or which may affect an improvement for which local government responsibility is established. Replat means the combination, recombination or division of one or more lotsparcels or tracts of land which involves land which has previously been platted and which is on file of record with the county pursuant to M.S.A. ch. 505. Any replat unless specifically exempted shall be required to meet all of the requirements of this Cchapter. Right-of-way width means the shortest distance between lines of parcelslots or easements delineating the street rights-of-way. Setback means the shortest distance between a building and the property line nearest thereto. Simple division means the subdivision of a parcel into no more than two parcels. Single-family attached housing means cluster housing, duplexes, or townhouses where each unit has a separate entrance and each unit is located on a separate parcel. Sketch plan means a plan, drawn to scale, which indicates the placement of proposed lots, streets, and building pads for the purpose of identifying requirements and limitations imposed by this chapter, the zoning chapter, and other city ordinances as related to the subdivision of property. Steep slope means a natural topographic feature with an average slope of at least 30%. Street width means the shortest distance between face of curb and face of curb, or if a surmountable curb, the shortest distance between the lowest point of each curb on opposite sides of the street. Subdivider means any individual, firm, association, syndicate, copartnership, corporation, trust or other legal entity having sufficient proprietary interest in the land sought to be subdivided to commence and maintain proceedings to subdivide the land under this Cchapter. Subdivision means the separation of an area, parcel or tract of land under single ownership into two or more parcels, tracts, lots, or long term leasehold interests, where the creation of the leasehold interest necessitates the creation of streets, roads or alleys, for residential, commercial, industrial or other use, or any combination thereof, except those separations: (1) Where all the resulting parcels, tracts, lots or interests will be 20 acres or larger in size and 500 feet in width measured along an existing right-of-way for residential uses and five acres or larger in size and 300 feet in width measured along an existing right-of- way for commercial and industrial uses; or (2) Creating cemetery lots; (3) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary. Any division of land so decreed which does not meet zoning chapter City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 7 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 6 requirements of Chapter 36-zoning for lot area, lot width, or which does not have the required frontage on a public right-of-way is not a buildable parcel. Subdivision variance means a variance to design provisions of this Cchapter, but not to provisions of Chapter 36-zoning. of the zoning chapter. Townhouses means dwelling units attached in a single structure, each having a separate private entrance from the exterior of the structure (also see the zoning chapter description for cluster housing). Tract means a parcel created by a registered land survey which is described by a tract designation and a Registered Land Survey Number which is on file with the register of deeds of the county. Unit lots means lots created from the subdivision of a two-family dwelling or a townhouse having different minimum lot size requirements than the conventional base lot within the zoning district. Sec. 26-4. Conformance with the Ccomprehensive Pplan. No subdivision shall be approved by the city council which does not conform to the land use designations, objectives, policies or goals of the Ccomprehensive Pplan. Sec. 26-5. Approvals necessary for acceptance of subdivision plats. Before any plat shall be recorded or be of any validity, it shall be referred to the city planning commission for recommendation and approval by the city council as having fulfilled the requirements of this Cchapter. Sec. 26-6. Conditions for recording. No plat of any subdivision shall be entitled to be recorded in the county recorder's office or have any validity until the plat thereof has been prepared, approved and acknowledged in the manner prescribed by this Cchapter and a resolution approving the final plat has been filed with the county. Sec. 26-7. Building permits. No building permits shall be issued by the city for the construction of any building, structure or improvement to the land or to any parcellot in a subdivision, until all requirements of this Cchapter have been fully complied with. No building permits shall be issued for any outlot, except a building permit for public structures if the parcel is in public ownership. Sec. 26-8. Noise control requirement. Reserved. A subdivision may not be approved that would violate Minnesota Rules, chapter 7030. Sec. 26-9. Exceptions. Combinations, simple divisions, and property line adjustments. Combinations, simple divisions, and property line adjustments shall follow the application and procedures required by this Chapter for a subdivision unless exempted by this Section in which case City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 8 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 7 the application and procedure for exempt combinations, simple divisions and property line adjustments shall be followed. The following land subdivisions are exempt from articles III and IV of this chapter. Upon request, the zoning administrator shall, within ten days, certify that a proposed subdivision is exempt. (1) Exempt subdivisions. Divisions of land are exempt if all of the following conditions are met: a. The land involved has been previously platted into lots and blocks and is designated in a subdivision plat on file and of record in the office of the county register of deeds or registrar of titles. b. The division involves no more than two previously platted lots. c. The division will not cause the land or any structure on the land to be in violation of this chapter, the zoning chapter of this Code or the building code. d. The subdivision will not involve any new street or road, or the extension of municipal facilities, or the creation of any public improvement. e. The subdivision will not involve any outlot. f. The purpose of the division is to divide a single parcel into two parcels. (2) Procedure for exempted subdivisions. The owners of such lots to be subdivided shall file with the zoning administrator a certificate of survey of the lots to be divided, and pay the required fee, plus any required park dedication. Such certificate of survey shall show the dimensions of the lots, as measured upon the recorded plan, the area of the lots, all corner elevations, all existing structures, including dimensions to existing and proposed property lines, all visible encroachments, all easements of record, and their proposed division. A written description of the separately described tracts which will result from the proposed division shall be included on the survey. If the proposed subdivision complies with all of the requirements of this section, it will be approved by the director of inspections, the planning manager, and the city assessor and forwarded to the county for filing. (a) Exemption. Applications for combinations, simple divisions and property line adjustments shall be exempt from articles III and IV of this Chapter if the following conditions are met: (1) A simple division will result in no more than one additional lot or tract. (2) A combination will combine no more than two parcels. (3) A property line adjustment will relocate a property line without increasing or decreasing the number of parcels. (4) The land involved has been previously subdivided by plat or Registered Land Survey and is on file and of record in the office of the county register of deeds or registrar of titles. (5) The application will not cause the parcel or any structure on the parcel to be in violation of this Code or the building code. (6) With the exception of sidewalks or trails, the application will not involve the construction of any new street or road, or the extension of municipal facilities, or the creation of any public improvement. (7) The application does not involve an outlot. (b) Applications. Applications for exempt combinations, simple divisions, and property line adjustments shall include the following: (1) A completed application and payment of the required application fee. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 9 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 8 (2) Certificate of survey, showing at a minimum: a. Dimensions of the existing and proposed parcels. b. The area of the existing and proposed parcels. c. All corner elevations. d. All existing structures, including dimensions to existing and proposed property lines. e. All visible encroachments. f. All easements of record. g. The proposed division. h. The legal description of the existing and proposed parcels. (3) A copy of the deed or title of the property. (c) Review. Applications for exempt combinations, simple divisions, and property line adjustments will be deemed complete when they contain all the required information. Complete applications will be approved by the Director of Inspections, the Planning Supervisor, the Engineering Director, and the City Assessor. Approved applications will be forwarded to the county for filing. Sec. 26-10. Conveyance by metes and bounds. No land shall be conveyedance of land in which the land conveyed is described by metes and bounds or by reference to an unapproved registered land survey made after April 21, 1961, or to an unapproved plat made after March 8, 1957. The provision of this section does not apply to the conveyance if the land described: (a) The provision of this section does not apply to the conveyance if the land described: (1) Was a separate parcel of record on March 8, 1957; (2) Was the subject of a written agreement to convey entered into prior to March 8, 1957; (3) Was a separate parcel of not less than 2 1/2 acres in area and 150 feet in width on January 1, 1966; (4) Was a separate parcel of not less than five acres in area and 300 feet in width on July 1, 1980; (5) Is a single parcel of commercial or industrial land of not less than five acres and having a width of not less than 300 feet and its conveyance does not result in the division of the parcel into two or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than five acres in area or 300 feet in width; or (6) Is a single parcel of residential or agricultural land of not less than 20 acres and having a width of not less than 500 feet and its conveyance does not result in the division of the parcel into two or more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than 20 acres in area or 500 feet in width. (b) In any case in which compliance with the foregoing restrictions will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of the subdivision regulations, the platting authority may waive such compliance by adoption of a Council resolution to that effect and the conveyance may then be filed or recorded. (c) Land conveyed to the city, Hennepin County, the State of Minnesota, or railroads for right- of-way, or any residual land resulting from such conveyance, is not required to be platted. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 10 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 9 Secs. 26-1110--26-40. Reserved. ARTICLE II. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT* Sec. 26-41. Nonplatted subdivisions. (a) Registered land surveys. All registered land surveys in the city shall be presented to the planning commission in the form of a preliminary plat in accordance with the standards set forth in this Cchapter for preliminary plats, and the planning commission shall first approve the arrangement, sizes and relationships of proposed tracts in such registered land surveys, and tracts to be used as easements or roads should be so conveyed to the city. Unless a recommendation and approval have been obtained from the planning commission and city council, respectively, in accordance with the standards set forth in this Cchapter, building permits will be withheld for buildings on tracts which have been so subdivided by registered land surveys, and the city may refuse to take over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or maintain any such tracts unless so approved. (b) Conveyance by metes and bounds. No division of one or more parcels in which the land conveyed is described by metes and bounds shall be recorded if the division is a subdivision. Building permits will be withheld for buildings or tracts which have been subdivided and conveyed by this method and the city may refuse to take over tracts as streets or roads or to improve, repair or maintain any such tracts. (b) Subdivision by metes and bounds. Properties described by metes and bounds shall only be further subdivided by plat. A subdivision described by metes and bounds shall not be approved by the City or recorded at the County. Building permits will be withheld for buildings on tracts which have been subdivided without City approval, and the city may refuse to take over tracts or to improve, repair or maintain any improvements on such tracts. Sec. 26-42. Subdivision Variances; planning commission recommendations; standards. (a) Findings. The planning commission may recommend a variance from the minimum standards of this chapter (not procedural provisions) when, in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance. In recommending any variance, the commission shall prescribe any conditions that it deems necessary or desirable for the public interest. In making its recommendations, the planning commission shall take into account the nature of the proposed use of land and the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the proposed subdivision and the probable effect of the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. A variance shall only be recommended when the planning commission finds that all of the following exist: (a) Findings. The planning commission may recommend a variance from the minimum standards of this Chapter when, in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance. The Planning Commission may not recommend a variance to a procedural provision of this Chapter, or use this provision to recommend a variance to a zoning regulation. In recommending a variance, the commission shall consider: (1) The nature of the proposed use of land and the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the proposed subdivision and the probable effect of the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 11 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 10 (21) There are sSpecial circumstances or conditions affecting the property such that the strict application of the provisions of this Cchapter would deprive the applicant/owner of the reasonable use of the land. (32) The impact the variance will have on the public health, safety and welfare of The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity territory in which the property is situated. (43) Topography, drainage or other naturally occurring characteristics of the land that result in an undue hardship preventing the land from being used in a manner typical of land within the vicinity. The variance is to correct inequities resulting from an extreme physical hardship such as topography, etc. (5 4) The variance is not contrary to the intent of the Ccomprehensive Pplan. (b) Prescribing Conditions. The Planning Commission and City Council may prescribe conditions that it deems necessary or desirable for the public interest. (c) City Council Action. After considerations of the planning commission recommendations, the city council may grant variances, subject to subsections (a)(1)--(a)( 45) of this section. (d) Expiration. A variance approved under this section shall expire without further action by the city at such time as the related preliminary plat and/or final plat approval expires. (b) Procedures. (1) Requests for a variance from this chapter shall be filed with the community development director on an application form provided by the city. Such application shall be accompanied by a fee as established by the city council. Such application shall also be accompanied by ten copies of detailed written and graphic materials necessary for the explanation of the request. (2) Upon receiving such application, the community development director shall set a date for a public hearing to coincide with the public hearing for preliminary plat at the planning commission. Notice of such hearing shall be published in the official newspaper at least ten days prior to such hearing, and individual property notices shall be mailed not less than ten days nor more than 30 days prior to the hearing to all owners of property within 500 feet of the parcel included in the request. (3) The community development director shall refer the application, along with all related information and report, to the city planning commission along with the request for a preliminary plat. (4) The applicant or a representative thereof shall appear before the planning commission in order to answer questions concerning the proposed variance request during the public hearing. (5) The planning commission and city staff shall have authority to request additional information from the applicant concerning the variance or to retain expert testimony with the consent and at the expense of the applicant concerning such variance where City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 12 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 11 such information is declared necessary to ensure preservation of health, safety and general welfare. (6) Within 30 days after the public hearing, the planning commission shall make recorded findings of fact recommending approval or denial of the variance request, together with any conditions of approval it considers necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this chapter and to protect the public health, safety and welfare. (7) The city council shall not grant a variance until it has received a report from city staff and recommendation from the planning commission or until 60 45 days after the first regular planning commission meeting at which the request was considered. (8) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the planning commission and city staff, the city council shall place the report and recommendation on the agenda for the next regular meeting or the next meeting at which the preliminary plat is considered. Such reports and recommendations shall be entered in and made part of the permanent written record of the city council meeting. (9) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the planning commission and city staff, the city council shall make a recorded finding of fact and impose any conditions it considers necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. (10) The city council shall decide whether to approve or deny a request for a variance within 30 days after the first regular city council meeting at which the request was considered. (11) A variance of this chapter shall be by majority vote of the full city council. Sec. 26-43. Violations; penalty. (a) Sale of parcelslots from unrecorded plats or registered land surveys. It shall be a misdemeanor to sell, trade or otherwise convey any lot or parcel of land as a part of any registered land survey, plat or replat of any subdivision or area located within the city unless such registered land survey, plat or replat shall have first been recorded in the office of the recorder of the county. (b) Receiving or recording unapproved subdivisionsplats. It shall be unlawful for a private individual to receive or record in any public office any plans, registered land surveys, or plats of land laid out in building lots and streets, alleys or other portions of the same intended to be dedicated to public or private use, or for the use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent thereto, and located within the city, unless the same shall bear thereon, by endorsement or otherwise, the approval of the city council. (c) Misrepresentations. It shall be a misdemeanor for any person owning an addition or subdivision of land within the city to represent that any improvement upon any of the streets, alleys or avenues of such addition or subdivision or any sewer in such addition or subdivision has been constructed according to the plans and specifications approved by the city council, or has been supervised or inspected by the city, when such improvements have not been so constructed, supervised or inspected. (d) Penalty. Anyone violating any of the provisions of this Cchapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day during which compliance is delayed shall constitute a separate offense. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 13 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 12 Sec. 26-44. Validity of Cchapter provisions. (a) Separability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Cchapter is for any reason to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Cchapter. (b) Failure to receive notices. Failure of a property owner to receive a notice shall not invalidate any proceedings as set forth within this Cchapter. Sec. 26-45. Amendment process. No amendment to this Cchapter shall occur without review and recommendation of the planning commission. Secs. 26-46--26-80. Reserved. ARTICLE III. PROCEDURES FOR FILING AND REVIEW Sec. 26-81. Sketch plan. (a) Purpose. In order to ensure that the all applicants are is informed of the procedural requirements and minimum standards of this Cchapter, and the requirements or limitations imposed by other city ordinances, plans and/or policies, prior to the preparation of a preliminary plat, the all applicants shall may present a sketch plan to the community development director prior to submitting an application for a preliminary plat. Similarly, the Community Development Director may require the submission of a sketch plan prior to the submission of a preliminary plat application. (b) Application. Submission of a subdivision sketch plan shall not constitute formal application for plat approval. Approval of the sketch plan shall not be considered binding in regard to subsequent plat review. The Ccommunity Ddevelopment Ddirector, notably in the case of multiphased projects, shall have the authority to refer the sketch plan to the planning commission and/or city council for review and comment. The sketch plan submission shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) The sketch plan submission shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. SixAt least 2 copies, and one digital copy of the plat sketch plan at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet or less. The city may require that the sketch plan be provided in metric at a scale not smaller than 1:1200. (2)b. An 8 1/2-inch x 11-inch or 11-inch x 17-inch reduction of the sketch plan. (3)c. Payment of plan review fee. (4)d. Escrow deposit to pay review costs of city staff and consultants. (2) The community development director shall review the sketch plat and respond to the applicant within ten business days for a single phase project and 30 calendar days for a multiphased project. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 14 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 13 Sec. 26-82. Preliminary plat. (a) Filing. At least six Sixteen copies, and one digital copy of the preliminary plat, as specified by section 26-122 at a scale not less than one inch equals 100 feet and one set of reductions no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches shall be submitted to the Ccommunity Ddevelopment Ddirector. The city may require that plans be submitted in metric at a scale not smaller than 1:1200. The subdivider shall also submit mailing labels for all of property owners located within 500 feet of the subject property obtained from and certified by the county auditor's office. The required filing fees, as established by city council resolution, shall be paid, and any necessary applications for variances from the provisions of this Cchapter shall be submitted with the required fee. The preliminary plat application shall be deemed complete when all the information requirements are complied with. (b) Hearing. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description and description of request and shall be published in the official newspaper of the city at least ten days prior to the hearing. Written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten days prior to all owners of land within 500 feet of the boundary of the property in question. The planning commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the city council. (c) Technical assistance reports. Upon submission of a complete application for a preliminary plat, the Ccommunity Ddevelopment Ddirector shall immediately forward one copy of the plat to the director of public worksEngineering Director, director of inspections, Ffire Cchief, Ppolice Cchief and to the Ccity Aattorney for examination. Written reports or comments shall be made to the community development director. Such reports shall state recommendations for approval or disapproval of the preliminary plat and what changes are necessary or desirable to make such preliminary plat conform to the requirements of this Cchapter coming within the jurisdiction of such officer or department. (d) Review by other commissions or jurisdictions. The Ccommunity Ddevelopment Ddirector shall refer copies of the preliminary plat to the parks and recreation commission, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, utility companies, other public service agencies, county, metropolitan, state or other public jurisdictions for their review and comment, where appropriate and when required. (e) Planning commission action. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the city council following the close of the public hearing. If the planning commission has not acted upon the preliminary plat within 45 days following official receipt by the city of a preliminary plat application, completed in compliance with this Cchapter, the city council may act on the preliminary plat without the planning commission's recommendation. (f) City council action. (1) The city council shall approve or disapprove the preliminary plat within 120 days following receipt by the city of an application for a preliminary plat completed in compliance with this Cchapter unless an extension of the review period has been agreed to by the applicant. If a motion for approval of the preliminary plat fails, the preliminary plat shall be considered denied. The city council may impose conditions and restrictions on the preliminary plat which are deemed appropriate. (2) If the preliminary plat is not approved by the city council, the reasons for such action shall be recorded in the proceedings of the city council. If the preliminary plat is approved, such approval shall not constitute final acceptance of the design. Subsequent approval of the final plat by the city council will be required, including approval of the City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 15 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 14 engineering proposals and other features and requirements as specified by this Cchapter to be indicated on the final plat. The city council may require such revisions in the preliminary plat and final plat as it deems necessary for the health, safety, general welfare and convenience of the city. (3) If the preliminary plat is approved by the city council, the subdivider must submit the final plat within one year 90 days after such approval or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void, unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing within 90 days and approved by the city council. Sec. 26-83. Final plat. (a) Filing. After the preliminary plat has been approved, the final plat shall be submitted for review as set forth in this section. At least three Ten copies, and one digital copy of the final plat at a scale no smaller than one inch equals 100 feet, plus one reduction no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches shall be submitted to the Ccommunity Ddevelopment Ddirector for distribution to appropriate city staff, the planning commission and the city council. The city may require that the final plat be submitted in meters at a scale no smaller than 1:1200. The final plat application shall be deemed complete when all the information requirements, documents, application fees as established by city council resolution, and applicable fees enumerated in this Cchapter have been submitted. (b) Staff review. The city staff shall examine the final plat and prepare a recommendation to the planning commission. (c) Planning commission review. The planning commission shall review the final plat within 30 days of the submittal of a complete application. The planning commission shall review the final plat for conformance with the preliminary plat and shall make recommendation to the city council. (d) Approval by the city council. If accepted by the city council, the final plat shall be approved by resolution, which resolution shall provide for the acceptance of all agreements for basic improvements, public dedication and other requirements as indicated by the city council. If denied, the grounds for any refusal to approve a plat shall be set forth in the proceedings of the city council. If a motion for approval of the final plat fails, the final plat shall be considered denied. (e) Special assessments. When any existing special assessments which have been levied against the property described shall be divided and allocated to the respective parcellots in the proposed subdivisionplat, the city assessor shall estimate the clerical cost of preparing a revised assessment roll, filing the same with the county auditor, and making such division and allocation, and upon approval by the city council of such cost, the same shall be paid to the Ccity Cclerk before the final subdivisionplat approval. If the final subdivisionplat is denied, 100 percent of these costs shall be reimbursed to the applicant. (f) Recording final subdivisionplat. If the final plat is approved by the city council, the subdivider shall record it with the county recorder within two years six months after the approval or the approval of the final plat shall be considered void,. At any time, before or after the expiration date, the subdivider may request an extension. The request for extension shall be reviewed by the City Council. If approved, the City Council shall establish a new deadline for recording the plat. If denied, then the plat shall be considered void, and extensions shall no longer be considered. unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing prior to the six-month deadline and approved by the city council. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 16 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 15 The subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the Ccity Cclerk with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. The subdivider shall also provide a copy of the final plat on disc in an electronic data format. No building permits shall be let for construction of any structure on any lot in the plat until the city has received evidence of the plat being recorded by the county. In addition, no erosion control permits shall be issued and no utility work or public improvements shall begin until the city has received evidence of the filing of such final plat, or all of the following conditions have been met: (1) The final plat is approved by the city council. (2) A developer's agreement is executed and financial security is in place as required. (3) A final grading plan is approved by the Engineering Ddepartment. (4) An erosion and sediment control plan is approved by the public worksEngineering Ddepartment. (5) A final tree replacement and preservation plan is approved by staff as required. (6) If utility work is requested, final utility plans are approved by the inspections and public worksEngineering Ddepartment. (7) If construction of public utilities is requested, final construction documents are approved by the public worksEngineering Ddepartment. (8) The city receives a copy of the watershed district permit approving the project. Furthermore, that the developer shall accept all risk associated with site work undertaken prior to recording of the final plat, and that any trees removed shall be replaced in accordance with the city's tree replacement and protection preservation ordinance, regardless of whether the site is developed. (g) Recording final plats of multiphased plats. If a preliminary plat is final platted in stages, unless otherwise provided in the development agreement, all stages must be final platted into lots and blocks, not just outlots, within two years after the preliminary plat has been approved by the city council or the preliminary plat of all phases not so final platted within the two-year period shall be void. (h) Simultaneous filing. The city may agree to review the preliminary and final plats simultaneously. Sec. 26-84. Premature subdivisions. (a) Deemed premature. Any subdivision deemed premature pursuant to the criteria listed in this section shall be deemed an incomplete application and shall be denied by the city council. (b1)Condition establishing premature subdivisions. A subdivision shall be deemed premature should any of the following provisions exist: (1)a. Lack of adequate drainage. A condition of inadequate drainage shall be deemed to exist if the proposed subdivision does not conform to the city's LSWMPwater resource management plan. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 17 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 16 (2)b. Lack of adequate water supply. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack an adequate water supply if the proposed subdivision does not have adequate sources of water to serve the proposed subdivision if developed to its maximum permissible density without causing an unreasonable depreciation of existing water supplies for surrounding areas. (3)c. Lack of adequate roads or highways to serve the subdivision. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack adequate roads or highways to serve the subdivision when: a1. Roads which serve the proposed subdivision are of such a width, grade, stability, vertical and/or horizontal alignment, site distance, and surface condition that an increase in traffic volume generated by the proposed subdivision would create a hazard to public safety and general welfare, or seriously aggravate an already hazardous condition, or when, with due regard to the advice of the county and/or the state department of transportation, as appropriate, such roads are inadequate for the intended use. b2. The traffic volume generated by the proposed subdivision would create unreasonable roadhighway congestion or unsafe conditions on roadshighways existing at the time of the application or proposed for completion within the next two years. c3. The traffic volumes generated by the proposed subdivision exceed those established by any joint powers agreements with other jurisdictions or the travel demand management districts established in Chapter 36 – zoning of this code. the city's zoning chapter. (4)d. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack adequate waste disposal systems if there is inadequate sewer capacity in the present system to support the subdivision if developed to its maximum permissible density after reasonable sewer capacity is reserved for schools, planned public facilities, and commercial and industrial development projected for the next five years. (5)e. Inconsistency with capital improvement plans. A proposed subdivision shall be deemed inconsistent with capital improvement plans when improvements and/or services necessary to accommodate the proposed subdivision have not been programmed in the city, the county or other regional capital improvement plans. The city council may waive this criteria when it can be demonstrated that a revision to capital improvement programs can be accommodated or the subdivider agrees to provide the needed improvements. (c2) Regional system service inadequacies. (1)a. Existing conditions. A subdivision may be deemed premature if any of the following conditions set forth are found to exist: a1. The regionally controlled metropolitan sanitary sewer interceptors or wastewater treatment facilities are classified as having inadequate capacity to provide service within the standards of recognized public health and safety. b2. Regional transportation systems are deemed as inadequate to provide service levels within standards of recognized public safety. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 18 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 17 c3. Storm drainage systems under the jurisdiction of regional watershed districts, the Army Corps of Engineers, the state department of natural resources, state department of transportation, or other such responsible jurisdictions are inadequate to provide service levels within standards of recognized public health and safety or any required permits are denied by these jurisdictions. (2)b. City liability exemption. The city shall be exempted from any liability associated with the preliminary plat, final plat, development agreement or building permit denials, based upon factors and conditions related to regional governmental agency and unit jurisdictions and related service inadequacies. (d3)Burden of establishing. The burden shall be upon the applicant to show that the proposed subdivision or development is not premature. Secs. 26-85--26-120. Reserved. ARTICLE IV. PLAT AND DATA REQUIREMENTS Sec. 26-121. Sketch plan. (a) Sketch plan. Sketch plans shall contain, at a minimum, the following information: (1) Plat boundary. (2) North arrow. (3) Scale. (4) Street layout on and adjacent to the plat. (5) Designation of land use and current or proposed zoning. (6) Significant topographical or physical features. (7) General lot locations and layout. (b8) Preliminary evaluation. Determination by the Community Development Director Preliminary evaluation by the applicant that the subdivision is not classified as premature based upon criteria established in section 26-84. Sec. 26-122. Preliminary plat. (a) Preliminary plat submittal. The subdivider shall prepare and submit an application for all phases of the proposed subdivision that includes the preliminary plat drawing, preliminary utility plan, preliminary grading plan and preliminary tree preservation plan, together with any necessary supplementary information, mailing labels and required fees. The plans shall display dimensions in English and, if required, metric, and shall contain the information set forth in the subsections which follow: (b) Preliminary plat application. The following must accompany the preliminary plat drawing at the time of application: City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 19 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 18 (1) Identification of portions of property that are registered (torrens). A copy of the certificate of title shall accompany the preliminary plat application. (2) Names and addresses of all persons having property interest and names, addresses, and registration numbers of: a. The developer; b. Architect; c. Landscape architect; d. Engineer; and e. Surveyor. (c1)Preliminary plat drawing. (1)a. Legal description of lands to be subdivided. (2)b. Proposed name of subdivision; names shall not duplicate or too closely resemble names of existing subdivisions within the county. (3)c. Location of boundary lines in relation to a known section, quarter section or quarter- quarter section lines comprising a legal description of the property. (4)d. Graphic scale of plat, not less than one inch to 100 feet or in metric, 1:1200. (5)e. Date and north arrow. (6)f. Existing conditions: a1. Boundary lines, boundary line dimensions, and total acreage of proposed plat, clearly indicated. b2. Existing zoning classifications for land within and abutting the subdivision, including shoreland zoning boundaries or overlay zoning districts, if applicable. c3. The boundaries of any wetlands or floodplains within the proposed plat, clearly indicated. d4. Location, widths and names of all existing or previously platted streets or other public ways, showing type, width and condition of improvements, if any, railroad and utility rights-of-way, parks and other public open spaces, permanent buildings and structures, easements and section and corporate lines within the parceltract and to a distance of 150 feet beyond the parceltract. e5. Boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land, within 150 feet, identified by plat name or ownership, including all contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider. (7)g. Proposed design features: a1. Layout of proposed streets showing the right-of-way widths, centerline gradients, typical street sections, and proposed names of streets. The name of any street heretofore used in the city or its environs shall not be used unless the proposed street is a logical extension of an already named street, in which event the same name shall be used. The proposed street name shall not include the word "park." The city council may reject any proposed street name it deems inappropriate. b2. Locations and widths of proposed alleys and pedestrianways. c3. Location, dimension and purpose of all existing and proposed easements, both public and private. d4. Layout, numbers, lot areas and lineal dimensions of lots and blocks, to a degree of accuracy necessary to determine zoning chapter compliance with Chapter 36 - zoning. e5. Minimum front, side street, interior side and rear building setback lines. f6. The lot width at the building setback line. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 20 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 19 g7. Areas, including streets, alleys, pedestrianways, bikeways, parks and utility easements intended to be dedicated or reserved for public use, including the size of such areas in acres. (2) Preliminary plat application. The following must accompany the preliminary plat drawing at the time of application: a. Identification of portions of property that are registered (torrens). A copy of the certificate of title shall accompany the preliminary plat application. b. Names and addresses of all persons having property interest and names, addresses, and registration numbers of: 1. The developer; 2. Architect; 3. Landscape architect; 4. Engineer; and 5. Surveyor. (d3) Preliminary grading plan. The developer shall submit a preliminary grading and drainage plan which must include the following information: (1)a. North arrow, scale (not less than one inch = 100 feet, or if in metric, 1:1200), and legend. (2)b. Lot and block numbers, house pad location, home style and proposed building pad elevations at garage slab and lowest floor for each lot. (3)c. Topography in two-foot contour intervals with existing contours shown as dashed lines and proposed contours as solid lines. Existing topography shall extend 150 feet outside of the parcel tract. (4)d. Location of all natural features on the parceltract and to a distance 150 feet from the parceltract. Natural features are considered to include, but are not limited to, the following: tree lines, wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, drainage channels, bluffs, steep slopes, etc. (5)e. Location of all existing storm sewer facilities, including pipes, manholes, catch basins, ponds, swales and drainage channels within 150 feet of the parceltract. Existing pipe grades, rim and invert elevations, and normal and high water elevations must be included. (6)f. If the plat is located within or adjacent to a 100-year floodplain, flood elevations and locations must be clearly shown on the plan. (7)g. Spot elevations at drainage break points and directional arrows indicating site, swale and lot drainage. (8)h. Locations, grades, rim and invert elevations of all storm sewer facilities, including ponds, proposed to serve the parceltract. (9)i. Locations and elevations of all street high and low points. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 21 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 20 (10)j. Street grades shown, with a maximum permissible grade of ten percent and a minimum of 0.5 percent. (11)k. Phasing of grading. (12)l. The location of all oversize nontypical easements. (e4) Erosion control plan. This plan shall incorporate the elements as required by Chapter 12- Environment and Chapter 36-Zoning. the Zoning chapter. (f5) Tree replacement and protection preservation plan. This plan shall incorporate the elements as required by Chapter 36-Zoning. the zoning chapter. (g6) Preliminary utility plan. (1)a. Easements. Location, dimension and purpose of all proposed easements. (2)b. Underground facilities. Location and size of existing sewers, water mains, culverts or other underground facilities within the parceltract and to a distance of 150 feet beyond the parceltract. Such data as grades, invert elevations and location of catchbasins, manholes, gateways, and hydrants shall also be shown. (3)c. Sanitary sewer facilities. Locations, grades, rim and invert elevations, and sizes of all proposed sanitary sewer facilities to serve the tract. (4)d. Hydrants and valves. Location, type and style of all proposed hydrants and valves for the proposed water mains. (h7) Preliminary landscape plan. This plan shall show the proposed tree replacement and landscape requirements set forth in Chapter 36-Zoning. the zoning chapter. (i8) Statement of proposed use. A statement of the proposed use of the land including the type of residential buildings, proposed number of dwelling units, and type of business or industry. This shall be used to determine whether existing roadways and utilities have the capacity to accommodate the development. (j9) Supplementary information. Any or all of the supplementary information requirements set forth in this subsection shall be submitted when deemed necessary by the city staff, consultants, advisory bodies and/or city council. (1)a. Existing conditions to a distance of up to 500 feet from the proposed subdivision tract, including such features as structures, street rights-of-way, natural features, topographical contours, etc. (2)b. Proposed protective covenants, deed restrictions, and commons areas. (3)c. Soil borings atfor locations within the proposed subdivision prepared by a qualified person. (4)d. A survey prepared by a qualified person identifying tree coverage in the proposed subdivision in terms of type, weakness, maturity, potential hazard, infestation, vigor, density and spacing. (5)e. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of buildings with number of proposed dwelling units or type of business or industry, so as to reveal the effect of the development on traffic, fire hazards and congestion of population. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 22 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 21 (6)f. If any zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed zoning plan for the areas, including dimensions, shall be shown. Such proposed zoning plan shall be for information only and shall not vest any right in the applicant. If appropriate zoning is not in place, the preliminary plat is deemed to be immature and shall be denied by the city council. g. The subdivider shall be required to submit a sketch plan of adjacent properties so as to show the possible relationships between the proposed subdivision and future subdivisions. All subdivisions shall be required to relate well with existing or potential adjacent subdivisions. (7)h. Where structures are to be placed on large or excessively deep lots which are subject to potential replat, the preliminary plat shall indicate a logical way in which the lots could possibly be resubdivided in the future. (8)i. When the city has agreed to install improvements in a development, the developer will be required to furnish a financial security satisfactory to the city. (9)j. House plans which demonstrate lots to be buildable and the resulting structures compatible in size and character to the surrounding area. (10)k. A comprehensive screening plan which identifies all proposed buffering and screening in both plan and sectional view. (11)l. Preliminary traffic analysis: Analysis shall cover all roadways which will be affected by the proposed plat, including traffic capacities at intersections, current traffic counts, traffic projections from the proposed development, and necessary roadway improvements to accommodate the proposed development. (12)m. Other information deemed appropriate by the city. Sec. 26-123. Final plat. (a) Final plat submittal. The owner or subdivider shall submit a final plat, final grading, development, and erosion control plan, final utility plan, final tree preservation plan, final landscape plan, and other documents as described in this section, together with any necessary supplementary information. (b) Final plat application. The following information shall be submitted as part of the final plat application. All plans shall be prepared in accordance with current city specifications: (1) Final grading plan. (2) Site development plan. (3) Erosion control plan. (4) Final utility plan. (5) Final landscape plan. (6) Final tree replacement and protection plan. (7) A title report prepared by a title company indicating owners and encumbrances on the property and a statement as to which parts of the property are registered (torrens). (8) Address map. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 23 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 22 (9) Any supplementary information which may be required. (c1) Final plat drawing. The final plat, prepared for recording purposes, shall be prepared in accordance with provisions of state statutes and county regulations, and shall contain the following information: (1)a. Name of the subdivision, which shall not duplicate or too closely approximate the name of any existing subdivision. (2)b. Location by section, township, range, county and state, including descriptive boundaries of the subdivision, based on an accurate traverse, giving angular and linear dimensions which must mathematically close. The allowable closure error of any portion of a final plat shall be one foot in 7,500 feet. (3)c. The location and description of all monuments. Locations of such monuments shall be shown in reference to existing official monuments on the nearest established street lines, including true angles and distances to such reference points or monuments. (4)d. Location of lots, streets, public highways, alleys, parks and other features, with accurate dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, with the length of radii and/or arcs of all curves, and with all other information necessary to reproduce the plat on the ground. Dimensions shall be shown from all angle points of curve to lot lines. (5)e. Lots and outlots shall be numbered clearly. Blocks are to be numbered, with numbers shown clearly in the center of the block. (6)f. The exact locations, widths and names of all streets to be dedicated. (7)g. Location, width and type of all easements to be dedicated. (8)h. Name and registration number of land surveyor making the plat. (9)i. Scale of the plat shall be 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 or 100 scale, if in English, with the scale written and shown graphically on a bar scale along with the date and north arrow. If the city requires the plat in a metric, acceptable scales shall be provided by the city. (10)j. Title information required on final plat: a1. Statement dedicating all easements as follows: "Easements for installation and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities are reserved over, under and along the areas marked `drainage and utility easements'." b2. Statement dedicating all streets, alleys and other public areas not previously dedicated as follows: "Streets, alleys, and other public areas shown on this plat and not heretofore dedicated to public use are hereby so dedicated." c3. Space for certification by the following parties (to be certified by appropriate parties prior to the city signing the final plat): 1i. Registered surveyor, in the form required by M.S.A. § 505.03, as amended. 2ii. Execution of all owners of any interest in the land, any holders of a mortgage thereon, of the certificates required by M.S.A. § 505.03, as amended, and which certificate shall include a dedication of the utility easements and other public areas in such form as approved by the city council. 3iii. Certificates of approval and review to be filled in by the signatures of the mayor and city clerk. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 24 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 23 The form of approval of the city council is as follows: Approved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota. This ________ day of _____________, 20________ Signed ___________________________ Mayor Attest, ___________________________ City Clerk Dated this ________ day of ________, 20________ (2) Final plat application. The following information shall be submitted as part of the final plat application. All plans shall be prepared in accordance with current city specifications: a. Final grading plan. b. Site development plan. c. Erosion control plan. d. Final utility plan. e. Final landscape plan. f. Final tree preservation plan. g. A title report prepared by a title company indicating owners and encumbrances on the property and a statement as to which parts of the property are registered (torrens). h. Address map. i. Any supplementary information which may be required. (d3) Title insurance. Prior to the city signing the final plat, the developer shall submit an owner's policy of title insurance which insures the city's interests in the plat, i.e. publicly dedicated streets, sidewalks, easements and the like. Sec. 26-124. Address map.Reserved. (a) Address map required. With submission of the final plat, the applicant shall submit to the community development director ten copies of the plat map showing all addresses on the plat correctly labeled in conformance with all applicable county and city ordinances and policies, which shall subsequently be distributed to the utility companies and local school districts. The zoning administrator shall supply the applicant with addresses for the new plat. Sec. 26-125. Engineering standards for final grading, development and erosion control plans. (a) Final grading plan required. The final grading, development and erosion control plan shall contain and comply with the following information and standards: (1) North arrow. (2) Scale: The scale on the plan must be one of the following, if in English: 1 inch 20 feet 1 inch 30 feet City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 25 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 24 1 inch 40 feet 1 inch 50 feet Scale to be shown graphically on a bar scale. (3) Symbol key: Key with all line types, symbols, shading and crosshatching denoted. (4) Illustration key: Illustration key showing symbols for all information pertaining to lot and house design, including grades, easements, lot and block, setbacks, etc. (5) Benchmark: The benchmark provided must be based upon the city/county benchmark system established in 1990. Copies of level loops for newly established benchmarks must be provided with the initial submittal of the grading plan. (6) Lines: Subject property's boundary lines, lot lines and right-of-way lines. (7) Adjacent area information: All adjacent plats, parcels, rights-of-way, section lines and existing topography extended a minimum of 150 feet beyond the subject parcel in all directions. (8) Topography: Topography in two-foot contour intervals with existing contours shown as dashed lines and proposed contours shown as solid lines. All existing and proposed contours labeled at each edge of the plan and at appropriate locations within the plan. (9) Natural features: Locations of all existing natural features must be clearly shown. Natural features are considered to include, but are not limited to, the following: tree lines, wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, drainage channels, bluffs, steep slopes, etc. (10) Storm sewers: Location of existing storm sewer facilities within 150 feet of the subject parcel. (11) Flood elevations: If the property is within or adjacent to a 100-year floodplain, flood elevations and locations must be clearly shown on the plan. (12) Total area: Total area of plat, each lot, outlot and ponding area denoted on plan (tabulation permitted). (13) Direction arrows: Direction arrows indicating site, swale and lot drainage patterns. Spot elevations must be provided at drainage break points. (14) Slope: Maximum slopes created by grading shall be 3:1, except where slopes meet a water body, then the maximum is 4:1. Existing grades which exceed 3:1 may be preserved. (15) Numbers: Lot and block numbers. (16) Lot corners: Proposed lot corner elevations. (17) Names: Street names. (18) Emergency overflow swales: Emergency overflow swales located, labeled and spot elevations. Rear or side lot line swales minimum one percent grade sandy soils, and 1.5 percent grade clay soils. (19) Grades: Percent grades indicated along major drainage swales (more than 12 lots). City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 26 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 25 (20) Proposed elevations: Proposed elevations at garage floor and lowest floor elevation. Proposed finished ground elevations around home for final grading. The top of the foundation and garage floor of all structures shall be a minimum of 18 inches above the grade of the crown (center) of the street. (21) Style of home: Style of home indicated for each lot, e.g., rambler, split level, walkout, full basement, etc. (22) Building footprints for each lot. (23) High and low points: Finished spot elevations at all high and low points. (24) Cul-de-sac: Locations of all temporary cul-de-sac. (25) Storm sewers: Locations of all proposed storm sewer facilities. (26) Drainage: Maximum of 600 lineal feet of drainage from rear yard areas permitted. Rear yard catchbasins must be installed at the 600-foot mark, or as determined by the director of public worksEngineering Director. (27) Draintile: Location of proposed draintile including cleanout locations and inverts of services to each lot (five feet from the lot line on the downstream side of the lot). Invert information is required only if depth of tile is other than 36 inches city standard depth. (28) Utility easements: Location of all oversized drainage and utility easements. (29) Ponds: All existing and proposed ponds must have normal water level (NWL), 100- year high water level (HWL) shown and total volume (acre feet) of stormwater retention indicated above the NWL. (30) Inlets and outlets: Invert elevation of inlets and outlets into ponds. (31) Tree protectionpreservation: Location of tree protection preservation fencing and limits of clearing and grading clearly shown on plans. (32) Mass grading: Designation of lots to be mass graded and custom graded. (33) Erosion control: Location and details of all structural erosion control measures including, but not limited to, the following: temporary gravel construction access roads, temporary and permanent sediment basins, silt fence, staked bales, storm sewer inlet filters, rock filter dikes, storm sewer outlet protection, erosion control mats, fiber blankets and nettings. (34) Soil stockpiling: Locations of soil stockpile areas with temporary stabilization measures indicated. (35) Seeding: Seeding specifications, including: a. Type of seeding (permanent, temporary, dormant); b. Type of seed and application rate; c. Fertilizer type and application rate; d. Mulch type, application rate and method of anchoring; e. Specifications for the installation and maintenance of erosion control mats, blankets or netting; f. Note requiring seeding to be completed within 48 hours of rough grading with revegetation to occur within 48 hours of fine grading. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 27 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 26 (36) Lot benching: Standard lot benching detail must be provided. (37) Detail plates: Standard detail plates and maintenance information for each of the measures in this section used must also be included. (38) Grading plan: Requirements for certified grading plan: a. A certified plan must be submitted within 30 days of grading completion. b. The "as constructed" grading plan must include certification by a registered land surveyor or engineer that all ponds, swales and drainageways have been constructed on public easements or land owned by the city. c. The "as constructed" grading plan shall include field verified elevations as the following: 1. Cross sections of ponds. 2. Location and elevations of all swales, drainageways and emergency overflows. 3. All lot corners and center of house pads. Secs. 26-126--26-150. Reserved. ARTICLE V. DESIGN STANDARDS Sec. 26-151. Consistency. Preliminary and final plats may only be approved if they are consistent with the city's Ccomprehensive Pplan and Chapter 36-Zoning. zoning chapter. Preliminary plats may not be approved prior to adoption of any Ccomprehensive Pplan or Chapter 36 – Zoning zoning chapter changes necessary for final plat approval. Sec. 26-152. Blocks and lots. (a) Blocks. (1) Length. In general, intersecting streets determining block lengths shall be provided at such intervals so as to serve cross traffic adequately and to meet existing streets. Where no existing plats control, blocks should not exceed 600 feet nor be less than 300 feet in length, except where topography or other conditions justify a departure from this maxim. In blocks longer than 300 feet, pedestrianways or easements at least ten feet in width through the block may be required near the center of the block. The optimum block shall have a perimeter of 1300 feet. (2) Width. The width of the block shall normally be sufficient to allow two tiers of lots of appropriate depth except where blocks abut a railroad or major thoroughfare where it may have a single tier of lots. Blocks intended for business or industrial use shall be of such width as to be considered most suitable for their respective use, including adequate space for off-street parking and deliveries. (b) Lots. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 28 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 27 (1) Area and configuration. The minimum lot area, width and depth shall not be less than that established by the Chapter 36 – Zoning zoning chapter in effect at the time of adoption of the final plat. The minimum lot width established by the zoning chapter shall occur at the front setback line and shall be maintained for a continuous one-third of the lot depth. a. Easements established over wetlands and regional utility lines shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. b. The minimum lot width established by Chapter 36 - Zoning shall occur at the front setback line and shall be maintained for a continuous one-third of the lot depth. (2) Corner lots. The minimum width for a corner lot in residential use shall be ten feet wider than that required for interior lots. (3) Side lot lines. Side lines of lots shall be approximately at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. (4) Frontage. Every lot must have frontage on a city-approved right-of-way other than an alley and have the minimum width measured at the setback line as required in Chapter 36 – Zoning the city zoning chapter. (5) Setback lines. Setback or building lines shall be shown on all lots intended for residential use and shall not be less than the setback required by Chapter 36 – Zoning the city zoning chapter, as may be amended. (6) Build to lines. Build to lines shall be shown on all lots located in those areas where applicable as determined by the Ccomprehensive Pplan or Chapter 36 – Zoning. zoning chapter, as may be amended. (7) Watercourses. Lots abutting a watercourse, wetland, ponding area, drainageway, channel or stream shall have additional depth of at least 30 feet to accommodate easements for public trails and erosion control devices. Buildings shall also conform to any requirements of Chapter 36 – Zoning the zoning chapter for floodplain or other setback requirements. No part of any lot shall be platted within the floodway unless such floodway is left in its natural state, and no clearing, filling, grading, or other changes in the natural contours shall be done except that required or authorized under the subdivision contract or by conditional use permit. (8) Features. In the subdividing of any land, due regard shall be shown for all natural features, such as topography, tree growth, watercourses, historic spots or similar conditions which, if preserved, will add attractiveness and stability to the proposed development. The subdivision shall conform to the natural limitations presented by topography and soil so as to create the least potential for soil erosion and minimize slopes for roads, sidewalks and trails. (9) Lot remnants. All remnants of lots below minimum size left over after subdividing of a larger parceltract must be added to adjacent lots, rather than allowed to remain as unusable parcels, unless the land is required for public purpose, is designated as an outlot, and has access from a public street. (10) Political boundaries. No plat shall extend over a political boundary. No single lot shall extend over a school district boundary. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 29 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 28 (11) Frontage on two streets. Double frontage, or lots with frontage on two parallel streets, shall not be permitted except: where lots back on major collector or arterial streets, county or state highways, or where topographic or other conditions render subdividing otherwise unreasonable. Such double frontage lots shall adhere to the following requirements: a. Lot depth. Double frontage lots shall have an additional depth of at least 20 feet in order to allow space for screening along the back lot line. To ensure adequate depth for such screening, except as may be approved by the city council, the following minimum depth requirements shall be required for double frontage lots: District Minimum Lot Depth (feet) R-1 low density single-family 140 R-2 single-family 140 R-3 two-family 140 b. Screening. All screening requirements as regulated Chapter 36 – Zoning by the zoning chapter are satisfactorily met. (12) Lots abutting collector or arterial streets. Turnaround access. Where proposed residential lots abut a collector or arterial street, alleys shall be encouraged for access to off-street parking areas and garages. Where alleys are not feasible, driveways shall have shared access and vehicle turnarounds so that vehicles do not back onto the street. (13) Buffer side yards. a. In the case of side yards involving single-family residential lots which abut major collector or arterial streets, except as may be approved by the city council, lot widths shall be increased at least ten feet above the minimum lot width for the purpose of establishing buffers along the lot line bordering such streets. b. Buffering of side yards bordering major collector or arterial streets shall comply with the requirements as established by Chapter 36 – Zoning. the zoning chapter. (14) Irregular shaped lots. On single-family residential lots which are not rectangular in shape, the developer shall demonstrate to the city an ability to properly place principal buildings and accessory structures upon the site which are compatible in size and character to the surrounding area. (15) Required yards setback infringements. All single-family, two-family and cluster housing residential lots shall be designed in consideration of potentials for to meet yard requirements for buildings such as accommodating residential dwelling, two-car garages, porches and decks, etc. Such buildings and structures shall be compatible in character with the surrounding area. Sec. 26-153. Streets and alleys. (a) Generally. There shall be a continuous network of streets and alleys within the subdivision which connect with existing streets and alleys. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 30 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 29 (b) Streets and alleys. Streets and alleys shall be constructed according to the standards and specifications on file in the City Engineers office. (c) Streets, continuous. Except for dead-end streets, aAll streets shall connect with streets already dedicated in adjoining or adjacent subdivisions, or provide for future connections to adjoining unsubdivided parcelstracts, or shall be a reasonable projection of streets in the nearest subdivided parcelstracts. The arrangement of thoroughfares and collector streets shall be considered in their relation to the reasonable circulation of traffic, to topographic conditions, to runoff of stormwater runoff, to public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the proposed uses of the area to be served. (d) Dead-end streets/alleys. (1) Prohibited. Dead-end streets (temporary or permanent) without turnarounds shall be prohibited. (2) Criteria for construction. Permanent dead-end streets or alleys shall be allowed only where one or more of the following criteria have been met: a. Area topography or other physical site conditions warrant a dead-end street or alley. b. A through street or alley is not physically feasible or desirable due to environmental considerations. (3) Requirements. Permanent dead-end streets or alleys shall not be longer than 500 feet including a terminal turnaround which shall be provided at the closed end. The turnaround design shall be approved by the Engineering Director. (e) Temporary dead-end streets. In those instances where a street is terminated pending future extension in conjunction with future subdivision and more than 200 feet between the dead end and the nearest intersection, a temporary turnaround facility shall be provided at the closed end, in conformance with cul-de-sac requirements. This temporary cul-de-sac must be placed inside a temporary roadway easement if it is located outside street right-of-way. Security will be required for removal or restoration as determined by the Engineering Director. (fc) Street plans for future subdivisions. Where the plat to be submitted includes only part of the parceltract owned or intended for development by the subdivider, a tentative plan of a proposed future street system for the unsubdivided portion shall be prepared and submitted by the subdivider. (d) Temporary dead-end streets. In those instances where a street is terminated pending future extension in conjunction with future subdivision and more than 200 feet between the dead end and the nearest intersection, a temporary turnaround facility shall be provided at the closed end, in conformance with cul-de-sac requirements. This temporary cul-de-sac must be placed inside a temporary roadway easement if it is located outside street right-of-way. Security will be required for removal or restoration as determined by the director of public works. (ge) Provisions for resubdivision of large lots and parcels. When a parceltract is subdivided into larger than normal building lots or parcels, such lots or parcels shall be so arranged as to permit the logical location and openings of future streets and appropriate resubdivision, with provision for adequate utility connections for such resubdivision. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 31 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 30 (hf) Street intersections. Under normal conditions, streets shall be laid out so as to intersect as nearly as possible at right angles, except where topography or other conditions justify variations. Under normal conditions, the minimum angle of intersection of streets shall be 80 degrees. Street intersection jogbs with an offset of less than 125 feet shall be avoided. (ig) Subdivisions abutting major rights-of-way. Wherever the proposed subdivision contains or is adjacent to the right-of-way of a U.S. or state highway or thoroughfare, provision may be made for a marginal access street approximately parallel and adjacent to the boundary of such right-of- way; provided, however, that due consideration is given to proper circulation design, or for a street at a distance suitable for the appropriate use of land between such street and right-of-way. Such distance shall be determined with due consideration of the minimum distance required for approach connections to future grade separations, or for lot depths. (jh) Sidewalks and multipurpose trailways. All new sidewalks and multipurpose trailways shall be funded consistent with the city's policies and shall be accessible by handicapped persons in accordance with M.S.A. § 471.464. (1) Location. Sidewalks or multipurpose trailways shall be provided on both sides of existing and new streets internal to the subdivision, and on the side of existing or new streets adjacent to the subdivision. both sides of all public streets whether existing or new. Sidewalks shall be provided on at least one side of all dead end streets and private streets. Multipurpose trailways shall be installed in areas identified by the Sidewalk and Trailway Plan, in some instances, the trailway may not be located adjacent to a street. comprehensive plan. (2) Sidewalk and trailway specifications widths. All sidewalks and trailways shall be constructed of concrete and shall conform to the specifications on file at the City Engineers Office and conform to the design standards in the Sidewalk and Trailway Plan. following minimum widths for all new plats: Land Use Street Type Width (feet) Single-family residential Private 5 Single-family residential Local 5 Single-family Collector, arterial 5 Multifamily residential All 6 Cluster housing Private 5 Cluster housing Local 5 Cluster housing Collector, arterial 6 Commercial All 6-8 Industrial All 6 (3) Multipurpose trailways widths. In new plats, unless otherwise directed by the city council, all multipurpose trailways identified by the city's comprehensive plan shall have a minimum width of eight feet and be constructed of bituminous materials. Sufficient area shall be designated on both sides of the multipurpose trail to allow for snow storage and landscaping. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 32 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 31 (4) Grade. Sidewalks shall slope one-quarter inch per foot away from the property line. (3) Dedication in lieu of construction. In lieu of installing a sidewalk or trailway, the city may require, at its discretion, a cash contribution in an amount listed in the schedule of fees attached as appendix A of this Code. (i) Bicycle lanes. Bicycle lanes shall be encouraged on all streets where either current or projected traffic volumes exceed an average of 3,000 cars per day. (kj) Service access; alleys. Service access shall be provided in commercial and industrial districts for off-street loading, unloading and parking consistent with and adequate for the uses proposed. Alleys shall be encouraged for access to parking in all areas. Alleys, where provided, shall meet the design standards indicated in subsection (s) of this section, street sections. Dead-end alleys shall be avoided wherever possible, but if unavoidable, such dead-end alleys may be approved if adequate turnaround facilities are provided at the closed end. Alleys, where provided, shall meet the design standards on file at the Engineering Department. (k) Half-streets. Dedication of half-streets shall not be considered for approval except where it is essential to the reasonable development of the subdivision and in conformity with the other requirements of the regulations of this section, or where it is found that it will be practical to require the dedication of the other half when the adjoining property is subdivided. (l) Curb and gutter. Curb and gutter shall be included as a part of the required street surface improvement and shall be designed for installation along both sides of all roadways in accordance with the standards of the city. (lm)Compliance with the county transportation plan. All subdivisions incorporating streets which are identified in the county transportation plan, as amended, shall comply with the minimum right-of-way, surfacedstreet width and design standards, as outlined in such plan, and must be reviewed and approved by the county. (n) Street grades. Except when, upon the recommendation of the director of public works, the topography warrants a greater maximum, the grades in all streets, thoroughfares, collector streets, local streets and alleys in any subdivision shall meet those requirements indicated in subsection (s) of this section, street sections. (o) Curb radius. The curb radii for thoroughfares, collector streets, local streets and alleys shall be approved by the public works director. Curb radius for driveways and alleys shall be five feet, except where an alley intersects with another alley and then the curb radius shall be 25 feet. (p) Reverse curves. Minimum design standards for collector and arterial streets shall comply with Minnesota State Aid Standards. (mq)Reserve strips. Reserve strips controlling access to streets shall be prohibited except under conditions accepted by the city council. (nr) Street right-of-way widths. Street right-of-way widths shall conform with those requirements indicated in subsection (s) of this section, the street sections on file in the Engineering Department., for each of the following designated streets: Street Classification Street section City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 33 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 32 High-density minor arterial Low-density minor arterial C-70, C-110 Major collector C-70, C-110 Minor collector R-60, R-75, C-70 Local streets R-50, R-60, R-75, C-70 Private streets R-22, R-22A, R-50, R-60 Alleys A-22-R, A-26-R, A-30-C (s) Street sections. The street section shall comply with design standards as set forth in this chapter. Typical street sections for various types of development are specified in this subsection. All street designs shall reflect projected traffic volumes and are subject to the review and approval of the director of public works. Land Use Allowable Street Type Single-family attached A-22, A-26, R-24-P, R-24-AP, R-50, R-60, R-75 Single-family detached R-50, R-60, R-75 Multifamily residential A26-R, A30-C, R-60, R-75 Commercial A-30-C, C-70, C-110 Industrial A-30-C, C-70, C-110 City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 34 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 33 Alleys (Lanes) Center Line Gradients Minimum……..0.5% Maximum……8.0% DELETE IMAGE City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 35 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 34 Private Residential Streets Center Line Gradients Minimum……0.5% Maximum…...6.0% DELETE IMAGE City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 36 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 35 Residential Streets Center Line Gradients Minimum……0.5% Maximum…...6.0% DELETE IMAGE City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 37 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 36 Commercial Streets Center Line Gradients Minimum……0.5% Maximum…...4.0% DELETE IMAGE City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 38 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 37 (t) Street trees. Street trees shall be planted in accordance with provisions of the zoning chapter. (u) Seeding or sodding. Any areas disturbed within the street right-of-way, at the time of construction, shall be restored with a minimum of four inches of topsoil and shall be seeded or sodded as directed by the director of public works. (v) Cul-de-sac/dead-end streets. (1) Prohibited generally. Dead-end streets (temporary or permanent) without cul-de-sac shall be prohibited. (2) Criteria for construction. Permanent dead-end streets shall be allowed only where one or more of the following criteria have been met: a. Area topography or other physical site conditions warrant a dead-end street. b. A through street is not physically feasible or desirable due to environmental considerations. (3) Requirements. Permanent dead-end streets shall not be longer than 500 feet including a terminal turnaround (cul-de-sac) which shall be provided at the closed end. The cul-de- sac shall have a right-of-way diameter not less than 80 feet and a paved roadway of not less than 70 feet from face of curb to face of curb. (ow) Water supply. Water mains shall be provided to serve the subdivision by extension of an existing public water supplycommunity system wherever feasible. Service connections shall be stubbed into the property line and all necessary fire hydrants, as required by the Ffire Cchief, shall also be provided. Extensions of the public water supply system shall be designed so as to provide public water in accordance with the design standards as approved by the Engineering Directordirector of public works and in accordance with the city's comprehensive water plan. (px) Sewage disposal, public. Sanitary sewer mains and service connections shall be installed in accordance with the design standards of the city as approved by the Engineering Director director of public works. Sec. 26-154. Easements. (a) Width and location. An eEasements for utilities at least ten feet in total width shall be provided along all lot lines. The easements shall be at least 10 feet wide along all street right-of- ways and five feet wide along all interior lot lines, except that the Engineering Director may increase or decrease the width of the easements as required to facilitate existing or proposed developments. If necessary for the extension of main water or sewer lines or similar utilities, or to accommodate drainage, additional easements of greater width may be required along lot lines or across lots. (b) Continuous utility easement locations. Utility easements shall connect with easements established on adjoining properties. (c) Guy wires. Additional easements for pole guys should be provided, where appropriate, at the outside of turns. Where possible, lot lines shall be arranged to bisect the exterior angle so that pole guys will fall along side lot lines. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 39 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 38 (d) Exclusion from minimum lot area. Easements established over wetlands and regional utility lines shall be excluded from the calculation of minimum lot area. (c e ) Outlot alternative. The city may at its discretion choose to require outlots rather than easements for wetlands, drainage areas and other natural features. These outlots must be designed with access from a public right-of-way. (Code 1976, § 14-933) Sec. 26-155. Erosion and sediment control. The subdivider shall adhere to follow the following requirements for erosion and sediment control requirements found in the zoning Cchapter 12 - Environment and the LSWMP surface water management plan:, (1) The development shall conform to the natural limitations presented by topography and soil so as to create the least potential for soil erosion. (2) Erosion and siltation control measures shall be coordinated with the different stages of construction. Appropriate control measures shall be installed prior to development when necessary to control erosion. (3) Land shall be developed in increments of workable size such that adequate erosion and siltation controls can be provided as construction progresses. (4) When soil is exposed, the exposure shall be for the shortest feasible period of time, as specified in the development agreement. (5) Where the topsoil is removed, sufficient topsoil shall be set aside for respreading over the developed area. Topsoil shall be restored or provided to a minimum depth of four inches and shall be of a quality at least equal to the soil quality prior to development. (6) Natural vegetation shall be protected wherever practical. (7) Runoff water shall be diverted to a sedimentation basin before being allowed to enter the natural drainage system. (8) The developer shall comply with current city specifications for erosion and sediment control. (9) Development shall comply with and follow all best management practices for erosion and sedimentation control as specified in the MPCA publication "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," as may be amended, or the applicable publication. Cross reference(s)--Environment and public health, ch. 12. Sec. 26-156. Storm drainage. All subdivision design shall incorporate adequate provisions for stormwater runoff consistent with the city LSWMP surface water management plan (SWMP), as amended, and with established city policies, the policies of Minnehaha Creek the wWatershed dDistrict, and other public agencies, and shall conform to the following standards:. (1) Plan required. The proposed provisions for stormwater runoff shall be documented in a runoff water management plan, prepared by a registered professional engineer to the minimum standards described in subsection (2) of this section. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 40 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 39 (2) Minimum standards for runoff water management plans. A runoff water management plan shall include the following items: a. A map containing a delineation of the sub-watershed contributing runoff from off-site, and proposed and existing sub-watersheds on-site. The delineation shall conform to the nomenclature of the SWMP and shall indicate any significant departures from the watershed delineation of the SWMP. b. Delineation of existing on-site wetlands, as defined in the Wetland Conservation Act, lakes, streams, shoreland, and/or floodplain areas. c. For waterbodies and channels, a listing of normal (run-out) and calculated ten- year and 100-year elevations on-site for both existing and proposed conditions. d. Stormwater runoff volumes and rates for existing and proposed conditions. e. All hydrologic and hydraulic computations completed to design the proposed stormwater management facilities. Reservoir routing procedures and critical duration runoff events shall be used for design of water storage areas and outlets. f. A checklist of best management practices to demonstrate that, to the maximum extent practical, the plan has incorporated the structural and nonstructural best management practices described in the book "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or the applicable publications. g. A grading plan incorporating overflow routes along streets or drainage easements designed to protect structures from damage due to: 1. Storms in excess of the design storm; or 2. Clogging, collapse or other failure of the primary drainage facilities. h. On-site water storage and water quality detention basins are required in accordance with the city's comprehensive water resource management plan. Copies of the calculations determining the design of the basins shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application. The size and design considerations will be dependent on required water quality and quantity, the imperviousness of the development and the degree to which on-site infiltration of runoff is encouraged. Design of on-site detention basins shall incorporate recommendations from the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or the applicable publications. Sec. 26-157. Protected areas. (a) Where land proposed for subdivision is deemed environmentally sensitive by the city due to the existence of wetlands, drainageways, watercourses, floodable areas, significant trees, steep slopes or wooded areas, the design of such subdivision shall clearly reflect all necessary measures of protection to ensure against adverse environmental impacts. (b) Based upon the necessity to control and maintain certain sensitive areas, the city shall determine whether such protection will be accomplished through lot enlargement and redesign or dedication of those sensitive areas in the form of outlots that are either deeded to the city or encumbered with a deed restriction protecting the sensitive area. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 41 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 40 (c) In general, measures of protection shall include design solutions which allow for construction and grading involving a minimum of alteration to sensitive areas. Such measures, when deemed appropriate by the city, may include, but shall not be limited to, the following: (1) The establishment of easements and/or outlots over wetlands, drainageways and watercourses. (2) The implementation of flood control measures. (3) The enlargement of lots or redesign of the subdivision. (4) The submission of a tree replacement and protection preservation plan subject to the review of the planning commission and the approval of the city council. (5) The use of appropriate erosion control measures subject to approval by the Engineering Directordirector of public works. (6) Soil testing to determine the ability of the proposed subdivision to support development. (7) The limitation of development on slopes steeper than 3:1 measured over a horizontal distance of at least 25 feet. (8) Structure conformance to the natural limitations presented by the topography and soil so as to create the least potential of soil erosion. Sec. 26-158. Park and trail dedication requirements. (a) As a prerequisite to subdivision approval, subdividers shall dedicate land for parks, playgrounds, public open spaces and trails and/or shall make a cash contribution to the city's park fund and trail fund, as provided by this section. (b) Land shall be reasonably suitable for its intended use and shall be at a location convenient to the people to be served. Factors used in evaluating the adequacy of proposed park and recreation areas shall include size, shape, topography, geology, hydrology, tree cover, access and location. Land with dead trees, trash, junk, pollutants and unwanted structures is not acceptable. (c) The parks and recreation commission shall recommend to the city council the land and/or cash contribution requirements for proposed subdivisions. (d) Any increase in density of subdivisions shall be reviewed by the parks and recreation commission for reconsideration of park land and/or cash contribution requirements. (e) When a proposed park, playground, recreation area, trail or other public ground has been indicated in the city's official map or Ccomprehensive Pplan and is located in whole or in part within a proposed subdivision, it shall be designated as such on the plat and shall be conveyed to the city. If the subdivider elects not to dedicate an area in excess of the land required hereunder for such proposed public site, the city may consider acquiring the site through purchase or condemnation. (f) Land area conveyed or dedicated to the city shall not be used in calculating density requirements of Chapter 36 – Zoning the city zoning chapter and shall be in addition to and not in lieu of open space requirements prescribed in Chapter 36 – Zoning the zoning chapter. (g) The city, upon consideration of the particular type of development, may require larger or lesser parcels of land to be conveyed to the city if the city determines that present or future residents would require greater or lesser land for park and playground purposes. (h) In residential subdivisions where a land dedication is required, the following formula will be used to determine the park land conveyance requirements: City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 42 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 41 Density: Units Per Acre* Land Dedication Percentage 0 - 2.5 10 percent 2.5+ - 4 11 percent 4+ - 6 13 percent 6+ - 8 15 percent 8+ - 10 17 percent 10+ 20 percent * Street rights-of-way shall be excluded from the density calculations. If the proposed streets are private, actual street width, plus 18 feet shall be deducted. In commercial or industrial plats where a land dedication is required, the following formula will be used to determine the park land dedication: Five percent of the gross area of land being platted. (i) In lieu of a park land dedication, the city may require the following cash contribution: Commercial/industrial 5 percent of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the city assessor Multifamily dwelling units A fee which shall be set from time to time by the city and a schedule of such fees is listed in appendix A to this Code Single-family dwelling units A fee which shall be set from time to time by the city and a schedule of such fees is listed in appendix A to this Code (j) The city may elect to receive a combination of cash, land and development of the land for park use. The fair market value of the land the city wants and the value of the development of the land shall be calculated. That amount shall be subtracted from the cash contribution required by subsection (i) of this section. The remainder shall be the cash contribution requirement. (k) Fair market value shall be determined as of the time of filing the preliminary plat in accordance with the following: (1) The city and the developer may agree as to the fair market value; or (2) The fair market value may be based upon a current appraisal submitted to the city by the subdivider at the subdivider's expense. The appraisal shall be made by appraisers who are approved members of the SREA or MAI, or equivalent real estate appraisal societies. (3) If the city disputes such appraisal, the city may, at the subdivider's expense, obtain an appraisal of the property by a qualified real estate appraiser, which appraisal shall be conclusive evidence of the fair market value of the land. (l) Subdividers of land abutting streets that have been designated in the city's comprehensive trail systems plan for the construction of a trail shall be required to pay five-eighths of the cost of constructing the trail. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 43 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 42 (m) Residential subdividers shall pay a fee in an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code per residential dwelling unit for trails. This payment is required whether or not the subdivider is required to construct trails. (n) Planned developments with mixed land uses shall make cash and/or land contributions in accordance with this section based upon the percentage of land devoted to the various uses. (o) Park cash contributions are to be calculated at the time of final plat approval. The city council may require the payment at the time of final plat approval or at a later time under terms agreed upon in the development agreement. Delayed payment shall include interest at a rate set by the city. (p) Cash contributions shall be deposited in the city's park and recreation development fund and shall only be used for park planning, acquisition, park development or public art. (q) Property being replatted with the same number of lots and dwelling units shall be exempt from park and trail dedication requirements if similar requirements were satisfied in conjunction with an earlier platting. If the number of lots or dwelling units is increased, then the park and trail dedication shall be based on the additional lots or the number of dwelling units, whichever is greater, added to the plat. Sec. 26-159. Tree preservation and replacement. The subdivider shall adhere to the tree preservation and replacement requirements found in Chapter 36 – Zoning and Chapter 34 – Vegetation. (a) Generally. All subdividers shall comply with all provisions in the zoning chapter which address the preservation of existing trees and the replacement of trees removed to accommodate grading and construction within the subdivision. Subdividers, however, are encouraged to preserve all healthy trees of significant value even if the trees are less than six inches in diameter. (b) Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Tree preservation plan means a plan certified by a forester or landscape architect indicating all of the significant trees in the proposed development or on the lot. The tree preservation plan includes a tree inventory which includes the size, species and location of all significant trees proposed to be saved and removed on the area of development, and the measures proposed to protect the significant trees to be saved. Tree protection means snow fencing or polyethylene laminar safety netting placed at the dripline of the significant trees to be preserved. The tree protection measures shall remain in place until all grading and construction activity is terminated. (c) Subdividers. (1) Subdividers shall: a. Prepare a tree preservation plan which is certified by a forester or landscape architect and is incorporated on the grading plan. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 44 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 43 b. Prepare a landscape plan which shows the location, size and species of trees which are to be planted on the site to meet the tree replacement provisions of the zoning chapter. c. Provide surety in accordance with the zoning chapter requirements as part of the development contract to ensure protection and tree replacement prior to final approval of the final plat. d. Ensure the tree preservation plan is followed during the plan development (mass grading). (2) During preliminary plat review, the tree preservation plan will be reviewed according to the best available layout to preserve significant trees and the efforts of the subdivider to mitigate damage to significant trees. (3) After the mass grading has been completed and streets and utilities installed, the forester or landscape architect shall: a. Certify in writing to the city the tree preservation plan was followed. b. Certify in writing to the city the tree protection measures were installed. c. Indicate which significant trees proposed to be saved were destroyed or damaged. (4) If a significant tree indicated to be saved on the tree preservation plan is destroyed or damaged, the tree replacement calculations required by the zoning chapter will be adjusted and additional replacement will be required. (5) The financial security will be released in accordance with provisions in the zoning chapter. (d) Tree preservation measures. Tree preservation measures shall require written approval from the director of public works prior to removal and shall not be removed from the site until the director of public works has approved the grading as-built plans for a mass graded site nor prior to the release of financial securities held by the city. (e) Home builders. (1) If the subdivider sells lots to individual builders or developers, the builder or developer shall comply with the requirements of the zoning chapter for tree preservation prior to issuance of any building permits on the lot. (2) A pro rata portion of the surety paid by the subdivider may be returned, provided that it is replaced by a surety from the builder. (3) If a lot remains vacant for a period of two years, the surety may be returned to the subdivider if all of the trees have been replaced in accordance with the zoning chapter requirements. Any subsequent development of the parcel will require compliance with the provisions of the zoning chapter for tree preservation and protection. Cross reference(s)--Vegetation, ch. 34. Sec. 26-160. Minimum design features. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 45 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 44 The design features set forth in this article are minimum requirements. The city may impose additional or more stringent requirements concerning lot size, streets and overall design as deemed appropriate considering the property being subdivided. Secs. 26-161--26-190. Reserved. ARTICLE VI. REQUIRED BASIC IMPROVEMENTS Sec. 26-191. General provisions. (a) Before a final plat is signed by the city, the subdivider shall pay all applicable fees and enter into a development contract setting forth the conditions under which the plat is approved, unless the city council deems a development contract to be unnecessary. (b) Before a final plat is signed by the city, the subdivider shall also furnish the city financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit. If the subdivider fails to perform any obligations under the development contract, the city may apply the security to cure the default. Terms for return of the financial security shall be those set forth in the Chapter 36 – Zoning zoning chapter or shall be set forth in the development contract. (1) If the developer is to install public improvements, the required security shall be the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs: 125% of the cost of the public and private improvements to be constructed as part of or as a result of the plat. a. Utilities. b. Streets. c. Streetlights and, if the city council deems appropriate, operating cost for two years. d. Erosion control. e. Engineering, to include the developer's design, surveying and inspection. f. Landscaping. g. Principal amount of special assessments previously levied against the property, together with one year of interest. h. Real estate tax for one year, if there are special assessments. i. Director of public works' fees. j. Placement of iron monuments. k. Sidewalks. l. Utility/street repair and street cleaning. m. Public and private tree replacement and protection. n. Other items as deemed appropriate. (2) If the city is to install public improvements, the required security shall be the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs: City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 46 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 45 a. Principal amount of special assessments for public improvements to be installed, together with one year of interest. b. Streetlights. c. Erosion control. d. Deferred park dedication charges on commercial and industrial property. e. Landscaping. f. Real estate tax for one year. g. Principal amount of special assessments previously levied against the property, together with one year of interest. h. Placement of iron monuments. i. Utility/street repair and street cleaning. j. Public and private tree replacement. k. Other items as deemed appropriate. (3) For private improvements, the required security shall be the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs: a. Erosion control, unless bonded separately. b. Private utility services in public right-of-way. c. Tree replacement and protection. d. Utility/street repair and street cleaning. e. Sidewalks. f. Placement of iron monuments. g. Other items as deemed appropriate. (c) No final plat shall be approved by the city council without first receiving a report from the director of public works that the improvements described therein together with the agreements and documents required under this section, meet the city's requirements. The city treasurer shall certify that all fees and sureties required to be paid to the city in connection with the plat have been paid or that satisfactory arrangements have been made for payment. (cd) The city shall, where appropriate, require of a subdivider submission of a warranty/maintenance bond in the amount equal to the original cost of the improvements or such lesser amount as agreed to by the director of Engineering Director public works. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship from the utility contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two years from the date of final acceptance or one year following final acceptance of the final bituminous wearing surface as approved by the director of Engineering Director public works. The required period for sod, trees and landscaping is one year following final acceptance of the project. (de) Reproducible as-built drawings, as required by the director of Engineering Director public works, shall be furnished to the city by the subdivider of all required improvements. Such as-built City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 47 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 46 drawings shall be certified to be true and accurate by the registered engineer responsible for the installation of the improvements. (ef) All of the required improvements to be installed under the provisions of this chapter shall be approved by and subject to the inspection of the director of Engineering Directorpublic works. All of the city's expenses incurred as the result of the requiredment improvements shall be paid either directly, indirectly or by reimbursement to the city by the subdivider. Sec. 26-192. Monuments. (a) Official monuments, as designated and adopted by the county surveyor's office for use as judicial monuments, shall be set at each corner, angle or curve points on the outside boundary of the final plat or in accordance with a plan as approved by the director of public worksEngineering Director. The boundary line of the property to be included with the plat to be fully dimensioned; all angles of the boundary excepting the closing angle to be indicated; all monuments and surveyor's irons to be indicated; and each angle point of the boundary perimeter to be so monumented. (b) Pipes or steel rods shall be placed at each lot within one year of recording the final plat. All United States, state, county or other official benchmarks, monuments or triangular stations in or adjacent to the property shall be preserved in precise position and shall be recorded on the plat. All lot and block dimensions shall be shown on the plat, and all necessary angles pertaining to the lots and blocks, as an aid to future surveys, shall be shown on the plat. No ditto marks will be permitted in indicating dimensions. (c) To ensure that all irons and monuments are correctly in place following the final grading of a plat and construction of utilities, financial security will be required as determined by the director of Engineering Director public works. Proof of the second monumentation shall be in the form of a surveyor's certificate, and this requirement shall additionally be a condition of certificate of occupancy as provided for in Chapter 36 – Zoning. the city zoning chapter, as may be amended. Sec. 26-193. Street improvements. (a) The full width of the right-of-way shall be graded in accordance with the provisions for construction as outlined in article V of this chapter, on file in the City Engineers Department and as modified by the City Council subdivision approval. (b) All streets shall be improved in accordance with the standards and specifications for street construction as required by this chapter and by the city council. (c) All streets to be surfaced shall be of an overall width in accordance with the standards and specifications for construction as required by this chapter and as approved by the city council. The portion of the right-of-way outside the area surfaced shall be sodded. (d) Where required, the curb and gutter shall be constructed in accordance to the standards and specifications for street construction as set forth and approved by the city council. (e) The grading and drainage requirements for each plat shall be approved by the Engineering Director director of public works at the expense of the applicant. Every plat presented for final signature shall be accompanied by a report from the Engineering Director director of public works that the grading and drainage requirements have been met. No plat shall be approved before an adequate stormwater disposal plan is presented and approved by the Engineering Director director City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 48 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 47 of public works. The use of dry wells for the purpose of stormwater disposal is at the discretion of the Engineering Directordirector or public works. (f) Trees and boulevard sodding shall be planted in conformance with the standards and specifications as required by Chapter 36 – Zoning the zoning chapter and the approved landscape plan. (g) Street signs of the design approved by the city council shall be installed at each street intersection. (h) Driveway approaches and sidewalks of standard design or pedestrian pathways as may be required by this chapter and the city council shall be installed. (i) Street lighting fixtures as may be required by the city council shall be installed. Cross reference(s)--Streets, sidewalks and other public places, ch. 24. Sec. 26-194. Future street improvements. As a condition of plat approval, when property being platted is adjacent to existing collector roads, highways or substandard streets which need improvement, the developer shall dedicate land for the widening or improvement and shall post a cash escrow acceptable to the city for the cost of the improvement. This section shall only apply when the need for the improvement is caused by the plat or surrounding development. Cross reference(s)--Streets, sidewalks and other public places, ch. 24. Sec. 26-195. Sanitary sewer and water distribution improvements. Sanitary sewers and water facilities shall be installed in accordance with the standards and specifications as required by the city council and subject to the approval of the Engineering Director director of public works. Cross reference(s)--Utilities, ch. 32. Sec. 26-196. Public and private utilities. Telephone, cable TV, electric, gas, plus all other utility service lines are to be placed underground in accordance with the provisions of all applicable city ordinances. Sec. 26-197. Election by city to install improvements. It is the subdivider's responsibility to install all required improvements, except that the city reserves the right to elect to install all or any part of the improvements required under the provisions of this chapter pursuant to M.S.A. ch. 429, as amended. If the city elects to install the improvements, the city may require the developer to post a cash escrow or letter of credit guaranteeing payment of the assessments. Sec. 26-198. Railroad crossings. No street dedications will be accepted which require a crossing of a railroad unless sufficient land as determined by the city council is dedicated to ensure a safe view. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 49 Draft Subdivision Ordinance May 16, 2016 Page 48 Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 16-05-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing March 2, 2016 First Reading May 16, 2016 Second Reading June 6, 2016 Date of Publication June 16, 2016 Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2016 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8d) Title: 1st Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 50 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Action Agenda Item: 8e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for the Sale of $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A. (Since these are Charter Bonds, the recommended action will require approval by at least 6 of the 7 City Councilmembers). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the issuance of G.O. Bonds the best approach for financing the construction of the two projects at the Rec. Center? SUMMARY: Staff is recommending issuing bonds for both the indoor refrigeration replacement and the outdoor recreation facility at the Rec Center in an amount not to exceed $10 million in aggregate. The issuance of bonds for these projects is consistent with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan, and best allows the City to keep its very strong financial position. The issuance of bonds for projects such as these also allows the costs to be paid over the course of 11 years, and not just to the current residents and businesses. The full breakout of the costs and funding for these projects is included as an attachment to this report. This information was provided to Council at the February 16 and 29 and May 9, 2016 meetings. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The two projects at the Rec Center are being consolidated into one bond issuance for potential investors to bid, which should aid in receiving more and lower bids due to the larger dollar issuance amount. The 11 year bond issue will have its first interest payment on 2/1/17 and is paid from capitalized interest from the bond issue, with the first principal payment due 2/1/18. The Charter Bonds debt service will be via tax levy beginning in pay 2017 in the amount of approximately $613,205, with the remaining years tax levy being approximately $1,230,000 per year. This structure is designed to spread the levy increase over the course of two years. NEXT STEPS: Week of June 6, 2016 – Distribute Official Statement- No City Council action required June 20, 2016 – Authorize and Award Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds July 14, 2016 – Estimated Closing Date – No City Council action required VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Breakout of Project Costs and Funding Pre-Sale Report Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor Tim Simon, Controller Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Page 2 Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $10,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES 2016 A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016 (the "Bonds") pursuant to the authority granted under Section 6.15 of the City Charter, to finance improvements to the City’s ice arena and outdoor recreation facilities in the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of the Bonds, and further authorizes Ehlers to assist the City in negotiating the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on June 20, 2016, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk DifferenceIndoor Refrigeraton Replacement4,400,000$                      4,390,000$                       (10,000)$              Outdoor Recreation Facility5,650,000$                      8,895,000$                       3,245,000$         Combined Project Cost10,050,000$                    13,285,000$                     3,235,000$         Debt Issuance Costs300,000$                          300,000$                           ‐$                     Total Costs of Projects10,350,000$                    13,585,000$                     3,235,000$         Original Project Costs (as of July 2015)Current Project Costs (as of 2/16/16)Rec Center Arena Refrigeration Replacement & Outdoor Recreation Facility Project CostFebruary 16, 2016City of St. Louis ParkCity Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center ProjectsPage 3 Total Costs of Projects13,585,000$     Sources of FundsG.O. Bonds10,000,000$     Grants & Rebates606,000            Value Engineering400,000            Hockey Assocation Donation 400,000            Park Improvement Fund 1,500,000         General Fund679,000            Total Sources of Funds13,585,000$     *Remaining $1,550,000 of Hockey Association Donation will be deposited into Park Improvement Fund** General Fund portion is equal to 1.9% of Total Fund Balance. City of St. Louis ParkFunding for Rec Center Arena Refrigeration Replacement & Outdoor Recrecation Facility ProjectsFebruary 16, 2016City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center ProjectsPage 4 May 16, 2016 Pre-Sale Report for City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds Series 2016               Prepared by: Stacie Kvilvang Senior Municipal Advisor/Director And Jason Aarsvold Municipal Advisor City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 5 Presale Report City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 16, 2016 Page 1 Executive Summary of Proposed Debt Proposed Issue: $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds Series 2016 Purposes: The proposed issue includes financing for improvements to the City's ice arena and outdoor recreation facilities. Debt service will be paid from ad valorem property taxes. Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to the City’s Charter and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. The City’s Charter enables the City to issue general obligation bonds for any corporate purpose pursuant to a “super majority” vote of the City Council. The City Charter portion of the Bonds will count against the City’s general obligation, tax supported debt capacity limit of 3% of estimated market value. Approximately $165,000,000 of debt limit remains available to the City. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged. Term/Call Feature: The Bonds are being issued for an 11-year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2018 through 2027. Interest is payable every six months beginning February 1, 2017. The Bonds maturing on and after February 1, 2026 will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2025 or any date thereafter. Bank Qualification: Because the City is issuing, or expects to issue, more than $10,000,000 in tax- exempt obligations during the calendar year, the City will be not able to designate the Bonds as “bank qualified” obligations. Rating: The City’s most recent bond issues were rated AAA by Standard & Poor’s. The City will request a new rating for the Bonds. Basis for Recommendation: Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, our advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing options, we are recommending the issuance of General Obligation City Charter Bonds as a suitable financing option because - This is a viable option available to finance this type of project under the City’s Charter and State law - This is the most overall cost effective option that still maintains future flexibility for the repayment of debt - This coincides with the City’s past practices to finance these types of City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 6 Presale Report City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 16, 2016 Page 2 projects with this type of debt issue Method of Sale/Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will competitively bid the purchase of the Bonds from local and national underwriters/banks. We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 0.80000% of the principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction. If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your borrowing amount. Premium Bids: Under current market conditions, most investors in municipal bonds prefer “premium” pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered “reoffering premium.” The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000. For this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the premium to reduce the size of the issue. The adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the original bid, either up or down. You have the choice to limit the amount of premium in the bid specifications. This may result in fewer bids, but it may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and other uncertainties. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there are no refunding opportunities at this time. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City’s outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain reportable events to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: Because the Bonds are tax-exempt securities/tax credit securities, the City must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 7 Presale Report City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 16, 2016 Page 3 issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield restriction compliance) are common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Certificate prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers to assist you with compliance with these rules. Other Service Providers: This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used a particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other sources. Our pre-sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, so their final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service providers or their role, or if you would like to use a different service provider for any of the listed services please contact us. Bond Attorney: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation Rating Agency: Standard & Poor’s This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City’s objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City’s objectives. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 8 Presale Report City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 16, 2016 Page 4 Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule Pre-Sale Review by City Council: May 16, 2016 Distribute Official Statement: Week of June 6, 2016 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of June 13, 2016 City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: June 20, 2016 Estimated Closing Date: July 14, 2016 Attachments Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale Sources and Uses of Funds Proposed Debt Service Schedule Ehlers Contacts Municipal Advisors: Stacie Kvilvang (651) 697-8506 Jason Aarsvold (651) 697-8512 Disclosure Coordinator: Meghan Lindblom (651) 697-8549 Financial Analyst: Alicia Gage (651) 697-8551 The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the City Council at their home address or e-mailed for review prior to the sale date. City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 9 City of St. Louis Park Resolution No. _______________ Resolution Providing for the Sale of $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds Series 2016 A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016 (the "Bonds") pursuant to the authority granted under Section 6.15 of the City Charter, to finance improvements to the City’s ice arena and outdoor recreation facilities in the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of the Bonds, and further authorizes Ehlers to assist the City in negotiating the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on June 20, 2016, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 10 St Louis Park, Minnesota $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA rates plus 20 bps 11 Year Term Sources & Uses Dated 07/14/2016 | Delivered 07/14/2016 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $10,000,000.00 Total Sources $10,000,000.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount (0.800%)80,000.00 Costs of Issuance 69,500.00 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund 95,219.40 Deposit to Project Fund 9,755,280.60 Total Uses $10,000,000.00 Series 2016 GO Ice Arena | SINGLE PURPOSE | 4/27/2016 | 9:31 AM City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 11 St Louis Park, Minnesota $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA rates plus 20 bps 11 Year Term Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 07/14/2016 ----- 02/01/2017 --95,219.40 95,219.40 95,219.40 08/01/2017 --87,002.50 87,002.50 - 02/01/2018 410,000.00 0.950%87,002.50 497,002.50 584,005.00 08/01/2018 --85,055.00 85,055.00 - 02/01/2019 1,005,000.00 1.150%85,055.00 1,090,055.00 1,175,110.00 08/01/2019 --79,276.25 79,276.25 - 02/01/2020 1,015,000.00 1.300%79,276.25 1,094,276.25 1,173,552.50 08/01/2020 --72,678.75 72,678.75 - 02/01/2021 1,030,000.00 1.400%72,678.75 1,102,678.75 1,175,357.50 08/01/2021 --65,468.75 65,468.75 - 02/01/2022 1,045,000.00 1.550%65,468.75 1,110,468.75 1,175,937.50 08/01/2022 --57,370.00 57,370.00 - 02/01/2023 1,060,000.00 1.700%57,370.00 1,117,370.00 1,174,740.00 08/01/2023 --48,360.00 48,360.00 - 02/01/2024 1,075,000.00 1.850%48,360.00 1,123,360.00 1,171,720.00 08/01/2024 --38,416.25 38,416.25 - 02/01/2025 1,095,000.00 2.050%38,416.25 1,133,416.25 1,171,832.50 08/01/2025 --27,192.50 27,192.50 - 02/01/2026 1,120,000.00 2.300%27,192.50 1,147,192.50 1,174,385.00 08/01/2026 --14,312.50 14,312.50 - 02/01/2027 1,145,000.00 2.500%14,312.50 1,159,312.50 1,173,625.00 Total $10,000,000.00 -$1,245,484.40 $11,245,484.40 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $64,457.22 Average Life 6.446 Years Average Coupon 1.9322651% Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.0563784% True Interest Cost (TIC)2.0565716% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.9225829% All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.1741173% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 1.9322651% Weighted Average Maturity 6.446 Years Series 2016 GO Ice Arena | SINGLE PURPOSE | 4/27/2016 | 9:31 AM City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 12 St Louis Park, Minnesota $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA rates plus 20 bps 11 Year Term Detail Costs Of Issuance Dated 07/14/2016 | Delivered 07/14/2016 COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL Municipal Advisor $38,500.00 Bond Counsel $15,000.00 Rating Agency Fee (S&P)$15,000.00 Miscellaneous $1,000.00 TOTAL $69,500.00 Series 2016 GO Ice Arena | SINGLE PURPOSE | 4/27/2016 | 9:31 AM City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 13 St Louis Park, Minnesota $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA rates plus 20 bps 11 Year Term Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New D/S 105% of Total 02/01/2017 --95,219.40 95,219.40 (95,219.40)-- 02/01/2018 410,000.00 0.950%174,005.00 584,005.00 -584,005.00 613,205.25 02/01/2019 1,005,000.00 1.150%170,110.00 1,175,110.00 -1,175,110.00 1,233,865.50 02/01/2020 1,015,000.00 1.300%158,552.50 1,173,552.50 -1,173,552.50 1,232,230.13 02/01/2021 1,030,000.00 1.400%145,357.50 1,175,357.50 -1,175,357.50 1,234,125.38 02/01/2022 1,045,000.00 1.550%130,937.50 1,175,937.50 -1,175,937.50 1,234,734.38 02/01/2023 1,060,000.00 1.700%114,740.00 1,174,740.00 -1,174,740.00 1,233,477.00 02/01/2024 1,075,000.00 1.850%96,720.00 1,171,720.00 -1,171,720.00 1,230,306.00 02/01/2025 1,095,000.00 2.050%76,832.50 1,171,832.50 -1,171,832.50 1,230,424.13 02/01/2026 1,120,000.00 2.300%54,385.00 1,174,385.00 -1,174,385.00 1,233,104.25 02/01/2027 1,145,000.00 2.500%28,625.00 1,173,625.00 -1,173,625.00 1,232,306.25 Total $10,000,000.00 -$1,245,484.40 $11,245,484.40 (95,219.40)$11,150,265.00 $11,707,778.25 Significant Dates Dated 7/14/2016 First Coupon Date 2/01/2017 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $64,457.22 Average Life 6.446 Years Average Coupon 1.9322651% Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.0563784% True Interest Cost (TIC)2.0565716% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.9225829% All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.1741173% Series 2016 GO Ice Arena | SINGLE PURPOSE | 4/27/2016 | 9:31 AM City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8e) Title: Authorize Sale of Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects Page 14 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 16, 2016 Action Agenda Item: 8f EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Approval of Reimbursement Resolution for Rec Center Projects RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Declaring the Official Intent of the City of St. Louis Park to Reimburse Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of Bonds to be Issued by the City (four affirmative votes are required to approve this action). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve a reimbursement resolution to preserve the ability to bond for all of the City’s costs related to the indoor refrigeration replacement and outdoor recreation facility projects? SUMMARY: Staff is recommending issuing bonds for both the indoor refrigeration replacement and the outdoor recreation facility at the Rec Center in an amount not to exceed $10 million in aggregate. The issuance of bonds for these projects is consistent with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan, and best allows the City to keep its very strong financial position. The issuance of bonds for projects such as these also allows the costs to be paid over the course of 10 years. This spreads the cost of the facilities over these ten years, and not just to the current residents and businesses. In order to preserve the ability to bond for all of the City’s construction costs, a pre-existing declaration of intent by the City to use bond proceeds to finance all or a portion of the expenditures is required prior to incurring those costs. The City is also eligible to be reimbursed for “preliminary expenditures”, such as architectural, engineering, and surveying costs, etc., up to an amount allowed under the reimbursement regulations. The attached resolution covers both construction and preliminary expenditures. The $10 million reimbursement maximum would cover all projected costs staff recommends financing through the issuance of debt. The remaining costs would be financed using internal sources along with grants and contributions from outside entities. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: It is currently anticipated bonds will be issued in July of 2016. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8f) Page 2 Title: Approval of Reimbursement Resolution for Rec Center Projects CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 16-____ DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the “Reimbursement Regulations”) providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS, the City expects to incur certain expenditures that may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from the proceeds of a tax-exempt bond; WHEREAS, the City has determined to make this declaration of official intent (the “Declaration”) to reimburse certain costs from proceeds of bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City proposes to undertake a project consisting of the construction of a multi-use recreation facility to include without limitation an ice arena and public multipurpose space (the “Project”). 2. The City reasonably expects to reimburse the expenditures made for certain costs of the Project from the proceeds of one or more series of bonds in an estimated maximum aggregate principal amount of $10,000,000. All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of issuance of the bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 3. This Declaration has been made not later than 60 days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5 percent of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) “preliminary expenditures” up to an amount not in excess of 20 percent of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the project for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term “preliminary expenditures” includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of a project, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 4. This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original City Council Meeting of May 16, 2016 (Item No. 8f) Page 3 Title: Approval of Reimbursement Resolution for Rec Center Projects expenditures for the Project and the principal amount of the bonds described in paragraph 2 are consistent with the City’s budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City’s budget or financial policies to pay such Project expenditures. 5. This Declaration is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of the Reimbursement Regulations. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 16, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk