HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/06/06 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
JUNE 6, 2016
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Items
1. 50 min. Bass Lake Update
7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes May 2, 2016
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business -- None
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations -- None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Minutes April 25, 2016
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes May 9, 2016
3c. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes May 16, 2016
3d. City Council Meeting Minutes May 16, 2016
3e. Study Session Meeting Minutes May 23, 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.)
Meeting of June 6, 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.
5. Boards and Commissions -- None
6. Public Hearings
6a. 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting
Recommended Action: None at this time. Each year the City is required to hold a
public meeting to provide an opportunity for residents to review and comment on its
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and its storm water management program. This
agenda item serves to meet this requirement. After a staff presentation the Mayor is
asked to open up the meeting for public comment.
6b. Zarthan Avenue South Right of Way Vacation
Recommended Action: Mayor to open public hearing, solicit comments and close
public hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance vacating the right-of-way
and set the Second Reading of the Ordinance for June 20, 2016. (Minimum five votes
required.)
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use
Permit to allow a motor fuel station with conditions as recommended by staff.
9. Communications – None
Immediately Following City Council Meeting
SPECIAL STUDY SESSION Continued – Community Room
Discussion Items
2. 35 min. PLACE Development Update
Meeting of June 6, 2016
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of April 23 through May 27,
2016.
4b. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the St. Louis
Park Code of Ordinances pertaining to Subdivisions, and to approve ordinance
summary for publication.
4c. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance Vacating Public Right of Way and
Drainage and Utility Easements at 7250 and 7341 State Hwy 7 and authorize
publication.
4d. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Parktacular Inc. for
their Annual Parktacular Celebration Rock the Block Party to be held June 17, 2016, at
the Town Green located at Excelsior and Grand, 3815 Grand Way.
4e. Authorize execution of a professional services contract with Kimley Horn in the
amount of $195,200 for the Municipal State Aid (MSA) Rehabilitation Project- Texas
Ave (Highway 7 to Minnetonka Blvd) Project No. 4017-1101.
4f. Reject bids for the Concrete Replacement – Project No.4016-0003 and authorize re-
advertisement for bids.
4g. Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of permit parking restrictions at 2725
Georgia Avenue So.
4h. Authorize execution of an amendment to a contract with WSB and Associates in the
amount of $142,510 for the design of 37th Street Roadway and Bridge Reconstruction
between Boone Ave and Aquila Ave - Project No. 4017-1700.
4i. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service
line at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN P.I.D. 17-117-21-14-0106.
4j. Approve Change Order No. 1 to Contract/Project No. 5015-5001, Water Meter
Replacement.
4k. Approve for filing Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of February 24,
2016.
4l. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 4, 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: June 6, 2016
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires feedback on the proposed improvements to the Bass
Lake Preserve and its watershed
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to proceed with the recommended
measures for the Bass Lake Preserve Project?
SUMMARY: At the April 4, 2016, study session, Staff provided the City Council with an update
on the Bass Lake Preserve Project. An in depth report was provided to describe the study
completed to date and the resulting improvement projects that were recommended to meet the
goals of a project reviewed by Council in June 2012. The 2012 direction was to define a project
which provided functional restoration to the basin with a desire to incorporate aesthetic and
environmental improvements.
The improvements discussed at the April 4 meeting were developed after examining the existing
infrastructure, upland vegetation and basin conditions. Improvements were explored that would
to improve water quality, reduce point source pollution, and improve overall aesthetics.
The City Council had a number of questions regarding these improvements. Staff has refined the
projects to address these questions.
Attached is a memo outlining the physical characteristics of the basin, the identified improvements,
and staff recommendations.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Bass Lake Preserve Project was
included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan as a multi-year project with a total budget of
$6,000,000. The project is proposed to be funding using the Storm Water Utility Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Bass Lake Preserve Report Memo
Regulatory Flow Chart
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra M Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued
DISCUSSION
City Council reviewed the proposed Bass Lake Preserve Project at the June 18, 2012 Study
Session, where the City Council gave staff direction to pursue a functional restoration of Bass Lake
Preserve based on recommendations made by Barr Engineering in their 2011 report, Stormwater
Pond Evaluation and Prioritization. In addition to pursuing a functional restoration project, Council
also directed staff to take a look at ways to achieve aesthetic and environmental goals.
In Barr’s 2011 report, functional restoration was described as the removal of sediment near the
inlets and outlet. The recommended removals also included any dead or decaying vegetation that
was interfering with the ability of the basin to accept water or freely discharge water in its capacity
as a flood protection and water conveyance basin.
The initial project budget was established as $6,000,000; however it was with the caveat that
additional study was necessary to determine the scope of the project.
Staff started work in 2014 on the additional study necessary to move this project forward. The
identified project goals are:
Functional restoration (defined above)
Environmental
o Remove phosphorus
o Reduce sediment loading
o Volume reduction
Aesthetics
Maintain the existing infrastructure around the basin
These goals are consistent with the City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the
overall goals of the reduction of pollutants outlined the City’s Surface Water Management Plan.
In addition to these stormwater goals staff also took a look at the financial impacts of the projects.
Staff did not want to recommend to the City Council projects that required high annual
maintenance investment, with low environmental benefit.
To achieve these goals, staff divided the project into three types of improvements: Dredging,
Infrastructure Improvements and Upland Vegetation Management. What follows is a brief
description of what each area encompasses.
1. Dredging is the act of removing sediment from a basin and helps achieve the Functional
Restoration goal noted above This maintenance work is completed to; remove sediment
and soil that is deposited there by storm water so that the basin has adequate capacity,
manage in basin vegetation so that it does not impede flow, and to create open water areas.
2. Infrastructure improvements are about the upstream system before it gets to the basin.
These improvement helps achieve the Functional Restoration, Infrastructure Maintenance
and Environmental goals noted above. The projects identified involve repairing and
replacing pipe systems, inlets and outlets. Projects have also been identified to construct
new water quality Best Management Practices (BMP’s). BMPs are systems that treat storm
water to remove phosphorus, remove sediment or promote ground water infiltration.
3. Vegetation Management focuses on improving aesthetics, the native ecosystem,
promoting wildlife habitat by managing invasive species, and restoring native vegetation.
This improvement helps achieve the Aesthetics and Environmental goals.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued
The following improvements were identified and reviewed against the Bass Lake Preserve Project
goals:
Dredging Not recommended
Infrastructure Improvements
Carpenter Park Sub-Surface Detention Basin Recommended
Park Glen Drive Improvements Recommended
Northeast BMP Recommended
Outlet Improvements Recommended
Vegetation Management Recommended after additional
budget review
Attached is a memo that goes into the improvements in depth.
Staff will continue to work to identify additional opportunities in the watershed upstream of Bass
Lake Preserve.
At the April 4 special study session, Council asked staff to bring back additional information on
the following items:
When Was Bass Lake a Designated a Wetland?
To assist with understanding the regulatory framework associated with water resources, staff has
put together the attached flow chart. Bass Lake Preserve is listed as a protected water by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) its classification falls under their purview.
Staff reached out to Kate Drewry, Metro North Area Hydrologist at the MnDNR, to better
understand the classification of this basin. What follows is a summary of the information provided:
The name Bass Lake has endured since the earliest of survey records available. The Department
of Natural Resources (DNR), who created the first inventory of protected waterbodies, did not
differentiate between wetlands, shallow lakes and lakes if they were over 10 acres in size. The
MnDNR also kept whatever name was associated with the identified waterbody.
Each time a comprehensive examination of the basin is completed the components of the basin are
measured against the classification system criteria to establish the wetland “type”. A summary of
the history of the basin assessment and classification includes the following:
1978 Environmental Assessment Worksheet included a letter from Bruce Sandstrom of
the MnDNR, which he classified it as a wildlife/ stormwater basin.
1992 Referenced as a Type 4 wetland (Deep Marsh) in the Environmental Assessment
Worksheet and Subsequent MnDNR permit.
2001 City of St. Louis Park Wetland Management Plan classified Bass Lake as a Type 4
wetland (Deep Marsh).
2010 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency assessed the basin as a wetland as part of the
TMDL program
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued
What is the treatment comparison of trees vs. a wet pond in the NE corner of the preserve?
One of the recommended improvements to meet the goals for Bass Lake Preserve was to create a
pond in the NE corner of the Preserve.
Barr Engineering completed a review of existing phosphorus and sediment removal efficiencies
vs. what could be expected from constructing a wet pond. These are shown in the table below.
Creating a wet pond would result in the removal of trees. Staff is recommending this location for
additional study to develop options for treating the storm water that comes from this subwatershed.
There are a number of different types of Best Management Practices (BMPs) other than a wet pond
that could be considered for this subwatershed. BMP options would be evaluated based on
efficiencies and values, with a sensitivity to tree impacts.
Watershed TP Load (lbs)TP Load Removed
(lbs)
Average BMP TP Removal
Efficiency (%)
Existing Vegetated Area 434 7 1.6
Proposed Wet Pond 434 229 52.7
WatershedSediment
Load (lbs)
Sediment Load
Removed (lbs)
Average BMP TP Removal
Efficiency (%)
Existing Vegetated Area 133,616 21,108 15.8
Proposed Wet Pond 133,616 112,573 84.3
10 Year Total Phosphorus (TP) Removal / Efficiency Analysis ‐ Barr
10 Year Sediment Removal / Efficiency Analysis ‐ Barr
Engineering Department
To: City Council
From: Phillip Elkin P. E., Sr. Engineering Project Manager
CC: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director; Tom Harmening, City Manager
Date: June 2, 2016
Subject: BASS LAKE PRESERVE (Project No. 4014-4000)
Initial direction regarding this project was provided at the June 18, 2012 Study Session, where the City Council
gave staff direction to pursue a functional restoration of Bass Lake Preserve based on recommendations made
by Barr Engineering in their 2011 report, Stormwater Pond Evaluation and Prioritization. In addition to
pursuing a functional restoration project, Council also directed staff to consider aesthetic and environmental
goals above and beyond functional restoration.
In Barr’s 2011 report, functional restoration was described as the removal of sediment near the inlets and outlet.
The recommended removals also included any dead or decaying vegetation that was interfering with the ability
of the basin to accept water or freely discharge water in its capacity as a flood protection and water conveyance
basin.
This memo outlines the pursuit of defining the scope of the Bass Lake Preserve Improvement Project based on
council direction, as well as identifying projects which will manage and treat stormwater draining to the basin.
The background information used to create this memo came from a variety of investigations completed by Barr
Engineering, WSB & Associates, Great River Greening and staff.
Staff started work in 2014 on the additional study necessary to move this project forward. The identified
project goals:
Functional restoration (defined above)
Environmental goals:
o Remove phosphorus
o Reduce sediment loading
o Volume reduction
Improve aesthetics
Perform maintenance on existing infrastructure around the basin.
These goals are consistent with the City’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and overall goals of
the reduction of pollutants outlined the City’s Surface Water Management Plan.
In addition to these stormwater goals staff also took a look at the financial impacts of the projects. We want to
recommend to the City Council projects that require low annual maintenance, with high environmental benefit.
To achieve these goals, staff divided the project into three types of improvements: Dredging, Infrastructure
Improvements and Upland Vegetation Management. What follows is a brief description of what each area
encompasses.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 5
Page 2 of 11
Dredging is the act of removing sediment from a basin. This maintenance work is completed to;
remove sediment and soil that is deposited there by storm water so that the basin has adequate capacity,
manage in basin vegetation so that it does not impede flow, and to create open water areas.
Infrastructure improvements are about the upstream system before it gets to the basin. The projects
identified involve repairing and replacing pipe systems, inlets and outlets. Projects have also been
identified to construct new water quality Best Management Practices (BMP’s). BMPs are systems that
treat storm water to remove phosphorus, remove sediment or promote ground water infiltration.
The upland vegetation management portion of the project focuses on improving aesthetics, the native
ecosystem, promoting wildlife habitat by managing invasive species, and restoring native vegetation.
Staff hired Barr Engineering, WSB & Associates, & Great River Greening to assist in evaluating the various
improvements discussed in this report. This memo is a summary of the information and is broken out into the
following sections:
1. Regulatory Climate- this section will provide background on the regulatory agencies and their
respective responsibilities.
2. Bass Lake Preserve Existing Conditions- this section is a summary of the data collected by staff and
consultants used to inform staff recommendations.
3. Improvement Projects- Information regarding the individual improvement projects and staff
recommendations.
REGULATORY CLIMATE
Because the Bass Lake Preserve is listed as a protected water by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (MnDNR), any work below the Ordinary High Water Level (OHW) will be regulated by the
MnDNR. In addition, since the basin is classified as a wetland, the Army Corps of Engineers will also be
involved in regulating work as well as the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Depending on the amount of
dredging and the desired outcome, the Army Corps may view a dredging project as a change in water type and
therefore require mitigation for the loss of wetlands. Any project proposing to dredge significant material out of
the Bass Lake Preserve will require agency review by the preparation of an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW).
A wetland delineation was completed in 2014 and is represented by the green line in Figure 1. This line is also
consistent with the OHW.
BASS LAKE PRESERVE EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 1 shown below is used to illustrate the changes to the Bass Lake Preserve and a snapshot of the current
condition. The outside orange line represents the approximate size of the Bass Lake Preserve in 1907 prior to
the establishment of a county ditch to drain the basin and filling to create developable land.
External Sediment/ Filled Areas
Cross hatched areas between the orange and the yellow line represent areas of the basin which show evidence of
fill material and dumping. These are areas where the soil samples indicate material that is either inorganic or
soil that has been placed to create upland areas.
Peat/ Organic Material
Areas in the center of the basin within the yellow dashed line represent soils comprising of naturally occurring
organic material that has accumulated over time. Soil samples in this area revealed two distinct layers; a highly
organic peaty muck ranging in depth between 3 to 6 feet in depth. This accumulation is driven by the growth
and decomposition of emergent vegetation (cattails) and has been observed to create a floating mat on the
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 6
Page 3 of 11
surface. The second layer detected ranged between 3.5 to 6.5 feet deep (beyond the hand measuring device) and
is a soft silty clay material.
Soil Sample Composition
In addition to noting the physical characteristics, several soils samples were tested for their composition to
determine the suitability for use as fill material. The number listed represents Soil Reference Values (SRV)
management levels. This is a rating system which assigns a number to soil samples based on the amount of
organic and inorganic pollutants. References numbers of 1 and below show little contamination and are suitable
for use on property with residential or recreational uses. References numbers 2 and below are suitable for only
for uses in industrial applications. SRV values at 3 and above must be disposed of in landfills with lined
bottoms the nearest of which are in Burnsville and Rosemount.
Soils adjacent to the western edge and along the drainage route registered high SRV numbers an indication of
external loading of sediments and runoff. The soil pollutants are inert and not moving through the basin. The
soils with these values are not impeding the function of the basin for water storage and conveyance.
Water Quality
The quality of water within the wetland has been classified as eutrophic to hypereutrophic with very high
nutrient levels and poor water clarity. It is worth noting that in 2015 staff took phosphorus readings from the
inlets and outlets and the results showed a significant reduction in phosphorus from the water entering the
wetland to the water leaving. This is most likely caused by the nutrient uptake of the cattails in the wetland
during the growing season. While the cattails eventually die off and add to the oxygen demand and nutrient
levels of the wetland, during growing season they act as a nutrient remover. The basin reduces the phosphorus
in the storm water as the water passes through.
FIGURE 1
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 7
Page 4 of 11
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Staff divided the project into three types of improvements: Dredging, Infrastructure Improvements and
Vegetation Management. Descriptions of these improvement types are listed earlier in this memo.
DREDGING
As discussed earlier, dredging involves the removal of sediment that is deposited into the basin by storm water
in order to maintain the basin for flood storage and storm water conveyance. One of the improvements
considered as a part of this project was to dredge the Bass Lake Preserve basin.
Functional Restoration
The soils investigation conducted in 2015 revealed a floating mat of cattails which fluctuated with the water
level throughout the summer. The cattails near the outlet are acting independently from the bottom of the basin
and are not blocking or impeding flow through the pipes. Because of these findings, staff is not recommending
dredging in front of the outlet.
Aesthetics
This project is designed to remove cattails and create open water with the intent to attract more waterfowl,
interesting open water vistas and possibly establish fish population.
Environmental Considerations
The removal of cattails for open water does not have an easily identifiable benefit to the environment or to
wildlife. Thick mats of cattails provide nesting and shelter for large mega fauna such as deer, foxes and
muskrats. Removing this cover will result in increased water fowl activity, but the diversity of the current
population of animals will most likely shrink.
While some equate removing cattails to create open water with a higher water quality, this not necessarily the
case. While the nuisance vegetation will be removed, the high nutrient environment remains which can lead to
another species of emergent plant thriving or algae blooms
Since the wetland has a large volume of organic material within its sub surface soils, there is a strong possibility
that disrupting this layer can release trapped nutrients which would further degrade the quality of water in the
basin.
The following figure outlines the dredging project analyzed by Barr Engineering. The size of the proposed
project was chosen to ensure a sustainable removal project. As mentioned earlier in the report, the soils
supporting the cattail growth are a peaty mixture that will float when inundated. The project therefore assumes a
deep enough excavation over a large area to deter cattail re-growth.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 8
Page 5 of 11
Proposed Project ‐Dredge 24 Acres, 6 feet Deep
233,000cy of Material Would Be Dredged to Create Open Water
Project Outcomes
Improved Aesthetics
Improved Recreational Experiences
Vegetation Management
Estimated Cost
$19,400,000
Estimated Range $15‐ $29 Million
Wetland Impacts 24 Acres
Staff Does Not Recommend this Project:
Does not remove sediment. The soils identified for removal are naturally occurring organic
material that has accumulated over time, not sediment introduced by storm water.
Does not increase phosphorus removal
Potential to degrade water quality in Bass Lake Preserve
Potential to decrease habitat for non‐water dwelling wildlife
Converts wetland to a shallow lake and will likely require wetland mitigation to replace
Floating cattails may eventually migrate east and close open water requiring on going annual
maintenance cost
High initial cost
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 9
Page 6 of 11
INFRASTRUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
As discussed above, infrastructure improvements are about the upstream system before it gets to the basin. The
projects identified involve repairing and replacing pipe systems, inlets and outlets. Projects have also been
identified to construct new water quality Best Management Practices (BMP’s). BMPs are systems that treat
storm water to remove phosphorus, remove sediment or promote ground water infiltration.
Installing BMPs is consistent with the responsibility the City has to meet the requirements of the City’s
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Surface Water Management Plan.
Staff has identified four infrastructure improvements that will meet the goals of the Bass Lake Preserve Project.
These are:
Carpenter Park Sub-Surface Detention Basin
Park Glen Drive Improvements
Northeast Corner BMP
Outlet Improvements
The majority of the land in the Bass Lake Preserve Watershed is single family residential. However, there are a
number of areas slated for redevelopment. When new developments are proposed, the developer is required to
install water quality and rate control BMPs.
Staff will continue to work to identify additional opportunities in the watershed upstream of Bass Lake Preserve
for the construction of new water quality BMPs.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 10
Page 7 of 11
Carpenter Park Sub‐
Surface Detention Basin
39 Acre Drainage Area
This proposed project would
create a sub‐surface detention
basin in Carpenter Park which
would collect untreated
stormwater and remove pollutants
while storing up to 0.75 acre‐feet
of water for potential re‐use in
sprinkling ballfields and play areas
in the park.
Estimated Cost
$1,025,000.00
Project Outcomes
Phosphorus Reduction
Sediment Reduction
Volume Control
Flood Protection
Aesthetic Benefits
Staff Recommends This Project:
Meets the City’s storm water management goals
Improves storm water quality going to Bass Lake
Preserve
Reduces volume of water going to Bass Lake Preserve
Removes sediment
Flood Control
Water conservation through re‐use
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 11
Page 8 of 11
Project Outcomes
Phosphorus Reduction
Sediment Reduction
Flood Protection
Park Glen Drive Improvements
13 Acre Drainage Area
This project would install a new catchment structure that would prohibit sediment from reaching a ditch
that discharges to Bass Lake Preserve. The treatment basin would not only prevent sediment during
stormwater events, it would also treat runoff from snow collection operations.
Staff Recommends This Project:
Meets the City’s stormwater management goals
Improves water quality going to Bass Lake Preserve
Estimated Cost
$70,000.00
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 12
Page 9 of 11
Estimated Cost
$100,000.00
Northeast BMP
35 Acre Drainage Area
In the northeast corner of the Preserve there is a large area of hard surface that runs off into the Preserve.
Additional study of this subwatershed is recommended to develop a BMP for this drainage area to meet
environmental goals. Selection of BMP type should be based on a balance of efficiency and values.
Project Outcomes
Phosphorus Reduction
Sediment Reduction
Flood Protection
Staff Recommends This Project:
Meets the City’s stormwater management goals
Improves water quality going to Bass Lake Preserve
Removes sediment
Flood Control
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 13
Page 10 of 11
Staff Recommends This Project:
This is a maintenance project that is necessary to ensure the basin functions.
There is a potential to be able to manage in basin vegetation as a part of this project, by
managing the elevation of the basin.
Outlet Improvements
This project would replace the existing outlet structure.
Currently the storm sewer outlet at the east end of the preserve is in poor condition and
should be replaced. The new outlet structure would allow for improved maintenance,
operations, and cleaning.
Review of the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation will be necessary to complete the
regulatory permitting for this project.
Estimated Cost
$80,000.00
Project Outcomes
Infrastructure Repair
Aesthetic Improvement
Flood Protection
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 14
Page 11 of 11
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
Upland Vegetation Management
This proposed project focuses on improving aesthetics and promoting wildlife habitat by removing invasive species
and creating native vegetation. For this project to be successful, it will require annual maintenance of the newly
planted areas. The estimated cost includes a 3 year maintenance by the contractor. Subsequent annual
maintenance will need to be built into the Operation Budget.
Project Outcomes
Improved aesthetics
Improved wildlife habitat
Improved recreational experiences
Diversify vegetation
Remove/ control of buckthorn growth
Estimated Cost
$1,445,625.00
Annual maintenance could reach $40,000.00
Staff Recommends this Project:
The project will require annual maintenance to promote vegetation growth. Further discussion is needed as
a part of the budget process to weigh this annual maintenance need vs. other programs
Project meets goals of aesthetic and wildlife habitat creation
Provides limited water quality benefits
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1)
Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 15
WATER RESOURCE REGULATIONS FLOW CHART MN Department of Natural Resources MnDNR Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MPCA Army Corps of Engineers USACE MN Board of Water and Soil Resources BWSR Minnehaha Creek Watershed District MCWD Bassett Creek Water Management Organization BCWMO All Public Waterbodies to OHW Aquatic Plant Control Water Appropriations Flood Administration Shoreline Management NPDES Program TMDL Program Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands Rules City of St. Louis Park Local Surface Water Management Plan Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP Wetland Rules Stormwater RulesStormwater RulesSpecial Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 1) Title: Bass Lake Preserve Project Update - Continued Page 16
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 2, 2016
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Thom Miller, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: None.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Hunt), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016
It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Lindberg, to approve
the EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3b. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 4, 2016
It was moved by Commissioner Lindberg, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve
the EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
4. Approval of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Lindberg, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve
the EDA agenda as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve
the EDA Disbursements.
The motion passed 7-0.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2016
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Application for Environmental Grant Funds. Resolution Nos. 16-08, 16-09,
16-10, 16-11, 16-12, 16-13, and 16-14
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. The proposed resolutions authorize the submission of
contamination clean up grant applications related to the renovation of The Parkdales and
two proposed new developments - Parkway 25, and Morrie’s Automotive. To assist with
cleanup costs, the developers are requesting that the EDA apply for approximately
$2,652,000 in grants on their behalf from Hennepin County, the Metropolitan Council and
DEED. Grant awards are typically announced in July.
Commissioner Mavity asked Mr. Hunt to articulate the financial impact these resolutions
would have on the City of St. Louis Park and whether there is a local share. Mr. Hunt stated
that in applying for these grants the EDA is agreeing to serve as a financial conduit for the
grant awards. The grants do not require a local share from the EDA, and funding is not
being requested from the EDA in connection with these grant applications.
It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 16-08, authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a grant
application to the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf
of the Parkdales project, to adopt EDA Resolution No. 16-09, authorizing the Executive
Director and President to submit a grant application to the Department of Employment
and Economic Development (DEED) Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf
of the Parkway 25 project; to adopt EDA Resolution No. 16-10, authorizing the Executive
Director and President to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Council Tax Base
Revitalization Grant Program on behalf of the Parkway 25 project; to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 16-11, authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a grant
application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Program on behalf of
the Parkway 25 project; to adopt EDA Resolution No. 16-12, authorizing the Executive
Director and President to submit a grant application to the Department of Employment
and Economic Development (DEED) Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf
of the Morrie’s Automotive project; to adopt EDA Resolution No. 16-13, authorizing the
Executive Director and President to submit a grant application to the Metropolitan
Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf of the Morrie’s Automotive
project; and to adopt EDA Resolution No. 16-14, authorizing the Executive Director and
President to submit a grant application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response
Fund Program on behalf of the Morrie’s Automotive project.
Commissioner Brausen asked if Morrie’s Automotive is subject to the city’s Green
Building Policy. Mr. Hunt responded that it is not. Commissioner Brausen asked what steps
need to occur to make projects like Morrie’s Automotive subject to the Green Building
Policy as he would like the council to consider that requirement.
Commissioner Brausen asked if Parkway 25 has requested tax increment financing (TIF),
and Mr. Hunt responded it had not at this time. Commissioner Brausen suggested the
council consider tying an affordable housing component when any public financing is
utilized for a project such as Parkway 25.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2016
Commissioner Spano clarified that the motion and second was for all seven resolutions.
Commissioner Mavity asked if city funding was requested if the Green Building Policy
would then apply. Mr. Hunt responded that most of these projects would likely qualify
under the Policy; however, there are size and funding requirements within the Policy that
also must be met before the Green Building Policy would be applicable to various projects.
The motion passed 7-0.
7b. Third Amendment to Central Park West Redevelopment Contract.
Resolution No. 16-15.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. The redevelopment contract assigned to Central Park
West LLC provides that whenever the commencement and completion dates for various
project phases required under the contract will not be met, modification must be requested.
The EDA and the city must formally approve such modifications. Construction on Phase
I due to utility work caused a delay, and it was unable to begin construction until late
November instead of June. This will push back the commencement dates for Phases I & II
so extensions have been requested.
Mr. Hunt explained that staff have also received a request to extend the contract dates of
Phases IV & V. The Partners are expected to make formal plans during the summer and
hope to obtain plan approval and start construction in spring of next year. Therefore,
commencement date of Phase IV will need to be extended to April 1, 2017. In allowance
for a reasonable building lease up period, the commencement date for the Phase V is also
requested to be extended until April 1, 2020.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 16-15, approving the Third Amendment to the Contract for Private
Redevelopment with Central Park West, LLC.
The motion passed 7-0.
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:31 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Anne Mavity, President
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of EDA Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Disbursement Claims for the
period of April 23 through May 27, 2016.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in
accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA Bylaws?
SUMMARY: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to review
and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and
those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the EDA’s Bylaws and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Controller
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:14:21R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
316.67ALLIANCE FOR INNOVATION DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TRAINING
316.67
8,005.62DMD PROPERTIES LLC MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE NOTES PAYABLE-CURRENT PORTION
8,032.30MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE BOND PRINCIPAL
6,967.70MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE BOND INTEREST
6,994.38MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES
30,000.00
225.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC CSM WESTSIDE OFFICE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
107.50SWLRT DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
326.75ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
664.50WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,500.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.00HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,093.75
10,000.00GREATER MSP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A ADVERTISING
10,000.00
25,483.28HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE PROPERTY TAXES
25,483.28
577.50HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING
577.50
180.00JBS BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
180.00
114.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
270.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
1,785.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
Economic Development Authority Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 2
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:14:21R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,169.00
6,000.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
6,000.00
38,693.01METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
38,693.01
100.00MINNEAPOLIS BUSINESS JOURNAL DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
100.00
12.61OFFICE DEPOT DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
12.61
55,390.92ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB
55,390.92
750.00ST LOUIS PARK FRIENDS OF THE ARTS CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU MISC EXPENSE
750.00
100.00ST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
100.00
713.73STEPCONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU MISC EXPENSE
713.73
Report Totals 182,580.47
Economic Development Authority Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 3
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 25, 2016
The meeting convened at 8:10 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: Mr. Harmening (City Manager), Mr. Sullivan (Senior Engineering Project
Manager), Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Batra).
Guest: None
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning
Mr. Harmening reviewed the topics scheduled for discussion at upcoming study sessions.
Councilmember Brausen asked if the council could discuss increasing the city’s minimum wage
to $15 and whether the City of St. Louis Park has the legal authority to enforce an increase.
Councilmember Sanger suggested the city work with surrounding suburbs to increase the
minimum wage. Councilmember Mavity stated that she thinks this topic will be brought to a
Metropolitan Cities policy committee.
2. SWLRT Potential Enhancements
Mayor Spano explained that a letter was sent to Star Tribune from several mayors regarding the
light rail. He explained that it was his intention to participate; however, he was not able to respond
in time.
Mr. Sullivan introduced the item and explained the topics for discussion, as outlined in the staff
report. This includes the lighting on the Regional Trail Bridge and the type of fencing used.
Mr. Sullivan discussed the specifications of the Regional Trail Bridge. The bridge will be 1700
feet long, 16 feet wide, and 25 to 27 feet off the ground. Ambient level lighting on the bridge is
needed for security. He displayed illustrations of the bridge, which showed the bridge without light
and with some low-level lighting. He noted Three Rivers Park District (Three Rivers) is also
interested in adding lighting to this area.
Mr. Sullivan explained that the base project does not have funding available for lighting. Hennepin
County, Three Rivers and the city would need to contribute financially to add lighting to the bridge.
Staff reached out to each of the organizations, but no reply has been received. Three Rivers will
be the ultimate owner of the bridge and will be responsible for maintenance of the structure.
Mayor Spano stated he supports the addition of lighting to the bridge and would like staff to
continue to push to accomplish this goal. Councilmember Sanger stated that lighting is a necessity
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 25, 2016
for visibility and for obvious safety reasons. Councilmember Mavity stated that the city needs to
be thoughtful about how the lighting is done and place it strategically.
Mr. Sullivan explained the railing enhancements and the different types of fencing that can be used
for the area. The three types are wood posts, galvanized chain link fence and galvanized decorative
picket fence. He reviewed the three options in detail and explained the primary purpose of each
type of fence.
In response to Councilmember Mavity’s question about height requirements, Mr. Sullivan
responded that the height requirements are different, depending on what the bridge is going over
(road, freight, tracks, etc.). Councilmember Mavity asked about the high cost of a bow shape in
the fence when the effect is minimized because a chain link piece is required to be installed. Mr.
Sullivan agreed that is the core issue.
Mr. Sullivan explained that the lighting could be integrated in the fence structures and integrated
into the railings. He then displayed several renderings that show the bridge using different railing
structures and different shapes. There’s a 10-foot vertical fence that must be installed over the
freight rail that’s required by code.
Mayor Spano stated that he doesn’t want to invest money if it’s not done right. Agreeing with
Mayor Spano, Councilmember Sanger stated that she is onboard with the higher-grade black
railing. In response to Councilmember Lindberg’s question, Mr. Sullivan answered that there was
a discussion to add trestles and make them less freight-orientated to soften the edges.
Councilmember Miller stated that he is in agreement with a larger investment so that it is
aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Sullivan confirmed the desire of the council to spend additional staff
resources to continue this discussion, and the council agreed.
Mr. Sullivan explained that there are two areas that must have fall protection railings over the
Regional Trail at Louisiana. He asked if there is a desire to have enhanced railings at these
locations. A trail user on either side of the bridge will see this chain link fence; therefore, there is
a desire to enhance the fence.
Councilmember Lindberg asked whether there has been discussion on the product quality of the
chain link fence. Mr. Sullivan responded the issue has been discussed. He explained that the project
office is looking at unity and cost effectiveness. Three Rivers prefers a coated black fence, which
wears better over time. Mr. Locke stated that none of these items are built into the project budget
so the money is going to need to come from somewhere.
Mr. Locke noted that Three Rivers has stated that they will cover a decorative railing and bowed
structure. In addition, Three Rivers agrees that no lighting would be a safety concern so they are
strongly encouraging the project office to add lighting to this bridge. Mr. Locke stated that staff
recognizes that lights are necessary, but spending more money is not desirable. Mr. Harmening
asked if the city should be doing a formal request for lighting. Councilmember Brausen stated his
agreement on a formal request. He explained that he is in favor of additional funding to make the
railings look good.
Mr. Locke explained that the city and SPO are not asking for a vote, but he would like to know if
the council is directing the staff to keep pushing forward.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 25, 2016
In reference to funding, Councilmember Brausen stated the city is committed to the top $589,000,
and he asked about the source of the recommended estimated costs. Mr. Harmening stated that he
does not know at this time, and future estimated costs will have to be put in priority order.
The council agreed that staff should further explore lighting the bridge; adding aesthetically
pleasing bridge upgrades with a piece of art; and upgrading the fences.
In reference to the Park and Ride at Beltline, Councilmember Sanger would like to consider
building more than 268 spaces because previous experience has shown that ridership participation
goes higher than estimated, so the parking structure will become obsolete when it opens. In
addition, expanding after construction is complete will become very disruptive and will cost more.
She suggested that the amount of spaces be addressed now to avoid those pitfalls. Mayor Spano
stated that this is a different type of line so he wants to be careful about not getting too far ahead
of themselves. Mr. Locke explained that the city would rather the development add parking if it is
needed.
3. Subdivision Code Amendments
Mr. Morrison introduced the topic. The city adopted the subdivision ordinance in 1976. A few
years ago a process was adopted to enact amendments.
Mr. Morrison discussed each proposed amendment in the summary report.
Councilmember Sanger asked for clarification on the requirement to have sidewalks on all
frontages except if one of the frontages is not involved in Connect the Park! Mr. Morrison
explained that the city then receives money from the applicant in lieu of the sidewalk. That money
is then spent on a section of sidewalk called for in the Connect the Park! Plan.
The council expressed their agreement with the proposed amendments.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Mayor Spano stated that the Earth Day celebration was lightly attended. He explained that there
was a lot of passion, a lot of energy, and a lot of ideas.
Councilmember Mavity stated that the annual storm water meeting was on April 18. She stated
that more of the public is interested and that the city could do a better job of advertising the
meeting. Mr. Harmening stated that the meeting on April 18 was not the required annual storm
water meeting. The meeting on April 18 was a meeting that staff added to the process to help
prepare interested residents for the annual storm water meeting scheduled for June 6.
Mr. Harmening noted that a subgroup of the school board and city council will be meeting soon to
discuss the topic of facilities. Councilmembers Hallfin and Lindberg will be serving on this group.
Councilmembers Brausen and Mavity have signed up to attend the National League of Cities
Conference in Philadelphia in November. Mr. Harmening stated that he can sign up any
councilmembers interested in the League of Minnesota Cities annual meeting scheduled to be held
June 14-17, 2016, in St. Paul. Councilmember Brausen stated that he is signed up to go to the
League of Minnesota Cities Conference
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 25, 2016
The meeting adjourned at 9:33 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4. Update on Grant Applications
5. March 2016 Monthly Financial Report
6. First Quarter Investment Report January - March 2016
7. New Minnesota State Plumbing Code
8. 2015 Volunteers in the Park
9. Central Park West Redevelopment Contract Update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
May 9, 2016
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Deputy City
Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), Planning and Zoning
Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Communications Director (Ms. Larson), and Recording Secretary (Ms.
Pappas).
Guest: Ginny Gelms, Hennepin County Elections Manager; Tony Barranco, Vice President, Ryan;
Tom Rehwaldt, Ryan; Carl Drecktrah, Ryan; Tom Tracy, Excelsior Group
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning –May 16, 2016
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed Study Session agenda for May 16, 2016. He noted the
May 23rd meeting will be held at the St Louis Park Nature Center starting at 6:15 p.m.
Several Councilmembers noted additional topics for discussion at future Study Sessions:
Rationale on minimum wage in the city
Discussion of the local real estate market, demand and life cycle, possible saturation of
market, and getting ahead of the situation
Housing status report, including price points and gaps, senior housing
Mr. Harmening said he would research and find an outside person to present an objective viewpoint
to the City Council on the aforementioned housing and real estate related topics.
2. Ranked Choice Voting
Ms. Kennedy presented information on Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in response to a request
from the council. She introduced Ginny Gelms, Hennepin County Elections Manager, who was
in attendance to answer questions regarding the Ranked Choice Voting method.
Ms. Kennedy noted the council had previously discussed this topic in 2006, 2010, and 2012. The
last time this topic was presented and discussed, the consensus of the council was that the city
should continue with the current voting model and not pursue a charter amendment for a switch to
Ranked Choice Voting. At that time the City Council also agreed not to pursue the RCV method
for municipal elections because it did not make sense from a financial or administrative standpoint.
Ms. Kennedy noted that the RCV model is used in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Ms. Gelms addressed the role of the county in the implementation, preparation, and use of the
RCV method for municipal elections in St. Louis Park. She noted that the current voting
equipment was not capable of completing the count for a RCV race to completion. Staff would
still need to manually complete the count, which can delay final results for several days.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
The council discussed the topic, noting the implications and merits of a potential switch to the
RCV model for municipal elections.
Councilmember Brausen questioned why conducting a RCV election would potentially cost more
money.
Ms. Kennedy stated more election judges would be required at the precincts and the city would
have to make investments in a robust public education process as well as reprinting of many of the
materials used at the precincts on Election Day. She noted additional staff would be needed after
the election for completion of the final tabulation process.
The council also discussed the advantages and disadvantages of holding a municipal primary and
whether eliminating the option for a primary election may resolve the main concerns that need to
be addressed. Mr. Harmening stated a charter amendment would be required to eliminate the
option for a municipal primary. Ms. Kennedy clarified that the Charter currently requires the city
to hold a primary election any time 3 or more candidates file for a particular office.
Ms. Gelms noted that of the 45 cities in Hennepin County, only 10 have the option to hold
municipal primary elections.
Councilmember Lindberg stated that the school district does not have the statutory authority to
switch to a RCV model. He noted the school district does not currently hold a primary election.
This would need to be considered if changes are made to the current voting process because there
would be two voting styles on the same ballot.
Ms. Gelms explained that Hennepin County has not had experience with programming the voting
equipment to accept and tabulate ballots with two different voting styles. She noted it is not an
issue in Minneapolis because school district elections are conducted in even year elections.
Mayor Spano suggested the council may want to consider eliminating the option for municipal
primary elections and testing how that works for several election cycles before considering a
switch to the RCV model.
Councilmember Sanger stated the city may also want to consider increasing the filing fee and/or
the number of signature required on the petition for candidates, in order to attract serious
candidates for municipal offices.
Councilmember Brausen stated he is not in favor of raising filing fees, as it may discourage people
from becoming candidates.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he sees some value in primary elections and also in getting more
signatures on petitions for those filing. He agreed this would attract more serious candidates.
Councilmember Hallfin agreed and added if the cost to file was raised a bit, there might be more
serious candidates who become involved in the process.
Mayor Spano cautioned he would not want the raising of fees to deter candidates from applying.
He did agree with increasing the number of signatures candidates are required to obtain on
nominating petitions.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
Councilmember Mavity agreed that fees should be raised, as well as signatures increased; however,
not to the point of being cost prohibitive.
Councilmember Lindberg added there needs to be a balance in the process between costs and
signatures needed.
Mr. Harmening stated he will direct staff to work on this issue and gather information to be
presented to council at a future study session. This information will focus on a request to the
Charter Commission to consider amendments to eliminate the option for municipal primary
elections, as well increasing the number of signatures required on nominating petitions and filing
fees for candidates.
3. Off-Sale Liquor Licensing
Ms. Deno presented information to the council that was requested related to off-sale liquor
licensing. The council discussed the possibility of amending the off-sale liquor licensing
requirements. The council had requested staff to include past information, including establishment
size, zoning and proximity information, and the regulations implemented by the City of Hopkins
in 2014.
Councilmember Mavity stated she would support limiting the square footage of liquor stores to a
maximum size of 5,000 square feet.
Councilmember Lindberg noted he originally raised this question as an issue of proximity and
concentration of liquor stores in the Knollwood area. He stated if the council wants to limit the
size of stores the process of deciding the maximum size will be important.
Councilmember Brausen stated he is not in favor of setting additional limitations because the
market will regulate itself.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he is in favor of capping the square footage at the size of the largest
existing liquor store.
Councilmember Sanger stated the city does not need limits on the number of stores and agreed the
marketplace regulate the issue.
Councilmember Miller stated he feels the free market will self-regulate and that limiting the size
of stores won’t solve the issue.
Mayor Spano said the council is in the same place it was last year on this issue and no consensus
has been reached. He thanked staff for their work, adding that at this time, no changes will be made
and no further information or meetings are needed on this issue.
4. Ten West End Planned Unit Development
Nicole Mardell introduced the presentation from Ryan Companies related to the concept design
for the offices at the West End Phase 4 of Central Park West.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
Tony Barranco, Vice President of Development - Ryan Companies, presented the development
concept, which will be two buildings built in separate phases and will include 700,000 feet of
office space in this corridor. The plans are to build the North building in the first phase. The parking
ramp would be built in two phases but will function as one ramp upon completion and will include
6,700 feet of green space that is usable and also softens the area. The proposal also includes
covering the loading dock and placing it between the office building and the ramp, where is will
be less noticeable. The structured parking will include 1,200 stalls, with additional stalls in the
surface area.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the ramp is being built to repurpose into offices later.
Karl Drecktrah, Director of Architecture - Ryan Companies, stated it could be repurposed;
however, the ramp should last 100 years. He added the ramp will be built to balance the aesthetics
of the area and will be lower than the office buildings. The ramp will be seen from Hwy. 100;
however, the view will mostly include the building and wall along Lilac Drive.
The developers also noted the proposed use of natural wood on the building and intermixed areas
in order to break up the tall mass of the building and to compliment the West End. Design elements
also include arches, a balanced brick façade, shared outdoor space, texture and sheen with the
brick. The interior will have a more natural feel, not corporate, but active space and interacting
lobby areas; with lounge seating vs. benches; bridges - connecting spaces with a flow and
connections.
They also presented an open stair visual in a subtle effort to get people to move more. Additionally,
a secure bike storage room, showers and a locker room area are included in the design.
Councilmember Sanger stated there is a need for better biking connections from Cedar Lake Road.
The developer noted they would pay more attention to this issue and could include a second
entrance area from the other side of the building.
Councilmember Mavity added the placement of the women’s locker room feels isolated and unsafe
as shown. The developer stated they will review this.
It was noted the retail space will feature a deli style food service and coffee shop.
Councilmember Brausen asked about the shadow into the park/green area from the proposed
building. The developer stated they will provide a shadow study at the next study session.
The developer received a question regarding public accessibility to the outdoor and indoor
common spaces. He explained the common spaces and retail area will be for public use, and the
conference rooms may be reserved by appointment for public meetings.
Councilmember Sanger asked if there are any commitments from tenants to lease the building yet.
The developer said not at this time; however, they are talking to potential tenants and equity
partners.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the developers envision this as one large corporate campus for
one corporation. The developer noted the facility would likely be multi-tenant, with one or two
anchor tenants and additional smaller tenants.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
Mr. Barranco explained the second phase of the building and ramp, points of access through the
ramp; and areas where the ramp would abut and connect with each phase of the building, providing
an additional area of green space to the linear park.
Councilmember Brausen noted the renderings of both buildings look very dark and have a
warehouse feel. Mr. Barranco stated the next rendering will be improved and will not be as dark
as it currently looks.
Councilmember Mavity stated the concept is absolutely lovely and the buildings look like a nice
repurposed north loop warehouse-type building.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if the building materials conform to all St. Louis Park City
ordinances.
Mr. Walther stated the city usually does not allow a large percentage of wood on building facades;
however the Melrose building does have synthetic wood. He added the council can decide
ultimately which material to use as it is part of a Planned Unit Development
Mayor Spano noted the wood soffit concept resembles CHS Field in Lowertown St Paul, which
has won national awards. He added he likes the wood look.
Councilmember Hallfin added as long as it conforms to the city ordinance, he is not concerned
about what materials are used on the outside.
Councilmember Lindberg noted it looks great, and he is happy the project has the potential to move
forward. He noted the council will need to further discuss the use of the wood soffit on the outside.
The consensus of the city council related to the following the developer should:
provide plating details of the parking ramp to show potential reuse
work with staff to identify improved bike connections
add a southern exit to the building
consider shifting the women’s locker room
provide a shadow study;
provide percentage of building materials on each façade, specifically of the wood soffit
expand the trash room to include space for future organics disposal
The developer is planning on an application submittal in late summer. These items will be further
discussed at the Planning Commission Public Hearing and First Reading.
5. Assessment Policy Discussion (continued) Parking Lots
Ms. Heiser continued the assessment policy discussion with the council. Once all areas have been
reviewed by council, staff will bring back an overall assessment policy for city council approval.
She noted the park and ride lots were not built with assessments and with other parking lots, the
past practice has been to assess 100% of the costs. She added the majority of the users of these lots
are private property owners. The recommended option for these lots is to continue to assess them.
This process would include having the council order a feasibility report and later a public hearing
to decide if the lots should remain municipal lots or be used for other purposes. Ms. Heiser noted
that over half of these lots are on the public right-of-way. She added that staff recommends moving
ahead with a 6-7 year CIP.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
Mayor Spano asked what the impetus is for this change. Mr. Harmening noted the city’s
assessment policy is being completely updated, and this will be part of that policy.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he recently drove through various city lots and noted many are in
rough shape. He asked how the city uses the parking lots and why they seem to be in the business
of parking lots.
Councilmember Sanger added she doesn’t understand why the city owns these parking lots, many
of which are adjacent to private businesses. Additionally, she noted businesses should provide
parking, and the city should not own them. She suggested the city sell the lots.
Councilmember Hallfin stated many of the parking lots have no overnight parking allowed, but
this has not been enforced.
Councilmember Brausen asked if the city publically auctions parking lots or sells them to adjacent
land owners.
Ms. Heiser stated if parking lots were not available, then patrons would need to park in city
neighborhoods.
Councilmember Miller added the biggest concern is the process, which seems complicated,
especially as to who actually uses these lots.
Ms. Heiser noted the lots are relied upon to meet the property owners’ parking needs.
Councilmember Sanger added the city cannot force businesses to purchase the lots, but what are
penalties for businesses that don’t provide off street parking. This may be a negotiating point.
Councilmember Brausen added the city is better off assessing businesses, otherwise this would
force people to park in the streets if parking lots are not available.
Councilmember Mavity said she agrees costs should go back to businesses or the city should sell
the parking lots.
Mayor Spano noted consensus is to continue to assess property owners and asked staff to also look
at ways to include striping and snow removal.
6. Climate Inheritance Resolution of iMatter
Mr. Harmening noted that in March, the iMatter group and Environment and Sustainability
Commission members presented a report card and asked the city to adopt a climate action plan. A
draft resolution is included in the materials provided to the City Council. Mr. Harmening noted
the resolution is aspirational and if adopted as written, the city will need to create a climate action
plan going forward. It was noted that the youth representatives are asking that the council adopt
the resolution by May 16 - before school is out for the year.
Mr. Harmening explained if approved, staff would hire a consultant to write a climate action plan,
and the Environment & Sustainability Commission and staff would assist in the preparation of the
draft plan. He noted this could take at least six months, and costs would be $10,000-15,000.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 9, 2016
Councilmember Sanger stated it would be wonderful to have the whole community involved in
this project, and there would be a need to conduct public forums and listening sessions. Then this
could become part of the comprehensive plan.
Mr. Harmening added that writing the goals and planning would not be hard, but implementing
the plan would be more difficult.
Mayor Spano added that iMatter could become the youth advisory commission, giving feedback
to the council.
The resolution will be reviewed at the May 16 city council meeting.
Communications/Meeting Check-in
Councilmember Mavity asked when the council will see the first draft of the comprehensive plan.
Mr. Harmening noted the planning process begins in the fall.
It was noted the Children First Ice Cream Social is May 15 from 2-5 p.m.
Mayor Spano updated the council on his first Mornings with the Mayor session.
Councilmember Hallfin referenced written report #11 regarding the Legion Post 282 Liquor
Ordinance Amendment Request. He stated he did not know they were moving. Mr. Harmening
stated they have not determined a new location yet but wanted council consideration.
Councilmember Hallfin noted he would like to know where they want to move before the council
discusses this further.
Boards and Commissions
The council discussed interviews conducted and the candidates for appointment to the various city
commissions. The slate of candidates will be presented for approval at the May 16, 2016 City
Council meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 pm
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
7. Candidate Filing Fees
8. Acceptance of Southwest LRT Corridor-wide Housing Strategy
9. Update on SW Parcel at Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue (Project # 2012-0100)
10. City Hall/Police Station Sidewalk Improvements for Accessibility
11. Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282 Liquor Ordinance Amendment Request
12. Series 2016 G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center Projects
13. PLACE Concept Plan
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 16, 2016
The meeting convened at 6:45 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), City Attorney
(Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guest: None
1. Boards and Commissions Appointments Discussion
The City Council discussed in detail the proposed appointments to the city’s boards and
commissions. It was pointed out by staff that the commissioners serve at the pleasure of the council
and can be removed at any time.
The full list of appointees will be read by Mayor Spano during the City Council meeting.
2. Xcel and CenterPoint Franchise Agreement Renewal
Mr. Harmening noted the purpose of the report is to inform the City Council of the need and
process associated with the renewal of two franchise agreements with CenterPoint Energy and
Xcel Energy.
The extensions on both agreements expire on December 31, 2016. Staff has been working with
both entities to reach new agreements and approvals through the City Council and Public Utilities
Commission, which takes approximately 5 months.
Mr. Mattick noted he has been in conversation with Xcel since March on the terms of the franchise
renewal. He added that the two utilities are currently considering city staff and city attorney
comments on the draft agreements. Staff will discuss the following issues with Xcel with the
expectation that 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.
Mr. Mattick noted that permit fees are difficult to negotiate.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of May 16, 2016
Councilmember Sanger asked if the city has the ability to impose time lines. Ms. Heiser stated the
city is setting expectations with the utility companies. She added that the meetings have been
going well, and a process is in place to address issues.
Staff will bring feedback obtained from Xcel and CenterPoint Energy back to the council for
further discussion at the July 25th study session.
The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
3. Outdoor Recreation Facility Project and Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement
Construction Update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3d
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 16, 2016
1. Call to Order
Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City
Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Controller (Mr. Simon), Finance Supervisor
(Mr. Heinz), Sr. Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Shamla) Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr.
Morrison), Fire Chief (Mr. Koering), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guests: Stacy Culver (Roots and Shoots Student Group) and Stacie Kvilvang (Ehlers &
Associates).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Retirement Recognition of Firefighter Eric Curran-Bakken
Mayor Spano read the proclamation for retiring firefighter Eric Curran-Bakken, and
congratulated him for his years of service. He noted Firefighter Curran-Bakken was a great
asset to the community and that the city owes him a great debt of thanks.
Firefighter Curran-Bakken said he began this career at age 40 and thanked his wife and
children for their support over the years. He said it is a great privilege working and living
in the City of St. Louis Park, and he thanked the City Council.
Chief Koering also recognized Mr. Curran-Bakken and noted how as a firefighter Mr.
Curran-Bakken sacrificed much and did many things for his own self-improvement and the
improvement of others. He wished him luck in retirement and said he will miss Mr. Curran-
Bakken’s calming leadership.
Mr. Harmening also congratulated Mr. Curran-Bakken and thanked him for his service,
integrity, professionalism and leadership.
Mayor Spano thanked Mr. Curran-Bakken for his regular post hospital visits in the city’s
partnership with Park Nicollet Health Services, which continues to be a tremendous
service.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
2b. Recognition of Donations
Mayor Spano noted the St. Louis Park Home Depot donated $7,000 for Gardens in the
Park. The Minneapolis Auto Club donated $1,000 to purchase Safety Camp t-shirts, and
George Hageman donated a canoe to Westwood Hills Nature Center.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Special Study Session Minutes April 18, 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve
the Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2016 as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes April 18, 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the April 18, 2016 Meeting Minutes as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3c. City Council Meeting Minutes May 2, 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
the May 2, 2016 Meeting Minutes as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution No. 16-063 confirming the appointment of Timothy Simon as City
Treasurer, effective May 16, 2016.
4b. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 16-2492 amending the zoning code
relating to microdistilleries and cocktail rooms, and to approve the Summary Ordinance
for publication.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 16-064 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 No. 16-065 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 No. 16-066 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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to
approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive
reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions
5a. Approve Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
Mayor Spano described the appointment process and read the slate of appointees.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to
approve the appointment of citizen representatives as listed in Exhibit A.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Public Hearings
6a. First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements, ROW at 7250 & 7341 State
Hwy 7
Mr. Shamla presented the staff report.
Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Spano closed
the public hearing.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to
approve first reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public Right of Way and Drainage and
Utility Easements and set second reading of Ordinance for June 6, 2016.
The motion passed 7-0.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Climate Inheritance Resolution. Resolution No. 16-067
Ms. Deno and Ms. Pinc presented the resolution for approval.
Roots and Shoots representatives from St. Louis Park High School appeared before the
City Council.
Nathan Kempf, 3937 Kipling, thanked the council for their interest in this issue. He stated
it is empowering to know that a group can come together to begin a commitment for a
sustainable society.
Sophia Skinner, 4521 Vallacher Ave., stated this is a momentous thing that has been
accomplished for the city and other cities. She thanked the council and acknowledged this
is not easy work, but stated if we work together we can create a brighter future.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
Lukas Wiede, 1624 Nevada Ave., stated when Roots and Shoots presented in March, they
were just beginning this process. He noted that most of the group are not seniors, and next
year they plan to continue this work and make sustainability a big issue in St. Louis Park.
He added the momentum they have built is exciting, and it is empowering to think about
what has been accomplished. He added that while this is a controversial issue, the group
believes they can move beyond this. He also noted a quote from Roots and Shoots member
and Environment and Sustainability Commissioner Jayne Stevenson that none should be
afraid of our future. He thanked the council for caring about the future as much as the
members of the Roots and Shoots program.
Councilmember Brausen agreed this is hard work, but it is essential, and our survival on
this planet depends on our commitment to it. He stated he appreciates the group’s
optimism.
Councilmember Miller recognized and appreciated the group for their hard work.
Councilmember Sanger thanked the students for pushing the City Council and said she is
impressed with all the work they have done. She noted their work will help develop goals
and strategies for everyone in the community - businesses, residents, and city services - as
the community begins to work on the comprehensive plan.
Councilmember Lindberg thanked the students for helping the council get to this point. He
added there have been many conversations on this, and the council desires to be a leader
on this sustainability journey. He looks forward to a continued partnership on this issue.
Mayor Spano stated this council and prior councils have done good work on environment
and sustainability in the past, but those efforts have been targeted on one issue. Now more
work will be done on high level issues. He complimented the students on their lobbying of
the council and their clear vision, which ultimately helped the council commit to do this
work.
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to waive
the reading and adopt Resolution No. 16-067, Climate Inheritance Resolution.
The motion passed 7-0.
Paul Thompson, of Edina, commented that the City of Edina will begin working with
iMatter shortly, and he thanked the St. Louis Park City Council for their example and
leadership in this work.
8b. Acceptance of the Southwest Light Rail Corridor-wide Housing Strategy.
Resolution No. 16-068
Ms. Schnitker gave a brief overview of the resolution relating to a corridor-wide housing
strategy for future housing planning and policy in the station areas. It was explained that
the work to develop this plan has involved an inventory of all current houses and future
needs for housing along the corridor. These efforts have helped form a base for a corridor-
wide housing strategy and an understanding of the current and potential local, county, state
and federal technical and financial resources to support a full range of housing. Input was
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
gathered from various stakeholders, and a final plan was presented and approved in January
of 2016 by the SW Corridor Works Steering Committee and is now being referred to
member cities and partner organizations for action as appropriate. Next steps involve the
Housing Committee continuing to meet to review implementation of the strategies
identified in the plan.
Councilmember Mavity recognized Ms. Schnitker’s work on this strategy and her
leadership role. She added this policy overall will be extraordinarily important for St. Louis
Park’s competitiveness and for receiving future funding. St. Louis Park has been a leader
in housing, and this plan along the corridor will be a model for what other cities should
also be doing.
Councilmember Brausen added this is an important strategy with 11,000 new housing units
proposed along this corridor. He added the city welcomes higher property values and also
the realization of major public works benefits with this project. St. Louis Park needs to
carry the fair share of this burden, and encourages all communities along the corridor to
also do this.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to waive
the reading and adopt Resolution No. 16-068 Accepting the Southwest Corridor-wide
Housing Strategy as a means to inform future housing planning and policy in the station
areas.
The motion passed 7-0.
8c. Conditional Use Permit – Marriott Minneapolis West Hotel, 9960 Wayzata Blvd.
Resolution No. 16-069
Mr. Morrison presented the report. He noted the existing conditions of the property which
include a seven-story, 195 room Marriott hotel with a restaurant and a conference center.
The proposed hotel would be a Courtyard by Marriott constructed on the north side of the
current Marriott. It would be six stories and have 142 rooms. It would be connected to the
Marriott with an enclosed walkway, allowing guests to utilize the amenities of the Marriott.
Both hotels will cater to business clients and will not be extended stay hotels. Mr. Morrison
stated a neighborhood meeting was conducted, and construction noise, parking and
landscaping was discussed. A parking study found that during peak hours, only 378 spaces
are required for these hotels. There is a surplus of 182 parking spaces in the plan.
Councilmember Brausen stated the developer did a nice job of discussing this project at
the neighborhood meeting, and he encouraged support of this Conditional Use Permit
resolution.
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to waive
the reading and adopt Resolution No. 16-069 Approving the Conditional Use Permit to
permit two principal buildings on one property with conditions as recommended by staff.
The motion passed 7-0.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
8d. First Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. The proposed ordinance is to update the design
standards and make clarifications around sidewalks and easement. The ordinance had been
presented to council in March, 2016, and also discussed in study session in April, 2016,
and the council was supportive of the proposed amendments.
Councilmember Brausen noted the council had spent a lot of time during the study session
discussing this issue.
It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
the first reading of an Ordinance amending the subdivision code, and to set the second
reading for June 6, 2016.
The motion passed 7-0.
8e. Authorize Sale of Series 2016A G.O. Bonds – Indoor/Outdoor Rec Center
Projects. Resolution No. 16-070
Mr. Simon was introduced and presented along with Mr. Heintz. Staff recommends 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 also allows the
costs to be paid over the course of 11 years. 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. Other project costs will be financed using internal sources, along with grants and
contributions from outside entities. Municipal bonds are still at historically low interest
rates, and the first payment will be part of the tax levy payable 2017. Staff will bring back
the results of the competitive bond sale on June 20th.
Ms. Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates, confirmed the bonds are still available at low
rates and also noted that St. Louis Park has an AAA credit rating.
Councilmember Miller stated he will oppose this bonding. He stated he sees no separation
between the construction project and the bonding, and the project is too expensive and will
be used by too few residents. He felt there was way too little public process involved in the
project, and he suggested there are perhaps other ways to finance it. He suggested financing
through the hockey association and by other means so as not to burden tax payers. He added
this is a big risk with big expenditures in St. Louis Park, especially with the coming
expenditures of the light rail, which will add more tax burden. He is also concerned that
other projects may not be completed in the city due to this project and stated St. Louis Park
is in need of a community center that would serve more citizens across the board. He stated
the Rec Center project serves only upper class white males who play hockey, adding they
need to consider further tax burdens to the schools also with this project.
Councilmember Sanger stated she is very reluctantly supporting this bond initiative. She
stated that while she supports refrigerated indoor rinks, she does not support refrigerated
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 7
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
outdoor rinks and also disagrees with the public process that occurred with the 4-2 vote.
She noted the city never identified the need for this project, and originally the hockey
association stated they would contribute one-third of the cost for the project.
Councilmember Sanger added St. Louis Park already has six outdoor and three indoor
rinks, and there are many other things that could be done with this money. She agreed a
community center would be a more favorable project and would serve a far more diverse
population within the community - people of all ages, all abilities and demographic
backgrounds. She said the ice rink serves a small group of people who are white, young,
middle class males. She said the city never did a needs assessment on the project, and the
rink will only be used four months out of the year.
Additionally, Councilmember Sanger stated the city never informed the public that the
price had increased significantly on this project. She added the city council had scheduled
another meeting to vote on the project but did not allow for public feedback at that time.
She is concerned this was very different from the way the city normally gathers public
feedback and added that the city owes the residents of this community an apology. She also
stated she was out of the country during the time of that meeting, but would have voted no
on the proposal.
However, Councilmember Sanger stated she will support the bonding because the city
could face legal issues and financial penalties if the contract was cancelled. She stated she
would not want to jeopardize the city’s AAA rating. Even though she does not agree with
the project, it is more important to protect the city, and added it would be irresponsible to
vote no. Councilmember Sanger stated she will reluctantly support the bond sale.
Councilmember Mavity stated she did not support this project at first, but will support it
tonight, as it is the will of the council to approve this project. She also wants to protect the
city’s good credit rating and wants to look forward to make sure the city gets the best
project possible, and what is best and most cost effective for all residents.
Councilmember Mavity stated she takes exception with Councilmember Sanger’s
comments and said this was not nefarious. She noted all public meetings on this topic were
posted and there was robust conversation. She stated she received 40-50 emails from the
public and it was a very transparent process.
Councilmember Brausen thanked his colleagues for supporting the bonding proposal, even
though they don’t support the project. He noted after all the study sessions and retreats on
this topic, he feels it is a valuable reinvestment in the community and he will support this
item.
Councilmember Hallfin stated this project is like other past projects, where upgrades have
been made in twenty-year intervals. He sees this as the right thing to do for the city and an
upgrade for the Rec Center – one of the signature buildings in St. Louis Park. He said he
is bothered by these same grievances, and construction has already begun on the project. He
disagreed with the opinion that consideration of the project was not conducted as a public
process, adding the bonding is a prudent way to pay for this project and he will support it.
Councilmember Lindberg stated the facts and staff report are clear. The issuance of these
bonds will provide financing at a rate less than inflation. He pointed out the Hockey
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3d) Page 8
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 16, 2016
Association contributed close to $2 million towards this project. He supports this project
and takes great offense with comments implying that this project flies in the face of what
the city is trying to do for racial equity in St. Louis Park. He added he trusts city staff and
Park and Recreation to make use of this facility the other eight months out of year. He
stated a vast majority of residents approved of this project, and the public process was alive
and well throughout.
Mayor Spano stated this project is supported by Parks and Recreation, and the financing is
no different from what was done for Oak Hill Park and Fern Hill Park, along with donations
and city contributions. He added there are people already booking the new space for
multiple uses, and it is not fair to classify the hockey program as a white, middle class,
male program. There are many children who participate in hockey who are on scholarship,
and if we want more kids of color to participate, as well as girls, we need more facilities,
not fewer. Mayor Spano stated he supports this item.
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to waive
the reading and adopt Resolution No. 16-070 Providing for the Sale of $10,000,000
General Obligation Bonds, Series 2016A.
The motion passed 6-1. (Councilmember Miller opposed).
8f. Approval of Reimbursement Resolution for Rec Center Projects. Resolution No.
16-071
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to waive
the reading and adopt Resolution No. 16-071 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.
The motion passed 7-0.
9. Communications
Councilmember Hallfin noted the Children First Ice Cream Social held this past weekend
had a great turnout and photos were posted on social media.
Councilmember Miller invited the community to the Bike to Work Day Event. Bikers will
meet at the Rec Center, 7:30 a.m. on Friday, May 20th.
Mayor Spano invited all to a fundraiser at St. Louis Park High School on Friday, May 20,
10 a.m. – 12 noon, featuring author Tom Friedman. Tickets are available on the St. Louis
Park Schools Foundation website.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Minutes: 3e
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 23, 2016
The meeting convened at 6:18 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), City Attorney
(Mr. Mattick), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Director of Operations and
Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Manager Westwood Hills Nature Center (Mr. Oestreich), Economic
Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Recreation Superintendent (Jason West), Principal Planner
(Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guests: Ken Grieshaber, SRF Landscape; Denita Lemmon, Miller Dunwiddie.
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 6 & 13, 2016
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed Study Session agendas for June, 2016.
Councilmembers also requested additional items for future agendas over the summer including the
following topics: former Holiday property; Highway 7 update; update/discussion on Section 8
housing ordinance; and Minnetonka Boulevard traffic.
2. Open Meeting Law Update
Mr. Mattick provided an overview and refresher for the council on the legal requirements related
to complying with the Open Meeting Law.
The discussion focused on email communication between members. Mr. Mattick noted that email
communications between councilmembers is public information if it involves city business, and it
does not matter if the email was sent from a personal computer or a city device. Also, emails which
relate to city business and are sent from personal email accounts are considered public information.
Text messages are considered public information when texting is between councilmembers, as
well as all forms of social media, including Facebook and Twitter.
Mr. Mattick added the intent of the law is to not allow councilmembers to make decisions or
conduct meetings outside of official city council meetings.
Councilmember Brausen asked if there is a city policy related to liability for councilmembers with
respect to Open Meeting Laws. Mr. Mattick stated insurance covers any liability, but he is not
aware of any city policy related to this.
Councilmember Mavity noted she recognizes that all of the councilmembers are fully committed
to the spirit and intent of this open meeting law, as representatives of their constituents and
otherwise.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
3. Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
Mr. Oestriech conducted a tour of the Westwood Hills Nature Center. He presented the main
classroom area, overflow area and public space. He noted that 40,000 individuals visited the
facility last year and there are 11 program staff who work at the facility.
Mr. Oestriech stated that several public meetings and online surveys were conducted last fall, along
with a follow-up public meeting in January, where feedback was received for the master plan.
Ms. Lemmon presented the master plan. She explained the public input process and showed some
initial concepts. She explained the history of the nature center, the various programs conducted at
the center, and how it has evolved over time. Ms. Lemmon noted some of the areas that are in
need of repair at the facility, including water infiltration and HVAC system deficiencies. She noted
it was also a concern that there is no fire sprinkler system at the nature center. Another concern is
the distance from the parking area to the facility, along with trail access issues. There is no storm
shelter, and the multi-use facility is very much overused. Because of the current parking shortage
the master plan includes adding 75 more parking spaces to bring it to a total of 130. These
additional spaces would be added, keeping the neighbors to the south in mind.
Councilmember Brausen asked how often the parking lot is full. Mr. Oestriech stated 3 out of 5
days per week it is full, and visitors also park along the entry way, while school buses take up
many spaces.
Ms. Lemmon said the design team looked at the existing building and how it can be expanded to
become an outdoor classroom and also include a staging area for when school children arrive. She
added there are opportunities to repurpose this space. Staff needs were also considered in the
design plan, along with a gathering space where parents can rest with children; multi-purpose
classrooms; removable partition walls; a centrally located storm corridor; animal care areas; and
storage areas for staff. The projected total cost of the project is $11,202,000. This includes new
building construction; parking lot expansion; expanded outdoor classroom and water garden area;
expanded natural plan and programming area; and improvements to the canoe kayak launch.
Additionally, Ms. Lemmon noted that the public wishes the nature center would provide programs
at the facility during all seasons.
Councilmember Brausen asked about expanding the canoe and kayak area and also the area that is
currently closed off. He noted security was a concern, but if it were opened up, it could be a more
friendly area for visitors.
Mr. Oestriech stated there are no restrooms around the lake, and there had been problems in the
past with vandalism and loitering. However, he added the Westwood Hills gates are now open in
Westdale and not in the Golden Valley portion of the park, and every tenant in the area now has a
security pass, which has helped these issues.
Councilmember Brausen asked about the fee structure for visiting school groups. Mr. Oestriech
noted there are resident and non-resident fees for all school districts.
Councilmember Miller stated he is very supportive of the facility and has always thought of it as
an educational facility. He added he has not thought about what more it could be, but cautioned if
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
the mission gets too large, there might push back from citizens. He added that the center is such a
gem, it should be expanded for use by both children and adults.
Mr. Oestriech pointed out the nature center does not have an official mission outside of the city’s
mission, including recreation, wildlife, nature and education. Ms. Walsh pointed out the nature
center is currently used mainly for educational purposes, along with walking and birding. Recently
however, more parents who drop off their kids at the center have said they would like more space
and a more engaging area for families. She noted the center could accommodate so much more;
however, the message from the public during the vision session was clearly about the natural aspect
of the center, and the feedback was not to change that.
Councilmember Lindberg asked how much impact there would be to natural resources if the
building were moved. Ms. Lemmon stated the land where the nature center sits is very young.
There is not much old growth. She added they would want to have the least amount of impact to
the site and would create a natural progression from the parking lot to the nature center. A few
cottonwood trees would be lost in the process, but that would be the extent of it. She added the
city forester has also weighed in on the impact to the center.
Ms. Lemmon added they would want to create a multi-use space and not over design the new
center. It is a delicate balance of daily staff needs and the needs of those who will use the facility.
Councilmember Sanger asked what kind of enhanced programming the center would have and
how much more staffing would be required. Mr. Oestriech stated the facility would go from a
2,700 square foot building, to a 12,000 square foot building, which would need additional staff for
maintenance as well as programming.
Councilmember Sanger noted that St. Louis Park’s population is getting older, and the
demographic is changing. She asked what the programming would look like for adults. Mr.
Oestriech stated currently the center conducts monthly adult date nights at the site and also lectures
on natural topics for adults.
Councilmember Sanger stated she comes to the center to walk, canoe, and cross country ski but
rarely comes into the building. She added they will need to consider this when they think about
who will use the facility in the next 15 years.
Mr. Oestriech noted that adults can be intimidated when coming to the center and seeing all the
school children in attendance. However, he also noted that bird watching is now becoming a huge
adult pastime at the center, with over 50 adults in the birding program. Ms. Walsh acknowledged
the center will need more programming as the project moves forward.
Councilmember Sanger asked about adding an addition on to the current facility. Ms. Lemmon
stated the cost to retro-fit the facility would be more than to build a new facility. There would
need to be a lot of excavation in order to retro-fit the building.
Councilmember Sanger asked about the new parking lot, stating she is concerned about the plan
to move it farther south. She also is concerned about the trees located there that currently serve as
a buffer to the neighborhood. Mr. Grieshaber stated the tree buffer would remain for residents
both to the south and the west. He noted that landscape buffers could also be added.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
Councilmember Hallfin pointed out the nature center building opened in 1981, but the
programming at the center has existed since the 1960’s, when a day program began there. He added
the council recently approved an $8 million rink at the Rec Center, and now the nature center
project will be $11+ million. He stated he wants the council to be conscious of this and the need
to remember the demographic in St. Louis Park. These projects need to serve a diverse population.
He noted there is a difference between the populations served at the nature center during the school
year versus during the summer programs.
The council asked when the project would be completed. Staff noted the planning would begin in
2017, design in 2018, and construction in 2019.
Councilmember Hallfin asked Mr. Harmening how the city would pay for this project. Mr.
Harmening stated the city spends $1 million plus per year on upgrades, but for a large capital
project such as this, GO Bonds would be utilized -- similar to funding the Rec Center project.
Councilmember Sanger requested an analysis of future bonding that includes this project and the
Rec Center, including cost estimates and financial obligations.
Mr. Harmening stated he will have Mr. Simon prepare and present the financial information in
order to give the council the full picture. He added the new facility will need to have every
environmental consideration and include reusable materials. Ms. Lemmon said this is definitely
included in the project and is part of the cost estimate.
Councilmember Sanger asked about using more glass in the new facility. Ms. Lemmon stated they
would include this also.
Mayor Spano stated there were approximately 300 people involved in the concept visioning
process. He asked about the plan for taking this out further to the community and getting
everyone’s input. He asked that the Environmental and Sustainability Commission be involved in
the process and be asked to informally weigh in on this conversation and spread the word on this
project. He added he agreed with Councilmember Hallfin’s comments about targeting programs
for diverse groups. He noted he also agreed with Councilmember Sanger’s thoughts on using glass
and slide away walls in the center. Mayor Spano noted this is currently a 2,700 square foot
building, and the council is considering creating a new facility which would be five times bigger.
He added it would be a shame to see a huge building in the middle of nature, adding he would
want it camouflaged in some way.
Councilmember Brausen stated he attended many of the community meetings on the project and
felt the public does not want to change the overall character of the center but wants to keep it low
key and comfortable in a natural setting. He added he worries about it becoming a wedding
destination, a coffee shop, or a disruption of the quiet. He added the community process must be
much more robust before anything is finalized. Also, he noted the price is a concern. He would be
interested to see if the St. Louis Park School District would be interested in being involved or if
major donors would be interested in becoming involved in helping to finance the project.
Councilmember Sanger added that a task force, similar to what was utilized with the Rec Center
public process, might be worth considering, also, especially in an effort to attract adults to the
facility.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
Councilmember Brausen added a public survey would possibly be helpful also.
Councilmember Lindberg stated the public process has been beneficial to date, but the new facility
will impact residents’ lives. At the same time, there is a need for community public space and
nature-based education programs, while making cross cultural connections. He noted there is an
opportunity to do creative things with this project and expose youth, their families, and adults to
nature. He asked if 12,000 square feet is enough public space and stressed more conversation
around this would be wise. Additionally, he noted that by the time the project is completed, the
cost may be closer to $15 million and stated it is important to get broad community input. He added
policy decision should not be influenced by a fear that there will be too much traffic in the area. It
should be more about building the right size facility and building something that will last for
generations.
Mr. Harmening stated he understands the concerns of the council related to this being a public
process; the sizing of the building; the diversity of those using the programming and facilities; and
the idea of not losing the natural aspect of the facility.
It was the consensus of the City Council to have staff present a plan to move forward at a future
meeting, while continuing to study this master plan. Mr. Harmening suggested the council do tours
of other facilities in the metro area, and staff would set this up.
4. SWLRT Updates
Mr. Locke presented an update on the SWLRT and the commitments required from the city for
joint development at the Beltline Station. In June and July, the SPO will be bringing the final
SWLRT scope and budget revisions through the Corridor Management Committee, Executive
Change & Control Board, and the Met Council for approval and authorization to apply to the FTA
for “entry into engineering.” The refined project scope & budget will address the Beltline Station
Park & Ride and TOD site. Discussions with SPO regarding what commitments are needed from
St. Louis Park for the Beltline elements are ongoing. It is expected a resolution of commitment
will be needed from the city in June.
Mr. Locke stated there are 268 parking spots slated for the facility at Beltline. Those spaces will
be provided either in a surface parking lot or in a parking structure, freeing land for a commercial
area on the north end of what would otherwise be a surface parking lot. A transportation easement
currently covers the land that would be used for commercial development. The City will need to
acquire rights to the private land on the corner covered by that easement. That land would then
become city land, available to be sold for commercial development. The parcel, owned by Vision
Bank, would need to be purchased by the SWLRT project in order to build either a surface parking
lot or to provide the site for a parking ramp.
Councilmember Hallfin asked for clarification on funding of the surface parking lot. Mr. Locke
stated the surface parking lot would be funded by the SWLRT project. The base plan includes a
park & ride at the Beltline Station. Alternatively, the SWLRT project would contribute to the City
an amount equivalent to what would have been spent on a surface lot to help the City fund a parking
ramp at the Beltline station. Mr. Locke noted there are three sources for funding a parking ramp,
estimated to cost $11-13 million. Funding sources include $6.5 million from a CMAQ Grant; $2.7
million in FTA New Starts money from the SWLRT; and the rest from the City. At a minimum
SLP’s share will need to be the 20% local match required for the CMAQ grant. He added that the
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 6
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
source of funds for the city’s share of the parking ramp costs is expected to be the $9 million in
tax increment projected to be generated from the anticipated new development shown in the
concept plan for the Beltline Station area. The concept plan is included in the staff report.
Additionally, there would be law sale revenue from SLP selling the land for new development to
the private developers, which could be used to fund a portion of the cost.
Mr. Locke added an agreement would be developed between the Met Council and EDA or the city
that would show how this would be conducted. This agreement would not be finalized and
approved until after the record of decision on the environmental review is published. It would also
be subject to change pending the record of decision from the FTA.
Councilmember Sanger asked at what point the city moves ahead on this project. She added there
should also be more discussion about the proposed land use, which falls into Councilmember
Sanger’s ward. She said she is concerned about adding more apartments and would actually prefer
more commercial and office space.
Councilmember Miller asked if this area would be a good spot for PLACE. Mr. Locke stated it
had been considered earlier; however the many complexities involved with both the Beltline
station park & ride, working with the FTA, and the complexities of the PLACE project itself
suggested it would be better not to attempt the PLACE project at Beltline. The current plan for
how to achieve joint development at Beltline is simpler than originally envisioned, but it would be
difficult to switch sites for PLACE at this point, and it would make the PLACE project dependent
on the timing of SWLRT. Mr. Locke added that PLACE is well along in the process on another
site, and PLACE is not an office space developer.
Councilmember Miller asked if the area must be used as office space. Mr. Locke stated the city
can decide how to develop this property, adding that mixed use residential could be another use in
this area. The city plans consider the intersection of Highway 25 and Beltline as an employment
and job creation area.
Councilmember Sanger added she would nominate this intersection for a grant through the regional
solicitation.
Councilmember Brausen stated he is also in favor of doing this and in getting control of this land
and control of the process and the property use.
Councilmember Lindberg asked if staff knows how much has been spent thus far on this project
and what other costs will be coming forward.
Mr. Harmening noted there have been consultant fees that the city has paid out at this point.
Mayor Spano noted that Governor Dayton will call a special session if needed; however, it will
not be called if there is not agreement in the legislature on the issue of transit funding, especially
SWLRT. Mayor Spano added that the city will continue to work on this project until anything
further develops.
Councilmember Sanger added she doesn’t want St. Louis Park to spend too much money on this
project until it is confirmed to happen.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 3e) Page 7
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2016
Mr. Locke added the funds discussed tonight will not be committed until sometime after the Record
of Decision (ROD) is issued, which is anticipated to occur in August, 2016, and the project office
is in a position to apply to FTA for project engineering approval.
Mr. Harmening asked staff from an FTA perspective, when they need to know that the $135 million
in additional local money to fund the project is committed. Mr. Locke stated once there is a Record
of the Decision (ROD), then the SWLRT project applies for the engineering. It is at that point the
project budget and scope will be set. It is staff’s understanding that is when the project would have
to show it has all the funding. The earliest this may occur would be August, 2016. A full funding
grant agreement application for FTA commitment to fund the SWLRT project is anticipated to be
submitted by January (2017) and approved by the summer of 2017. Then there would be a full
commitment to go ahead with the project. Mr. Locke added that there is a link to the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the City’s website, including responses to the over
1000 comments to the original draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and comments to the
supplemental draft environmental impact statement (SDEIS).
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
There were none.
The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
5. April 2016 Monthly Financial Report
6. Public Art Initiative – 4900 Excelsior
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of City Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the
period of April 23 through May 27, 2016.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve City disbursements in
accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter?
SUMMARY: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the City Council
to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by physical check
and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the City’s Charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Controller
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
456.003RD LAIR SKATEPARK SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
456.00
105.70A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
105.70
90.00AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
90.00
127.98ABERNATHY, LISA ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
127.98
36.06ABLE HOSE & RUBBER INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
36.06
3,892.45ABRA MN ST LOUIS PARK UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
3,892.45
225.00ACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
115.25ACCUITY INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
115.25SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
115.25SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
115.25STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
461.00
346.50ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS OPERATIONS TRAINING
346.50
525.00ADVANCED CONCRETE SAWING STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
525.00
41,364.78ADVANCED DISPOSAL SERVICES SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
3,590.25SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
44,955.03
738.40ADVANCED FIRST AID INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
738.40
3,750.00ALL TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS MUNICIPAL BLDG OFFICE EQUIPMENT
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 2
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
3,750.00
1,266.66ALLIANCE FOR INNOVATION ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
633.33COMM & MARKETING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
316.67IT G & A TRAINING
633.33COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
633.34INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
3,483.33
3,686.50ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,722.50UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
6,409.00
270.00AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT SOIL TESTING SERVICES
270.00
904.48AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
904.48
495.50ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
495.50
2,092.79ANDERSEN INC, EARL INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,092.79
630.60ANOVASOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OTHER
630.60
575.00APACOMM DEV PLANNING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
575.00
474.77ARCPRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
474.77
6,876.50ASPEN MILLS OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
675.44OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
288.00OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
7,839.94
342.82AT&T MOBILITY CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
342.82
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 3
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,755.78ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
3,290.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
1,935.35MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
6,981.13
330.00AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
330.00
4,435.00AVI SYSTEMS INC COMMUNICATIONS & MARKETING GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4,435.00
1,126.01AVOLVE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
1,126.01
381.75AVR INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
381.75
3,086.23BACHMANSBEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
3,086.23
400.00BACKLUND, BRUCE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
400.00
115.76BALVIN, AARON POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
115.76
1,487.82BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,487.82
1,265.14BARR ENGINEERING CO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,265.14
600.00BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
600.00
136.45BATTERIES + BULBS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
136.45
211.00BEBERGS LANDSCAPE SUPPLY WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
211.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 4
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
4,249.51BEDFORD TECHNOLOGY LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,249.51
991.75BELSON OUTDOORS LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
991.75
11,355.00BERGERSON CASWELL INC REILLY BUDGET OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
11,355.00
225.00BERGFORD ARCHITECTURE, JOHN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
237.33BERSCHEID, GARY HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
237.33
288.34BIRCHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
288.34
30.00BISON, ALEXANDER SEASON PASSES PROGRAM REVENUE
30.00
6,712.47BLACKSTONE BISTRO ADMINISTRATION G & A LIQUOR
200.00-POLICE G & A FALSE ALARM
6,512.47
2,650.80BLI LIGHTING SPECIALISTS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
2,650.80
960.00BLOMSNESS, MATT EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
960.00
300.00BLUE CARD-HENNEPIN CTY FIRE CHIEFS ASSN OPERATIONS TRAINING
300.00
77.01BOHN WELDING INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
77.01
5,909.50BOLTON & MENK INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
15,088.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
20,997.50
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 5
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
70.00BORENSTEIN, JOSHUA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
70.00
275.00BORKEN, STUART GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
275.00
591.53BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
591.53
50.00BREDENBERG, JASON INSPECTIONS G & A LICENSES
50.00
366.00BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
366.00
150.00BROMENSCHENKEL, JIM INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
150.00
233.62BROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
233.62
150.00BROWNDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
150.00
474.04BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ALLEY MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
564.04PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
570.72PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,608.80
30.11BUTTERBAUGH, LAURA WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
30.11
78.48CAMDEN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
156.96PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
235.44
12,031.63CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
49.50SIDEWALKS & TRAILS G & A LEGAL SERVICES
11,211.69STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES
1,221.00WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 6
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
214.50SOLID WASTE G&A LEGAL SERVICES
24,728.32
1,500.00CAPITAL EQUITY LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,500.00
15.32CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
26.38FAMILY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
41.70
529.20CASTANEDA-PEDERSON, DAN IT G & A TRAINING
529.20
20,000.00CBIZ BENEFITS & INSURANCE SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
20,000.00
1,594.44CDW GOVERNMENT INC CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
8,719.63TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
1.52TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
10,315.59
7,116.92CENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,116.92
2,541.17CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
3,482.13WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
124.25REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
97.19SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
110.13SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
565.19PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
56.60WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
95.16NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
7,071.82
2,962.26CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
6,713.50REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS
9,675.76
15,700.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENT
15,700.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 7
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
641.25CENTURY LINK COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
168.75E-911 PROGRAM POLICE EQUIPMENT
523.20CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
1,333.20
254.56CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
178.14FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,559.52WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
377.27VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,369.49
10.66CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
99.98ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
188.80ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
110.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
2,009.20ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
876.68ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
41.34HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
150.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
695.00HUMAN RESOURCES SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
133.68HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
45.96COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
311.41COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
334.27COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
260.79COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
270.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
335.90COMM & MARKETING G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
57.47IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
112.00IT G & A TRAINING
117.00ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
89.00ASSESSING G & A TRAINING
310.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
1,407.14COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
2,263.64FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,394.95FACILITIES MCTE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
244.99FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER
640.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A TRAINING
264.94POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
332.84POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
77.41POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
98.89DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 8
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
51.72NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
222.00COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
173.56OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
1,437.12OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,577.53OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
251.59OPERATIONSUNIFORMS
154.22OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
434.94OPERATIONSREPAIRS
931.73OPERATIONSTRAINING
3,159.20OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
81.13INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,129.53INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
196.25ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
122.00ENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
519.00ENGINEERING G & A TRAINING
100.00ENGINEERING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
235.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
522.89CABLE TV G & A MEETING EXPENSE
205.18TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
799.99TV PRODUCTION OFFICE EQUIPMENT
520.00TV PRODUCTION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
100.75POLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
400.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
265.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
985.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
371.67SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
25.00SOLID WASTE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
135.01TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES
60.04TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
53.63TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
65.38ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
58.60ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
3.90ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
249.51KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
480.30HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
171.62LITTLE TOT PLAYTIME GENERAL SUPPLIES
10.67BALLFIELDSOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
54.50PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
125.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
99.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
25.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 9
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
48.27WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
380.16WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,140.56WESTWOOD G & A OTHER
18.70FAMILY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
59.69REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
748.68REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
60.00ARENA MAINTENANCE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
212.40INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
370.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
38.52AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
20.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET MEETING EXPENSE
502.28SEASON PASSES GENERAL SUPPLIES
30.57VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
33,477.93
36.81CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
71.31OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
108.12
18,581.32COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
18,581.32
982.00COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION CO UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
982.00
117.50COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
18.13OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
284.55WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13.59REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
433.77
4,338.37COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,844.62WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
6,182.99
23,500.00-COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
470,000.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
446,500.00
5,401.90COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP SUB HENN EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,401.90
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 10
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
109,687.50CONCRETE ETC INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
109,687.50
7,375.06CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSUR
7,375.06
1,204.86CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,204.86
8,750.00CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,750.00
2,228.68CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,228.68
412.00COUGHLIN, JUDY FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
72.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
484.00
59.98COUNTING CARS ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
59.98
10,106.00COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
10,106.00
664.19CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC - DARE DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
664.19
161.69CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
161.69
30.40CROWN MARKING INC COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,035.00OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,065.40
296.89CUB FOODS POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES
296.89
5,861.00CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,345.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 11
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,716.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,405.50SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
486.02SSD #5 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
3,730.00SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
486.02SSD #6 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
2,225.00SSD #6 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
22,254.54
1,407.79CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,407.79
140.00CUSTOM REMODELERS INC INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
140.00
1,200.00DAKOTA CO TECH COLLEGE OPERATIONS TRAINING
1,200.00
3,616.10DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
206.21REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
3,822.31
12,450.00DALSIN, JOHN & SONS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
12,450.00
14,698.94DEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A UNEMPLOYMENT
14,698.94
8,222.58DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
8,222.58
145.00DEX MEDIA EAST LLC ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISING
145.00
495.54DISE, SHEILA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
495.54
6,118.72DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,118.72
1,152.30DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE
822.21COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 12
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
199.05NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,812.97SOLID WASTE G&A ADVERTISING
4,986.53
200.00DZIUSA, ROMAN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
200.00
551.75ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES
668.00SOLID WASTE G&A ADVERTISING
57.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL NOTICES
1,277.25
4,342.75EGAN COMPANIES INC SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,642.21WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
5,984.96
112.50EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS ELIOT PARK
312.50ESCROWSOPPIDAN - BALLY'S SITE
425.00
251.97ELECTRONIC CENTER GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
251.97
1,581.48EMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
1,581.48
1,052.97EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,052.97
18.77EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
18.77
59.31EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
59.31
900.00EMPLOYEE STRATEGIES INC ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
900.00
195.00ENCORE BROKERS IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
195.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 13
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
9,758.98ENTERPRISE FM TRUST VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A RENTAL EQUIPMENT
9,758.98
300.00ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
300.00
1,135.57FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
51.67GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
100.00TRAININGTRAINING
1,287.24
111.17FAHEY, CHRISTOPHER HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
111.17
500.00FAHRENDORFF, JACK SOFTBALL PROGRAM REVENUE
500.00
28.62FASTENAL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
28.62
6,120.38-FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
3,926.46WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
138,870.20WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
136,676.28
60.10FILTRATION SYSTEMS INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
60.10
249.00FINANCE & COMMERCE ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
249.00
224.00FINISHED BASEMENT CO INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
224.00
117.84FINKLER, ERIKA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
117.84
260.24FIRE SAFETY USA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
229.70OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
397.50OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
1,130.00OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 14
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,017.44
1,241.00FIRST ADVANTAGE LNS SCREENING SOLUTIONS HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,241.00
545.00FISCHLER & ASSOCIATES PA HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
545.00
29.91FLECK, JAMIE WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
29.91
547.50FLEX COMPENSATION INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
547.50
159.83FORKLIFTS OF MN INC.FACILITIES MCTE G & A TRAINING
479.43PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TRAINING
127.87PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
127.87TRAININGTRAINING
895.00
1,510.00FOUNDATION TECHNOLOGIES LLC IT G & A TRAINING
1,510.00
10,050.00FOURTH PROPERTIES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
10,050.00
4,000.00FOX INDUSTRIES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
4,000.00
327.56FRADY, TARA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
327.56
52.98FRATTALLONE'S HARDWARE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
5.29PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
58.27
11.98FREEDMAN, BREANNA HUMAN RIGHTS MEETING EXPENSE
11.98
90.96G & K SERVICES REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
90.96
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 15
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
54.84GARSKE, BETTE HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
54.84
346.00GARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC ARENA MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
346.00
2,564.00GELLERMAN CONSTRUCTION CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,564.00
2,000.00GERTENSPARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
36.95BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,036.95
1,500.00GERVAIS, JACOB ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
337.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,837.50
3,100.00GETTY IMAGES COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
3,100.00
657.21GLEASON PRINTING MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
436.53PERFORMING ARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,093.74
43.00GOLD MEDAL OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
43.00
54.40GOLDSTAR ELECTRIC INC INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
54.40
1,107.75GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,107.75
295.00GRAFIX SHOPPE UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
295.00
538.80GRAINGER INC, WW FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
11.56DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
533.19WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS
268.40GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 16
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,351.95
1,027.30GREAT NORTHERN LANDSCAPES INC CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,027.30
3,095.50GREEN ACRES SPRINKLER CO IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,095.50
1,500.00GREEN LLC, HARRY ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,500.00ESCROWSDEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
4,000.00
230.00GROTE, DEBRA INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
230.00
472.08GROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE
472.08
1,122.00HAMILTON, MIKE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,122.00
200.00HAMILTON, PATRICK BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
200.00
43.21HAMPTON, BOB OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
43.21
59.59HANSON, ANDERS PRESCHOOL GENERAL SUPPLIES
59.59
120.36HASS, RACHEL COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
120.36
3,909.52HAWKINS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
5,420.43WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
9,329.95
1,017.00HCI CHEMTEC INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,017.00
3,346.00HEALTHPARTNERSHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 17
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
3,346.00
264.60HEDBERG SUPPLY OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
339.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
107.86WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
711.46
1,500.00HEIDER, CHAD ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,500.00
80.00HEINZ DISPENSING SOLUTIONS CONCESSIONS PROGRAM REVENUE
80.00
39.80HEISER, DEBRA ENGINEERING G & A MEETING EXPENSE
39.80
48.17HEMANN, COTY FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
48.17
765.00HENDERSON, TRACY SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
765.00
72.50HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
72.50
1,100.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
2,322.50POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
11,717.61POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE
1,672.20OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
8,247.30STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A PROPERTY TAXES
7,521.92STORM WATER UTILITY G&A PROPERTY TAXES
387.67PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
32,969.20
800.00HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE OPERATIONS TRAINING
800.00
3,047.71HENRICKSEN PSG FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER
14,925.26MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
17,972.97
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 18
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,582.91HICKS, MAGGIE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
1,582.91
34.51HILDESTAD, JODIE HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
250.00HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
284.51
1,305.00HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC GENERAL INFORMATION GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,305.00
113.61HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
107.94SEALCOATINGGENERAL SUPPLIES
121.89ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
39.97ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
368.70PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT GENERAL SUPPLIES
160.05WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
6.06SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
452.76PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
77.88PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
265.55NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
558.61BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
99.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS SMALL TOOLS
815.23BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
139.86REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,327.11
34.98HOME DEPOT CREDIT SRVCS WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
32.44WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
67.42
102.00HONEY & RYE BAKEHOUSE NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
102.00
400.00HOPKINS POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE G & A TRAINING
400.00
92.34HOPPE, MARK ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
92.34
90.00HUTCHINSON, KATHRYN INSPECTIONS G & A 1&2 SINGLE FAM. RENTAL
90.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 19
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,502.40I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,502.40
19.00IATNVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
19.00
682.73IDEAL SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
682.73
683.47IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
683.47SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
683.47SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
683.46STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
2,733.87
29.00INDELCOPARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
29.00
1,957.95INTEGRA TELECOM IT G & A TELEPHONE
1,957.95
125.00INT'L SOCIETY OF FIRE SERVICE INSTRUCTOR OPERATIONS TRAINING
125.00
830.00INTOXIMETERS INC POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
830.00
127.98INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
127.98
75.00IPMA-HR MINNESOTA HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
75.00
1,089.98I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,089.98
42.18J & F REDDY RENTS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
42.18
110.00JASMER, JERRY INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 20
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
973.64EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
1,083.64
225.00JDA DESIGN ARCHITECTS GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
88.00JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
88.00
70.17JERRY'S HARDWARE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
18.00IMS INFORMATION MANAGEMENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
13.11WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
388.43PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
34.31PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
524.02
1,083.01JOHN HENRY FOSTER MN WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,083.01
3,000.00JOHNSON, BRYAN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,000.00
150.00KAPOOR, TARUN INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
150.00
337.50KEENAN, MELISSA INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
337.50
1,334.99KEEPRS INC POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
1,334.99
754.62KELLER, JASMINE Z EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
754.62
5,000.00KEVITT EXCAVATING INC ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
5,000.00
2,395.00KEY ENTERPRISES LLC COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING
2,395.00
6,389.37KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 21
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,474.63WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,864.00
422.20KOERING, STEVE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
422.20
104.65KOSALKO, JONNA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
104.65
48.40KRESLINS, ULDIS & KATI INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
48.40
48.22KRIETE, DANIEL HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
48.22
786.26KRUELLE, BRYAN EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
786.26
443.75KRUGE-AIR INC BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
443.75
153.00KUBES, JON SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
153.00
103.06LAKES GAS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
103.06
882.00LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
882.00
397.42LARSON, JH CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
397.42
35.00LARSON, LINDA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
35.00
2,779.15LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
2,779.15
42.74LAWSON PRODUCTS INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
42.74
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 22
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
13,272.16LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
13,272.16
116,498.00LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
112,760.75UNINSURED LOSS B/S PREPAID EXPENSES
2,705.82UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
231,964.57
576.00LEICA GEOSYSTEMS INC ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
576.00
231.52LEWIS, DON POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
231.52
299.24LIBERTY ENVELOPE COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
299.24
152.00LIBERTY TIRE SERVICES LLC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
152.00
109.29LIEPKE, MERLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
109.29
7,227.93LINAEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
7,227.93
5,773.51LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
5,773.51
2,940.67LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
5,000.00POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
7,940.67
37,858.96LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
13,806.50TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
51,665.46
854.04LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
854.04
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 23
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,674.95LYNDA.COM INC IT G & A TRAINING
1,674.95
203.66M/A ASSOCIATES INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
203.66
2,690.28MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
455.95SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
10.01VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
3,156.24
13,079.96MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
13,079.96
469.66MARTENS, AFTON ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
69.76JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAVEL/MEETINGS
57.97JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP MEETING EXPENSE
597.39
500.00MCCHESNEY, CHARLIE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00
394.74MCCORMICK, MEG HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
394.74
64.00MDHWATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
64.00
19.52MENARDSROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
51.11INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
202.30FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
100.48WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
60.20PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
66.75PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
154.17WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
654.53
1,418.34METHODIST HOSPITAL SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
1,418.34
268.00METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 24
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
268.00
371,482.65METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
348,097.01OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
719,579.66
500.00MICHAEL PRODUCTIONS, GENE TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
500.00
3,404.13MIDSTATES EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY SEALCOATING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
3,404.13
37,080.00MIDWAY FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
37,080.00
11,250.00MIDWEST GROUNDCOVER PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
11,250.00
42.00MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES INC PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES
42.00
11,156.08MILLER DUNWIDDIE ARCHITECTURE PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
11,156.08
225.00MILLER, JAMES GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
535.50MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
535.50
149.07MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
149.07
615.00MINNESOTA BUREAU CRIMINAL APPREHENSION POLICE G & A TRAINING
615.00
221.49MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
221.49
198.40MINNESOTA CITY/COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
198.40
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 25
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
80.00MINNESOTA FIRE SVC CERT BD OPERATIONS TRAINING
80.00
8,841.90MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8,841.90
136.63MINNESOTA TRUCKING ASSOC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.63WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.62PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.62VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
546.50
78.00MINNETONKA, CITY OF ERU OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
78.00
539.20MINUTEMAN PRESS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
539.20
58.31MINVALCO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
242.48FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
4,217.00WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,517.79
150.00MN AWWA WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
150.00
430.00MN STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS ASSESSING G & A LICENSES
430.00
148.00MNFIAM BOOK SALES OPERATIONS TRAINING
148.00
1,250.00MOBIUS INC HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,250.00
311.00MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
311.00
20,000.00MOTOROLAPOLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
20,000.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 26
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
6,175.50M-R SIGN CO INC FABRICATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
6,175.50
205.00MRPABASKETBALLSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
205.00
40.00MSSATRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
40.00
306.15MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
295.50GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
601.65
240.00MUNICI-PALS INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
60.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
300.00
452.50MVTL LABORATORIES REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
452.50
40.33MYERS TIRE SUPPLY CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
40.33
1,430.35NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
493.62PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
517.80VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
238.14GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,679.91
185.00NATIONAL SPORTS PRODUCTS PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
185.00
569.10ND CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
569.10
68.46NEP CORP PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
387.69VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
456.15
134.09NORTH CENTRAL REFORESTATION INC REFORESTATION LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 27
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
134.09
22.44NORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
22.44
2,519.11NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,519.11
2,500.00NORTHSIDE SEPTIC SERVICES ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
25.00NORTHSTAR CHAPTER APA HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
25.00
677.70OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
677.70
249.69OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
67.16NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
316.85
63.19OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
648.75COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
70.70COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
187.27GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
343.12POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
323.34OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
620.06INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
162.19PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
6.30HOUSING REHAB G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
5.39WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
246.86ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
53.25WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
2,730.42
123.87OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
123.87
262.50OLSON, AIMEE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 28
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
262.50OLSON, ERIC GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
89.00OLSON, MARNEY HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAINING
9.09HOUSING REHAB G & A MEETING EXPENSE
450.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM GENERAL SUPPLIES
548.09
53.00ON SITE SANITATION FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
53.00
16.15O'REILLY AUTO PARTS GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
16.15
201.63OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
201.63
281.75PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
281.75
4,334.00PAINTERS GEAR INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
4,334.00
6,000.00PALTRIN, LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
6,000.00
1,000.00-PARK PRO SHOP REC CENTER BUILDING RENT REVENUE
2,110.50SKATE RENTAL PROGRAM REVENUE
445.50SKATE SHARPENING PROGRAM REVENUE
1,556.00
2,335.82PARKER, JON EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
2,335.82
771.00PARSONS ELECTRIC REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
771.00
350.00PATRIOT 2000 INC PATCHING-PERMANENT EQUIPMENT PARTS
350.00
825.00PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 29
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
825.00
20.52PETTY CASH GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
15.98HUMAN RESOURCES CITE
12.00POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
20.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
38.56ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
31.00ENGINEERING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
38.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LICENSES
7.01ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
2,650.00PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH PETTY
5.29CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OFFICE SUPPLIES
15.42CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL GENERAL SUPPLIES
20.98CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
12.60CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL MEETING EXPENSE
11.74WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
21.65WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
21.24WATER UTILITY G&A MEETING EXPENSE
38.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
17.93PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
13.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
101.14VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
3,125.06
30.54PETTY CASH - WWNC WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
49.48WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
6.38PRESCHOOLGENERAL SUPPLIES
22.90HOME SCHOOL GENERAL SUPPLIES
109.30
3,388.93PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT CITY POOLED INVESTMENTS BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
3,388.93
926.25PHILIP'S TREE CARE INC SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
926.25
1,320.00PIERCE PHOTOGRAPHY, SARAH COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,320.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 30
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
17,025.00PLACEGENERAL FUND G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
17,025.00
774.05PLAISTED COMPANIES INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
774.05
485.40PLANT & FLANGED EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
485.40
543.00PLANTRA INC REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
543.00
100,000.00PLAYPOWER LT FARMINGTON INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
100,000.00
110.00PLEAACLERICALTRAINING
110.00
116.02POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
116.02
235.80POPP.COM INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE
235.80
1,350.00POST BOARD POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
1,350.00
10,000.00POSTMASTERRESIDENTIAL/BUSINESS COMMUNIC POSTAGE
10,000.00
141.14POWERS, STEVE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
141.14
112.00PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
112.00
192.26PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
192.25WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
192.26SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
192.25STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
769.02
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 31
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
947.00PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
947.00
81.99PREMIUM WATERS INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
81.99
80.00PRINTERS SERVICE INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
80.00
150.00PRO AUTO DETAILING PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
150.00
700.00PROFESSIONAL SPORTS PUBLICATIONS AQUATIC PARK G & A ADVERTISING
700.00
40.00PROHASKA, CALEB INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING
40.00
3,000.00PURNELL, THOMAS & EMILY ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,000.00
2,430.65Q3 CONTRACTING WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,593.60STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
4,024.25
40.49QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
40.49
66,500.00R & R SPECIALTIES PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
66,500.00
6,000.00RAE & RAY PROPERTIES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
6,000.00
3,960.50RAINBOW TREECARE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
3,960.50
20,000.00RAMSEY EXCAVATING ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
20,000.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 32
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
463.37RAMSPERGER, ANGELA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
463.37
3,943.64RANDY'S SANITATION INC FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
1,143.67BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
640.85SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,672.35REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
7,400.51
50.00RAPPAPORT, JULIE ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY GENERAL SUPPLIES
50.00
31.32RASMUSSEN, SUE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
31.32
379.38RECREATION SUPPLY CO AQUATIC PARK G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
379.38
12,000.00RED CEDAR STEEL ERECTORS INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
12,000.00
192.22REGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
192.22
2,640.00REINDERS INC TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,640.00
365.78RETROFIT COMPANIES INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.73REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
628.51
1,792.18REUVERS, TERRY EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
1,792.18
4,915.54RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,350.00CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S LEASE PAYBLE - LONG TERM PORTN
6,265.54
3,999.00RIVER CITY SUPPLY LLC OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
3,999.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 33
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
143.21ROSHOLT, PAUL OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
143.21
289.00ROTARY CLUB OF SLP ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
289.00
1,668.00RTVISION INC ENGINEERING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
1,668.00
1,208.17SAFE-FAST INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,208.17
71.99SAM'S CLUB GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT
61.78-POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
200.00NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
80.45JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP MEETING EXPENSE
59.88OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
229.24OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
579.78
60.03SAURER, MARTI INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
60.03
507.53SCAN AIR FILTER INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
507.53
29.98SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
29.98
2,144.52SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,144.52
149.00SCHNITKER, MICHELE HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAINING
149.00
63.18SCHOMER, KELLEY ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
63.18
1,724.77SCHWICKERT'S TECTA AMERICA LLC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,724.77
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 34
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
51.00SEDGWICK HEATING & AIR INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
51.00
32,383.24SEHSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
32,383.24
8.27SELBYG, ANNE HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
8.27
1,780.88SHERWIN WILLIAMS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
33.67PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
1,814.55
2,461.97SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO PAINTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,461.97
102.33SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11.77FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
62.67POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
47.93WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
224.70
489.00SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
489.00
3,986.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,986.00
1,109.84SIMON, TIM HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
1,109.84
641.00SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
641.00
119.48SIR KNIGHT CLEANERS OPERATIONS TESTING & CALIBRATION
119.48
3,388.00SITEIMPROVE INC COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,388.00
582.61SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 35
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,008.00PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,590.61
136.00SKALLET, DAVID INSPECTIONS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
136.00
35.46SKELLY, GABRIEL HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
35.46
450.00SKUNK HOLLOW LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT
450.00
1,379.10SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,379.10
2,950.00SNYDER ELECTRIC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,950.00
4,495.00SOLARWINDSTECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
4,495.00
1,736.44SOURCE INC OF MISSOURI TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT DATACOMMUNICATIONS
1,736.44
14,845.05SPACK CONSULTING ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
14,845.05
600.00SPECIAL SERVICES GROUP LLC POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
600.00
54.56SPOK INC OPERATIONS TELEPHONE
54.56
1,600.47SPRINTIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS
3,334.03CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
4,934.50
796.03SPS COMPANIES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
178.87PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
188.10ARENA MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,163.00
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 36
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
5,239.98SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC ESCROWS GENERAL
5,239.98
500.00ST LOUIS PARK FRIENDS OF THE ARTS JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
500.00
100.00ST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY COMM DEV PLANNING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
100.00
1,011.62ST PAUL, CITY OF PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,011.62
194.48STAR TRIBUNE ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
194.48
181.04STEPP MANUFACTURING CO INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
181.04
4,815.01STEVENS ENGINEERS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,815.01
71.99STREICHER'S GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
23.99ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
847.79OPERATIONSUNIFORMS
943.77
92,397.69STRUCTURES HARDSCAPES SPECIALISTS INC CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
92,397.69
51.00SUBURBAN ELECTRIC INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
51.00
32,835.30SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
32,835.30
51,248.78SWAN COMPANIES PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
51,248.78
1,074.03SWANSON, MITCH EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
1,074.03
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 37
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
37Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
640.00SWEET DREAMS FOR KIDS PARK BUILDINGS RENT REVENUE
640.00
370.00TABLES AND TENTS RENTAL COMPANY NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
370.00
172.86TELELANGUAGE INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
172.86
417.44TENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO.REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
239.45GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
247.10BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
903.99
370.16TERMINAL SUPPLY CO GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
370.16
77.50TERMINIX INT BRICK HOUSE (1324)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
77.50WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
105.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
260.00
1,040.00TERRAMAX INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,040.00
170.00THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
170.00
500.00TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING
500.00
986.50TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
986.50
60.68TITAN MACHINERY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
60.68
1,640.13TKDAWATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,640.13
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 38
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
38Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
31.59TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
31.59
2,013.00TRADE DIRECT FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,013.00
2,500.70TRAFFIC CONTROL CORP RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,500.70
115.76TRANT, AARON POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
115.76
204.00TRAUTMANN, JOHN SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
204.00
2,724.06TREE TRUST PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,724.06
29,903.40TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
29,903.40
167.50TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
167.50
58.82TWIN CITY HARDWARE PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
58.82
1,970.00TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
695.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,665.00
560.39UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
560.39
720.61UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,509.29SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,789.44PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
517.00RESERVESOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
7,536.34
2,500.00UNITED ARTIST COLLABORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 39
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
39Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,500.00
474.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAY
474.00
425.00UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE POLICE G & A TRAINING
425.00
300.00UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
300.00
4,000.00UPIN, DAVID ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
4,000.00
560.00URBAN LAND INSTITUTE ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
560.00
561.85VAIL, LORI HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
47.56HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
609.41
96.12VAUGHAN, JIM NATURAL RESOURCES G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
96.12
40.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
40.00
50.04VERIZON WIRELESS SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
13,129.00CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
70.16CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
13,249.20
364.74VICKERMAN, MARGE HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
364.74
232.55-VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
968.57WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
55.01WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
30.90PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
86.40PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
90.74TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 40
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
40Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
999.07
434.60WAHL'S ENTERPRISES GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
434.60
287.86WALTHER, SEAN COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
12.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MEETING EXPENSE
299.86
1,520.00WARNER'S OUTDOOR SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,520.00
1,130.00WARNING LITES OF MN INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,130.00
780.40WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
780.40
533.48WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
533.48
1,281.43WEISS, DEANNA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
1,281.43
150.00WEXLER, IAN INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
150.00
1,768.01WHEELER HARDWARE FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,768.01
6,956.00WHEELER LUMBER LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
6,956.00
529.00WHITE, PERRY PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
529.00
736.68WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS
50.58OPERATIONSUNIFORMS
787.26
106.92WODTKE, RON WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 41
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
41Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
106.92
10.00WOLFF, JOHN OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
10.00
140.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS OAK HILL SLASH PAD GENERAL SUPPLIES
447.50VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
587.50
250.00WREEVES AND ASSOCIATES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
250.00
12,729.85WSB ASSOC INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
12,729.85
233.13WYATT, LISA HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
233.13
27,214.75XCEL ENERGY GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC SERVICE
24.18OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
23,388.89PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
24,567.69WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,074.07REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
6,208.06SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,818.61STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
6,723.45PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
27.92BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
48.45WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
534.08WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
12,467.02REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE
105,097.17
1,122.20YAEKEL, DANIEL OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
1,122.20
865.00YTS COMPANIES LLC TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
865.00
1,092.62ZACKS INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
1,092.62
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 42
5/26/2016CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:47:41R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
42Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
5/27/20164/23/2016 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
18,000.00ZAN ASSOCIATES HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
18,000.00
515.26ZANDER, LOIS HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
515.26
2,276.00ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC SWEEPING EQUIPMENT PARTS
2,276.00
76.75ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
48.55REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
125.30
400.00ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
400.00
86.54ZIP PRINTING PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
86.54WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
86.54PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
137.44AQUATIC PARK G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
397.06
Report Totals 3,308,312.19
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 43
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance
amending Chapter 26 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances pertaining to Subdivisions, and to
approve ordinance summary for publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUMMARY: Staff initiated a request to amend the subdivision code. The proposed ordinance
was reviewed by the City Attorney. The proposed ordinance is attached for review.
If the proposed changes are adopted, the subdivision ordinance will govern the subdivision of land
and defer the specifications of storm water management, erosion control, tree replacement, and
infrastructure design and construction to the appropriate city codes and policies. The ordinance
will also clarify the process for administrative approval of certain applications without changing
the policies for these activities.
In addition to the clarifications noted above, the amendment also proposes policy changes to the
way subdivision variances, sidewalks, and easements are reviewed and processed. The criteria
used to review variances are proposed to be considered in the proposed ordinance, instead of the
current requirement that they all be met for a variance to be approved. The required sidewalk and
easement configurations may be altered as recommended by the Director of Engineering without
the need for a variance.
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. 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 approved the first
reading on May 16, 2016.
NEXT STEPS: If approved, the summary ordinance will be published on June 16, 2016, and the
ordinance will take effect on June 26, 2016.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance for Publication
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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO.____-16
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO SUBDIVISIONS
The amendments will update the design standards, clarify the variance criteria, amend the
administrative process, and make general clarifications to the ordinance.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council June 6, 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: June 16, 2016
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.
Secs. 26-85--26-120. Reserved.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 3
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 4
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 5
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 6
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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 7
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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 8
(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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 9
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.
Secs. 26-1110--26-40. Reserved.
ARTICLE II. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT*
Sec. 26-41. Nonplatted subdivisions.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 10
(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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 11
(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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 12
(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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 13
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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 14
(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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 15
(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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 16
(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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 17
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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 18
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:
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 19
(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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 20
(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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 21
(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.
(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,
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 22
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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 23
(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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 24
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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 25
(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).
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 26
(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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 27
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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 28
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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 29
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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 30
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.
(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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 31
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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 32
(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
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 33
Alleys (Lanes)
Center Line Gradients
Minimum……..0.5%
Maximum……8.0%
DELETE
IMAGE
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 34
Private Residential Streets
Center Line Gradients
Minimum……0.5%
Maximum…...6.0%
DELETE
IMAGE
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 35
Residential Streets
Center Line Gradients
Minimum……0.5%
Maximum…...6.0%
DELETE
IMAGE
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 36
Commercial Streets
Center Line Gradients
Minimum……0.5%
Maximum…...4.0%
DELETE
IMAGE
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code 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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code 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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code 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.
(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:
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 40
(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:
Density: Units
Per Acre*
Land Dedication
Percentage
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 41
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.
(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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 42
(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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 43
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.
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 44
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:
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 45
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
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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 46
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
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.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 47
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code 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 June 6, 2016
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment Related to the Subdivision Code Page 49
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 and 7341 Hwy 7
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance
Vacating Public Right of Way and Drainage and Utility Easements at 7250 and 7341 State Hwy 7
and authorize publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable – The Council approved the first reading of the
ordinance vacating the easements at its May 16 meeting.
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
Ordinance
Summary 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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Second 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 occurred at the May 16th City Council meeting at which time the Council
approved the first reading of an ordinance vacating the easements.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Title: Second 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 June 16, 2016
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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO. ____-16
AN ORDINANCE VACATING PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS
7250 and 7341 STATE HIGHWAY 7
This ordinance states that 7250 and 7341 State Highway 7 will vacate easements as provided in
the full text of this ordinance.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council June 6, 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: June 16, 2016
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 5
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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 6
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7Page 7
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c) Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7Page 8
¬«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 June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Vacating Easements & ROW at 7250 & 7341 State Hwy 7 Page 9
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License – Parktacular Inc.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor
License for Parktacular Inc. for their Annual Parktacular Celebration Rock the Block Party to be
held June 17, 2016, at the Town Green located at Excelsior and Grand, 3815 Grand Way.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are all of the requirements met to allow the temporary liquor
license to be issued?
BACKGROUND: The Parktacular 2016 Community Celebration will be held June 16-19.
Parktacular, Inc., 3700 Monterey Drive, has made an application for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor
License for the Parktacular Rock the Block Party scheduled for Friday, June 17, at the Excelsior
& Grand Town Green. Liquor will be available during the hours of 6-11 p.m. and the Lions Club
will also be selling food at the event. The outdoor concert entertainment will be provided by the
Prince tribute band Chase and Ovation.
The Police Department has completed the background investigation on the main principals and
has found no reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant has met all requirements for
issuance of the license, and staff is recommending approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100
per day of the event which is funded by Parktacular, Inc.
VISION CONSIDERATION: The annual Parktacular Street Community Event supports the
strategic direction of being a connected and engaged community by increasing use of existing
gathering places.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Map
Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant – City Clerk’s Office
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director/Operations and Recreation
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Temporary Liquor License – Parktacular Inc.
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The 2016 Parktacular Event is an annual celebration, with many sponsors and
volunteers promoting a spirit of pride, a sense of community and an atmosphere of celebration for
all residents of the City of St. Louis Park. Various sponsors, along with Discover St Louis Park,
have donated funds to Parktacular to sponsor the Rock the Block Party, which includes
entertainment, food, and beverages.
Per State Statute 340A.404, Subd. 10, a Temporary On-sale Liquor License may provide that the
licensee can contract for intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of a full-year On-
Sale Intoxicating Liquor License issued by any municipality. Parktacular has contracted with the
St Louis Park Frank H. Lundberg American Legion Post 282 to provide alcoholic beverages at the
event from 6-11 p.m. to anyone 21 years of age and older. The American Legion will be
coordinating and providing the staff required to check ID’s and wrist bands to ensure that no
alcohol will be sold to minors. Police officers will also be on duty at the event.
Per City Code Section 3-33, “No person shall possess open containers of alcoholic beverages or
consume any alcoholic beverages on public streets, public parking lots…or on private property
generally open to the public unless possession or consumption is during a specific event on such
property which is approved by the city.” Attached is a map of the Excelsior and Grand Town Green
showing the fenced off premises where liquor will be allowed for the Rock the Block Party.
The required certificate of liquor liability insurance to cover the event will be submitted to the
Parktacular Board and the city Liaison.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Many volunteers will be monitoring the crowd at the Rock
the Block Party. There will be a “dump bucket” at each entrance/exit. After the 11 p.m. closing,
the area will be cleaned. The Police Department has indicated that there have been no incidents
reported during previous block parties.
NEXT STEPS: After City Council approval of the Temporary Liquor License application, the
State application is submitted to the Alcohol Enforcement Division of the Minnesota Department
of Public Safety for final approval.
PARKTACULAR BLOCK PARTY
JUNE 17, 2016
Alcohol permitted only in the fenced area
Lion
s
C
lub
Food
Sa
le
s& Ame
r
ican
Leg
ion
L
iquo
r
Sa
le
s
Stage
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4d)
Title: Temporary Liquor License – Parktacular Inc.Page 3
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approve Consultant Contract for MSA Rehabilitation Project - Texas Ave. - Project No.
4017-1101
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize execution of a professional services contract
with Kimley Horn in the amount of $195,200 for the Municipal State Aid (MSA) Rehabilitation
Project- Texas Ave (Highway 7 to Minnetonka Blvd) Project No. 4017-1101.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to continue to implement the city’s
Pavement Management Program?
SUMMARY: In 2017, Texas Avenue between Highway 7 and Minnetonka Boulevard is proposed
to be rehabilitated. This street is an important north/south route in the City and is designated as a
Municipal State Aid (MSA) road which makes it eligible for state funding (gas tax dollars). In
order to qualify for funding, the road needs to be constructed to state aid standards. Given work
load demands, consultant assistance is needed for the study and design of the proposed
rehabilitation project. A request for proposal (RFP) was sent to four consultants that the
Engineering Dept. has worked with in the past and that are qualified to complete this project.
A total of four (4) proposals were received for this project. A summary of the results is shown
below:
CONTRACTOR AMOUNT
Kimley Horn $195,200
Bolton & Menk, Inc. $196,434
WSB and Associates, Inc. $197,673
SEH
$212,530
A review of the proposals indicates Kimley Horn provided the best value work plan. Kimley Horn
is a reputable consultant that has successfully completed worked for the City before.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is included in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) for 2017. Funding will be provided by a combination of MSA,
Utility, and General Obligation Bonds (Connect the Park!).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Location Map
Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Approve Consultant Contract for MSA Rehabilitation Project - Texas Ave - Project No. 4017-1101
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: In 2017, Texas Avenue between Highway 7 and Minnetonka Boulevard is
proposed to be rehabilitated. This road serves many residents and is an important north/ south
route in the City. This road is also a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road which is eligible for state
gas tax dollars for rehabilitation projects. In order to qualify for funding, the road needs to be
constructed to state aid standards. What follows is a summary for this project.
Public Process:
Engineering will host an open house this summer to gather public input prior to starting the
preliminary design. Another open house will be scheduled this fall to inform the public about the
proposed design. In early 2017, the city council will hold a public hearing prior to deciding on
whether to move forward with the project. City staff will present the recommended design along
with public input received from the neighborhood meetings.
Pavement Rehabilitation:
A team of staff members from Streets, Utilities, and Engineering worked together to select streets
and to recommend appropriate rehabilitation techniques for inclusion in the CIP. The pavement
preservation technique chosen by staff for Texas Avenue is a full reconstruct. A full reconstruct
consists of the removal the curb and gutter, pavement, and sidewalk at the back of curb. In addition
to the reconstruct, staff is anticipating the need to upgrade the curb ramps to meet the American
with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the reconstruction of some of the existing retaining walls.
Private Utility Replacement:
Centerpoint Energy will be replacing their 24 inch high pressure gas main on this segment of Texas
Avenue in 2017. This work will be quite intrusive and will disrupt traffic and/ or parking on Texas
Avenue. This is part of a larger regional project which extends into Hopkins. Staff has noticed an
increase in the number of leaks on this line with the most recent occurring less than two weeks
ago. Centerpoint has plans to continue the replacement of their pipeline north of Minnetonka
Boulevard in 2020.
City Utility Construction.
As a part of all of our street rehabilitation projects, the City evaluates the condition of the existing
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain. At this time it is anticipated that only minor
replacement of this infrastructure is necessary.
Design of Texas Avenue
A corridor study is included with this contract and will help guide the City to the final design of
Texas Avenue. The Comprehensive Plan designates Texas Avenue as a three lane road section.
Also the Connect the Park! Bikeway, Sidewalk and Trail plan includes a bikeway on this segment
of Texas Avenue. Using the existing traffic data and input from residents, the consultant will
recommend a typical street section for approval by City Council.
Proposal Evaluation:
A request for proposal (RFP) was sent to four consultants who engineering has worked with in the
past and are qualified to complete this project. The RFPs were reviewed based on four criteria
which was cost, work plan/ schedule, qualifications/ experience of the personnel working on the
project, and understanding of the project objectives. A review of the proposals indicated that
Kimley Horn provided the best value for the design of Texas Avenue. The consultant contract
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Title: Approve Consultant Contract for MSA Rehabilitation Project - Texas Ave - Project No. 4017-1101
covers all preliminary aspects of the project up to final plans. Another contract will be needed
when the final design has been determined. The table below summarizes the costs received by the
consultants.
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Kimley Horn $195,200
Bolton & Menk, Inc. $196,434
WSB and Associates, Inc. $197,673
SEH
$212,530
Proposed Schedule:
The following is the proposed project schedule:
1. Survey work completed July 2016
2. Corridor Study / Concept Plans August 2016
3. 60 percent plans November 2016
4. Final Plans January 2016
5. Construction April – Nov 2017
")5
")20
¬«7 PENNSYLVANIA29TH
TEXASMINNETONKA
O A K L
E
A
F
32ND
LOUISIANA28TH
WALKERCA
VE
L
L
LAKE
WALKER
32ND
31ST
BOONE VIRG
IN
IA
RHODE ISLANDAQUILA34TH GORHAMTAFT35THBOONEWYOMING33RD
36TH WYOMING31ST SUMTER32ND
32 1/2
31ST
37TH
33RD
29TH
BOONEYUKONUTAH34 1/2XYLON LOUISIANASUMTERSUMTERXYLON
VIRGINIA31ST
QUEBECQUEBECZINRANXYLONYUKONOREGONVIRGINIANEVADAPENNSYLVANIACAVELLMARYLANDQUEBECQUEBECOREGONXYLONVIRGINIAWYOMINGUTAH37TH 2NDQUEBECVICTORI
A
AQUILAAQUILABO
O
N
E VIRGINIA
PRIVATEKENTUCKYVIRGINIAPRIV
A
T
E AQUILAUTAHCAVELL28TH
0 0.15 0.3 0.45 0.6Miles
¯
Legend
2017 MSA Street Rehabilitation
City Limits
2017 MSA Street Rehabilitation (Texas Ave. S.)
City Project 4017-1101
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4e)
Title: Approve Consultant Contract for MSA Rehabilitation Project - Texas Ave - Project No. 4017-1101 Page 4
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Reject Bids for Concrete Replacement – Project No. 4016-0003
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to reject bids for the Concrete Replacement – Project No.
4016-0003 and authorize re-advertisement for bids.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable
SUMMARY: Bids were received on May 24, 2016 for the annual repair and construction of
sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. This annual
construction contract addresses needed concrete repairs in the pavement management area
scheduled for sealcoat the following year. These improvements are in addition to the sidewalks
installed as part of Connect the Park.
Only one (1) bid was received for this project. A summary of the bid results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Concrete Idea $541,845.00
Engineer’s Estimate $440,907.50
Staff has reviewed the bid submitted and has found that the lowest bid was $100,937.50 (23%)
above the Engineer’s Estimate. With only one bid received and the unit prices for concrete
replacement considerably over the estimate, staff recommends rejecting this bid and re-advertising
the project.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These projects were planned for and included
in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program with an estimated budget of $ 463,500.00.
Based on the low bid received the total project costs are estimated to be $541,845.00, which means
an additional funding source would need to be identified. This project is funded by the Public
Works Operations budget, Stormwater Utility and the Pavement Management. Funding details
are provided in the Discussion section.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Reject Bids for Concrete Replacement – Project No. 4016-0003
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Bids were received on May 24, 2016 for the annual repair and construction of
sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. This annual
construction contract addresses needed concrete repairs in the pavement management area
scheduled for sealcoat the following year. These improvements are in addition to the sidewalks
installed as part of Connect the Park.
Staff annually surveys the condition of sidewalks to identify hazards for repair. Panels of sidewalk
that are cracked or have been lifted by tree roots to create trip hazards that need to be removed and
replaced are included in this contract. Curb and gutter with similar defects that create drainage or
safety problems are also repaired. Deteriorating catch basins that are within the work area will
also be repaired or rebuilt.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on April 28, 2016. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor Quest CDN.com.
Seven contractors/vendors purchased plan sets including two Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBE) and one Veterans Preferred business.
Funding Details
Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are revised as follows:
Expenditures
Construction Cost (proposed contract) $ 541,845.00
Engineering & Administration (7%) $ 37,929.50
Total $ 579,774.50
Revenues
PW Operations Funds $ 95,000.00
Pavement Management Funds $ 258,500.00
Stormwater Utility Funds $ 110,000.00
Total $ 463,500.00
Construction Timeline:
It is staff’s recommendation to reject the bids received in May and rebid the contract later this year
with a new construction completion date of June 30, 2017. This reschedule will not impact the
timing of the associated projects.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Traffic Study No. 664: Authorize Permit Parking Restrictions at 2725 Georgia
Avenue So.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of permit
parking restrictions at 2725 Georgia Avenue So.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The restriction is allowed per the City’s established regulatory
authority.
SUMMARY: In May, staff received a request by Joanne Girard to restrict on-street parking in
front of her house at 2725 Georgia Avenue So. Joanne and Steven Girard need accessible parking
for transportation pickup and drop off for medical needs. Due to other on-street parking which
occurs on this street, Joanne Girard has requested the City install permit parking in front of their
home.
Staff has discussed this request with Joanne Girard. Installation of handicapped parking signs is
not feasible since the parking stall design requirements cannot be met on this local street.
However, the City’s Traffic Policy and past practice do allow for permit parking in this situation.
It has been the City’s practice to use permit parking, which can then be removed when the
individual needing the access no longer resides there or no longer needs the access.
Staff has verified the need for the request and supports the installation of permit parking for
handicap access at 2725 Georgia Avenue So. This recommendation is based on the following:
1. The residents of the household have limited mobility and are eligible for a disabled
person’s parking permit.
2. Parking conflicts with neighbors will be eliminated.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost of enacting these controls is
minimal and will come out of the general operating budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Map
Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, Project Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Traffic Study No. 664: Authorize Permit Parking Restrictions at 2725 Georgia Avenue So.
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PERMIT PARKING RESTRICTIONS
AT 2725 GEORGIA AVENUE SO
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 664
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and
has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to establish a parking restriction based upon
permit issuance in front of 2725 Georgia Avenue So.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Engineering Director is hereby authorized to install permit parking at 2725 Georgia
Avenue So.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 6, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: Traffic Study No. 664: Authorize Permit Parking Restrictions at 2725 Georgia Avenue So.
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 664
2725 Georgia Avenue So.
(Permit Parking)
PERMIT PARKING
2725 Georgia Avenue
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approve Consultant Contract for 37th St. Roadway and Bridge Reconstruction - Project
No. 4017-1700
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize execution of an amendment to a contract with
WSB and Associates in the amount of $142,510 for the design of 37th Street Roadway and Bridge
Reconstruction between Boone Ave and Aquila Ave - Project No. 4017-1700.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to continue to implement our
Pavement Management program?
SUMMARY: The bridge on 37th Street over Minnehaha Creek is scheduled to be reconstructed
in 2017. In 2013, a contract was signed with WSB and Associates for $74,253 for the design of
the 37th Street Bridge. The scope of work included in this contract was for replacement of the
bridge only with very little road design and no fees for temporary right of way acquisition. This
will be an addendum to the original contract in the amount of $142,510 for the changes not
included in the original scope. If approved the total contract for design of the roadway, bridge,
and temporary right of way acquisition will be $216,763.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is included in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) for 2017. Funding will be provided by a combination of Federal
Funds, Utility, Pavement Management, and proposed Special Assessments.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Location Map
Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Approve Consultant Contract for 37th St. Roadway and Bridge Reconstruction - Project No. 4017-1700
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The bridge on 37th Street over Minnehaha Creek is scheduled to be
reconstructed in 2017. This bridge was inspected in 2011 and the inspection revealed the need for
replacement. This bridge is a channel span bridge which is no longer constructed because MnDOT
has had a lot of issues with them. The plan is to remove the existing bridge / pedestrian bridge and
replace with a new bridge with sidewalk on both sides.
In 2013, a contract was signed with WSB and Associates for $74,253 for the design of the 37th
Street Bridge. The scope of work included in this contract was for replacement of the bridge only
with very little road design and no fees for temporary right of way acquisition. This will be an
addendum to the original contract in the amount of $142,510 for the changes not included in the
original scope. If approved the total contract for design of the roadway, bridge, and temporary
right of way acquisition will be $216,763.
After the consultant contract was signed in 2013, the city was informed that the bridge was
designated for Federal Funding. Additional work is required by the consultant in order to qualify
for Federal Funding. The City is expecting to receive $1,200,000 in Federal Funding for the
construction of the bridge.
This project will require a Project Memorandum (PM) due to Federal Funding. The PM document
identifies social, economic, and environmental impacts associated with the alternatives identified
and the recommended alternative. The bridge also passes over parkland, therefore parkland
impacts will need to be addressed through a process known as Section 4f.
During preliminary design it was determined that the bridge would need to be raised to meet the
requirements of the Department of Natural Resources. The estimated raise of the bridge is
approximately 3 feet. Raising the bridge requires significant road design to connect the new bridge
into the existing infrastructure. The raising also requires a lot of temporary right of way to be able
to enter private property for construction. 37th Street will need to be reconstructed between Boone
Avenue and Aquila to be able to construct the new bridge.
Below is a summary of what was not included in the original scope of work:
Federal permitting documentation
Additional survey from Aquila Avenue to Boone Avenue
Geotechnical borings for the roadway design
Feasibility study for special assessments
Road design due to raising the bridge
Right of way services for the acquisition of temporary right of way
Proposed Schedule:
The following is the proposed project schedule:
1. Preliminary Plans complete September 2016
2. Final Plans January 2017
3. Construction June – Oct 2017
It is staff’s recommendation that an amendment to the contract with WSB and Associates be
executed in the amount of $142,510 for the additional work.
¥f¤
")20¬«7AQUILAAVESZINRANAVES YUKONAVES35TH ST W
36TH ST W WYOMINGAVESBOONEAVES34 1/2 ST W
XYLONAVESYUKONAVESVIRGINIAAVESDIVISION STPHILLIPS PKWY37TH ST W
A Q U I L A A V E S T O W B H W Y7
S E R V I C E D R H I G H W A Y 7KNOLLWOODMALLACCESRDBOONEAVESUTAHAVES
P R IV A T E R DPRIVATERDPRIVATERD
0 250 500 750 1,000Feet
¯
Legend
37th Street Construction Area
¥f¤37th Street Bridge Construction Area
City Limits
37th St. W. Bridge and Street Construction Area
Knollwood Mall
Target
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Approve Consultant Contract for 37th St. Roadway and Bridge Reconstruction - Project No. 4017-1700 Page 3
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Special Assessment – Sewer Service Line Repair at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment
for the repair of the sewer service line at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN
P.I.D. 17-117-21-14-0106.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously
established by the City Council.
SUMMARY: Brian and Anna Kelly, owners of the single family residence at 3225 Hampshire
Avenue South, have requested the city to authorize the repair of the sewer service line for their
home and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the city’s special assessment
policy.
The city requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare
within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or sewer
service lines for existing homes was adopted by the City Council in 1996. This program was put into
place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like this are
unexpectedly required.
Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed, submitted, and approved by city
staff. The property owners hired a contractor and repaired the sewer service line in compliance with
current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work, this repair qualifies for the city’s special
assessment program. The property owners have petitioned the city to authorize the sewer service line
repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined
to be $2,800.00.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City has funds in place to finance the
cost of this special assessment.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Jay Hall, Utility Superintendent
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Patricia A. Sulander, Accountant
Tim Simon, Controller
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Special Assessment – Sewer Service Line Repair at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPAIR OF THE SEWER SERVICE LINE AT
3225 HAMPSHIRE AVENUE SOUTH, ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
P.I.D. 17-117-21-14-0106
WHEREAS, the Property Owners at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South, have petitioned the
City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line for
the single family residence located at 3225 Hampshire Avenue South; and
WHEREAS, the Property Owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Utility Superintendent related to the repair of the sewer service line.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The petition from the Property Owners requesting the approval and special assessment for the
sewer service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The sewer service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and specifications
approved by the Public Works Department and Department of Inspections is hereby accepted.
3. The total cost for the repair of the sewer service line is accepted at $2,800.00.
4. The Property Owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal
from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other
statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
5. The Property Owners have agreed to pay the City for the total cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 4.00%.
6. The Property Owners have executed an agreement with the City and all other documents
necessary to implement the repair of the sewer service line and the special assessment of all
costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 6, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Change Order No. 1 to Contract - Project No. 5015-5001, Water Meter Replacement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Change Order No. 1 to Contract/Project No.
5015-5001, Water Meter Replacement.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve a two-month extension to
the contract performance period?
SUMMARY: On February 17, 2015, the City Council awarded a contract in the amount of
$3,423,102.70 to Ferguson Waterworks for the Water Meter Replacement Project – Project No.
5015-5001. The project was to replace approximately 12,800 residential meters and 800
commercial and irrigation meters. Notice to proceed was given to Ferguson Waterworks on March
24, 2015, with a substantial project completion date of June 30, 2016.
Ferguson has now made their way through the entire city having replaced approximately 12,300
residential meters. City staff are making extensive efforts to contact the remaining 500 residential
property owners so we can get them scheduled for replacement. With the residential effort being
mostly complete, the contractor has started replacing commercial and irrigation meters. As of June
1, Ferguson has replaced approximately 60 of the 800 commercial and irrigation meters.
Ferguson Waterworks has requested a four-month contract extension citing procedural delays
associated with our extensive customer service requirements for scheduling notification, meter
replacement and service shut-offs. Staff has reviewed the extension request with the contractor
and feels a two-month extension to both the substantial and final completion dates is acceptable.
All other terms of the Contract will remain the same.
Contract Term Original Date Revised Date
Substantial Completion June 30, 2016 August 31, 2016
Final Completion August 31, 2016 October 31, 2016
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Change Order No. 1
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Change Order No. 1 to Contract - Project No. 5015-5001, Water Meter Replacement
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On February 17, 2015, the City Council awarded a contract in the amount of
$3,423,102.70 to Ferguson Waterworks for the Water Meter Replacement Project – Project No.
5015-5001.
The project was to replace approximate 12,800 residential meters and 800 commercial and
irrigation meters. The project is being funded through the 2015 and 2016 water and sewer budgets.
Notice to proceed was given to the Contractor, Ferguson Waterworks, on March 24, 2015, with a
substantial completion date of June 30, 2016.
Ferguson has now made their way through the entire city, providing four separate scheduling
notices and replacing approximately 12,300 meters. The remaining 500 meters belong to non-
responsive property owners. City staff are making extensive efforts to contact these owners so we
can get them scheduled for replacement as follows:
Non-responsive property owners are called (if a phone number is available), door-knocked,
and posted with a shut-off notice.
To date, we have been able to avoid shutting off water to an occupied residence.
Staff have received approximately 25 requests for information regarding the alternate meter
option. Of those:
o Approximately half have decided to accept the standard meter replacement
o Four have accepted the $50/read fee for the alternate touchpad, and
o The remaining ten have yet to decide. Staff is currently contacting those who
remain undecided to inform them a decision must be made since we are reaching
the end of the contract performance period.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: With the residential effort being mostly complete, the
contractor started replacing commercial and irrigation meters. As of June 1, Ferguson has replaced
approximately 60 of the 800 commercial and irrigation meters. Additionally, now that the trees
have reached full canopies, the contractor is reviewing the data collection network to determine if
additional collectors are needed. If additional collectors are needed, they will be installed as part
of this contract.
On May 18, 2016, Ferguson Waterworks requested a four-month contract extension citing
procedural delays associated with our extensive customer service requirements for scheduling
notification, meter replacement and service shut-offs. Staff has reviewed the extension request
with the contractor and feels a two-month extension to both the substantial and final completion
date is reasonable.
Contract Term Original Date Revised Date
Substantial Completion June 30, 2016 August 31, 2016
Final Completion August 31, 2016 October 31, 2016
All other terms of the Contract will remain the same.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Change Order No. 1 to Contract - Project No. 5015-5001, Water Meter Replacement
NEXT STEPS:
Description Completion Date
Complete installation of residential meters August 31, 2016
Complete installation of commercial meters August 31, 2016
Complete updates to data collection network October 31, 2016
CHANGE ORDER
TKDA
Engineers-Architects-Planners
Saint Paul, MN May 31 20 16 Proj. No. 15686.000 Change Order No. 1
To Ferguson Waterworks, 1694 - 91st Ave NE, Blaine, MN 55449
for Fixed Network Water Meter Replacement Project
for City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
You are hereby directed to make the following change to your contract dated
February 17 , 20 15 . The change and the work affected thereby is subject to all contract stipulations and
covenants. This Change Order will (increase) (decrease) (not change) the contract sum by
($ 0.00)
CHANGE ORDER
Work will not able to be completed by June 30, 2016, therefore the revised Contract Substantial Completion date for the
Fixed Network Water Meter Replacement Project shall be changed to August 31, 2016. The Final Completion date for the
project shall be changed from August 31, 2016 to October 31, 2016.
There are no changes to the contract amount due to this change order
NET CHANGE =-$
Amount of Original Contract 3,423,102.70$
Additions approved to date (Nos. 1, 2)-$
Deductions approved to date (Nos. )-$
Contract amount to date 3,423,102.70$
Amount of this Change Order (Add) (Deduct) (No Change)-$
Revised Contract Amount 3,423,102.70$
Approved TKDA
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
By By
Matthew R. Ellingson, P.E.
Approved
Ferguson Waterworks
By
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Change Order No. 1 to Contract - Project No. 5015-5001, Water Meter Replacement Page 4
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2016
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Maren Anderson, Bruce Browning, Dale Hartman, Cindy Hoffman
and Rolf Peterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Toby Keeler and Andrew Reinhardt
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator; and, Jacqueline Larson, Communications and
Marketing Manager
OTHERS PRESENT: Kate Hensing, Comcast Cable
1. Call to Order
Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Anderson, Browning, Hartman, Hoffman and
Peterson.
3. Approval of Minutes for December 9, 2015
It was moved by Commissioner Browning, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to
approve the minutes of December 9, 2015, without changes. The motion passed 5-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Browning, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to
approve the agenda as presented. The motion passed 5-0.
5. Public Comment - None
6. New Business
A. Park TV marketing, publicity & program report
Mr. Dunlap referred to the memo sent summarizing the programming. Channel 14 is
educational access with a total of 135 shows. On Channel 15, staff produced over 100
shows. Channel 16 is the on location channel, aka “van channel,” with the majority of
program being sporting events. Channel 17 is the civic channel with 75% of program
hours being meetings. Channel 96 is the second community TV channel with 82%
performances. Each of the channels is streamed live on the Internet and most shows are
available on YouTube.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of February 24, 2016
Ms. Larson stated that they were completing new Park TV program brochures. They will
be available on the web site and some printed to distribute. They will be hiring a new
production assistant, possibly two. These are part time, 20 hrs/week.
Mr. McHugh added that they are premiering new Park TV golf shirts this spring.
Commissioners can attend the volunteer appreciation event where they will also be
handing out Park TV bumper stickers.
Ms. Larson indicated she talked with Scott Smith about Life in the Park and the program
will be changing to every other week due to viewership and the amount of work needed
for the program. They are going to look at what other communities are doing and have
something new in June.
Commissioner Browning asked if they could tell how many people were watching the
shows on cable TV? Mr. Dunlap responded a survey had been done ten years ago and
that was one of the questions, but that information was old. Another technology survey is
planned at some point, and that would be a good time to get those numbers.
B. Cable TV technology presentation, including fiber optic technology
Mr. Dunlap showed the YouTube video, How Stuff Works: Fiber Optic Cable.
Chair Peterson felt the demonstration with the stream was a great visual. It was also
interesting how they used amplifiers for the cable that crosses the ocean.
Mr. Dunlap noted the Comcast cable system is called HFC (Hybrid Fiber Coax). They
use fiber around town to bring the signal to a neighborhood node, which was 400-500
homes when the system was built. It possible they have added a few more nodes. The
Commission toured the Comcast Roseville head end in the past and can have further
discussion about a meeting at the CenturyLink head end facility in Golden Valley, which
is different because it is IP and internet based. All of the information Comcast sends you
is available at all times to their cable box, whereas with the CenturyLink product, you get
one stream at a time, which is why they can use a smaller bandwidth cable in your home.
Commissioner Browning said that fiber is getting faster, so with those kinds of speeds
you can download much more quickly. The world of coaxial cable will go away at some
point because fiber just makes sense.
Chair Peterson noted there are a lot of other benefits to fiber as well, including electrical
resistance to lightening. It is fascinating technology, and the sooner it gets to our homes,
the better.
Commissioner Browning asked when Comcast would be running fiber to the home?
Ms. Hensing responded they do run it to some homes. They use fiber, but coax is still a
great product.
Mr. Dunlap said that by the end of the year the DOCSIS 3.1 modem would be introduced.
It will be a better price point and provide greater speeds. It is expensive to connect people
with fiber all the way to the home, hundreds of dollars per month, but it is an option.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of February 24, 2016
C. Brainstorm future topics for Commission action, based on discussion at the
Council Study Session February 22
Commissioner Browning said that he made the presentation to the City Council and eight
other commissions were also there.
Commissioner Browning talked about CenturyLink, which they spent time on most of
last year. He also said there should be more promotion for Park TV, including signage
(electronic signs.) They can also do bumper stickers.
Commissioner Hoffman asked if the City Council gave any direction? Mr. Dunlap
replied there was no specific direction given but Commissioner Browning answered a
few of their questions. Mr. Pires can address the appropriate role for the Commission
with the Council, and ask for feedback on technology issues.
Commissioner Browning asked if it would be helpful to have a study session with City
Council to get feedback? Mr. Dunlap replied that technology issues probably would
come from Mr. Pires to the Commission.
Chair Peterson suggested that they could do five year planning, and that it was very
helpful when he was on the School Board. Ms. Larson noted that Council does have a
strategic direction and technology is one of the goals. They can provide the commission
with a copy of the plan.
D. Comcast HD enhancements and set-top box exchanges
Kate Hensing, Comcast, stated that they would be introducing MPEG 4 technology at the
end of May, which allow more HD channels and more efficient use of bandwidth.
Customers can go to channel 95 to find out if the box they have is compatible. They can
order a new box from the screen, call or go into one of their stores. The store employees
will show customers how to install it. It is a pretty seamless process and being done
nationwide. The transition to new boxes needs to be done by the end of May or customers
will lose some channels (a few at a time) through the end of May. Customers will be
given warnings, but only a handful of customers are affected. There will be 3
notifications, letters and Emails sent. Customers can switch now.
Commissioner Hoffman asked how old the boxes were that are being replaced? Ms.
Hensing replied there are 20 types that are fine and at least 20 types that are ten plus
years old. The old boxes can’t handle new technology.
Commissioner Browning said it was probably because of decoding, hardware and chip
sets.
Commissioner Hoffman felt it would be more expensive to get the X1 box, and a hassle
to get a new box.
Ms. Hensing said that customers don’t have to get the X1 box, there are other boxes they
won’t have to pay extra for.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 4
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of February 24, 2016
Chair Peterson recalled when the toured the Roseville head end, they had many different
types of boxes and it made sense to consolidate. They had legacy brands and boxes.
Ms. Hensing encouraged commissioners to tour the head end facility when possible.
Mr. McHugh asked if customers that use DTA boxes would be affected? Ms. Hensing
replied it depends on which one. There are some legacy DTA’s but the newer DTA’s are
fine. Customers will get a scroll on their TV if they need to make a change.
Mr. McHugh asked if there would be a mix of MPEG2 and MPEG4 channels after the
switch? Ms. Hensing said no, it will be all MPEG4. One other good thing about MPEG4
is that it doubles DVR storage.
Ms. Hoffman asked about current DVR storage, and Ms. Hensing said it varies by the
DVR models. Mr. Dunlap said the X1 has approximately 100 hours of HD storage.
Commissioner Browning felt that MPEG4 was better quality and a better approach, and
that DirecTV uses MPEG4. He asked about the Comcast bills being revised? Ms.
Hensing replied that the biggest complaint is billing. Comcast had just done a pilot
project and with bills that were easier to read. After that, call volumes went down
dramatically. They will be changing the billing format in the Twin Cities soon.
Commissioner Browning agreed that a lot of complaints relate to billing. A lot of people
get “specials” and when they end, the cost goes up and they are upset. Comcast should
have something to let them know on their bill about the cost changing at the end of the
special term.
Ms. Hensing stated that they currently have call centers in Minnetonka and St. Paul. They
will be hiring 400 new employees and opening an additional call center in St. Paul by the
end of quarter 1, and have invested $300 million to improve the customer experience
because we know this is a problem that we have. She also wanted to share that Comcast
Care Day will be done again in St. Louis Park at Perspectives Inc. They have a lot of
volunteers and it is a fun day. It will be done April 30th.
Mr. McHugh asked the projected date for bills to change? Ms. Hensing replied she had
nothing specific, but it would be before the end of year.
E. Complaint logs
Chair Peterson noted as discussed, most were billing concerns.
Commissioner Browning noted one was a problem with an X1 box needing to be re-set
every week or ten days. That could be a problem with the strength of the signal to his
facility. Mr. Dunlap noted he wasn’t sure if it had been resolved, but that the customer
had already swapped boxes a few times, which means you lose the recorded material on
your DVR. He agreed it could be the signal level.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4k) Page 5
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of February 24, 2016
Commissioner Browning asked if CenturyLink had an escalation team? Mr. Dunlap
replied he sends complaints to Kirstin Sersland, and copy another administrative person,
but there have been few complaints so there is no track record yet.
Commissioner Hoffman was alarmed by the complaint related to a customers Life Line
not working, and they are always supposed to work. Mr. Dunlap noted it could be
converted to Comcast technology, and that customer was resolved that day. The customer
went to the cable store on Excelsior Boulevard and was taken care of immediately, so this
is one of those times when it’s really nice to have the local office. I found out about this
after the packet was sent.
7. Communication from the Chair, Commissioners and City Staff
Mr. Dunlap said this would be recording secretary Stegora-Peterson’s last meeting, and
thanked her for saving hundreds of hours of work over the years. Chair Peterson also
thanked her, and said they joined the Commission about the same time.
8. Adjournment
Commissioner Browning made a motion, Commission Hartman seconded to adjourn at
7:58. The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Consent Agenda Item: 4l
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
May 4, 2016 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Richard
Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Torrey Kanne, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther, Jennifer Monson
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of April 20, 2016
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of April 20, 2016.
Commissioner Peilen seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
Commissioner Person arrived at 6:07 p.m.
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Motor Fuel Station
Location: 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Applicant: Yousef Abumayaleh
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The
application is made to reopen the vacant motor fuel station and operate it as a Super
America Express gas station.
Mr. Morrison reviewed conditions of approval. He discussed the County’s request to
close the eastern access on Minnetonka Blvd. It has been noted that the entrance is
necessary to facilitate the movement of the fuel truck. The County is willing to allow the
access to be altered to discourage use by the customers. A surmountable curb would be
installed. This would require a replacement of the sidewalk. The County recommends
installation of grid grass adjacent to the sidewalk.
Mr. Morrison said staff is recommending that the northerly access on Dakota Ave. be
closed. Staff is asking that the landscaped island on the northwest corner of the property
be expanded upon. Staff also asks that some of the pavement be removed along the west
property line to increase the amount of pervious surface of the property. The remainder
of the pavement could and should remain.
Mr. Morrison spoke about canopy and/or ornamental trees that will need to be planted
along Dakota Ave.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2016
Mr. Morrison discussed the lighting plan, screening and fence.
Chair Johnston-Madison asked about screening of rooftop equipment on the south.
Mr. Morrison said screening is required however, the city doesn’t generally require
compliance until the roof is scheduled to be replaced, and sufficient structural support can
be installed.
Mr. Morrison and Commissioner Peilen discussed access points.
Commissioner Robertson and Mr. Morrison discussed whether or not the building would
be sprinklered and whether or not a door exit on the west would be needed. He added if
that door exit remains accessible then landscaping at that point would not be needed. Mr.
Morrison said the placement of the door will depend on the final floor plan.
Commissioner Tatalovich said he appreciates how the applicant and neighbor worked
together on the screening on the south end. He asked about the surmountable curb and
whether that design was used throughout the city. He asked if vehicles with higher
clearance would also try to use that curb; in addition to the fuel trucks.
Mr. Morrison responded the surmountable curb provides access and is a standard curbing
used in other cities, but not often used in St. Louis Park. He said in this case the design
intent is visual. It does not invite traffic or make it obvious that it can be used.
Commissioner Carper asked about public sidewalks, screening and landscaping.
Mr. Morrison illustrated sidewalk location. He discussed screening, shrubs and pedestrian
visibility.
Commissioner Robertson asked the desired permeability ratio for this zoning district.
Mr. Morrison responded that there isn’t a maximum impervious requirement. In the C-1
District a conditional use permit is required to exceed 70% impervious.
Commissioner Person and Mr. Morrison discussed lighting.
Yousef Abumayaleh, applicant, said his only concern is changing the southwest corner.
The pavement gives him options for additional parking, a dumpster or snow removal. He
said that concern is not a defining obstacle. He is in agreement with staff on all other
conditions.
Commissioner Peilen asked the applicant when he hopes to open the business.
Mr. Abumayaleh said he is hoping to open in the fall.
The Chair opened the public hearing.
Terry Warner, 3020 Florida, 29 year resident, said he lives one block away from the site,
said he supports the project and the improvement. He spoke about vacant and abandoned
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2016
store fronts on Minnetonka Blvd. between Hwy. 100 and 169. He spoke about walkability
and the desire for shops and grocery businesses on Minnetonka Blvd. to uphold property
values in the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Robertson said he agrees with Mr. Warner’s remarks. He said he thinks it
is a great project. He said the surmountable curb is a very good solution. He said he isn’t
a huge fan of grid grass in Minnesota due to upkeep. He suggested that the applicant and
staff keep thinking of other ways to keep traffic from going through there. Perhaps
signage indicating “not an entrance, not an exit”. He said he is a little ambivalent to
changing the west side as it has been paved and especially since there isn’t a stated
required impervious percentage. Perhaps a picnic table there would make it softer. That
paved area would also be good for snow storage. Commissioner Robertson said it is clear
there has been a lot of good discussion and compromise on how to make a tough site
work and he’s excited to see it happen.
Commissioner Peilen said she will support a motion in favor. She said she agreed that
nothing looks worse than an abandoned building and nothing looks better than having a
business there. It’s a good thing for the neighborhood and small business.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of a conditional use permit
to allow a motor fuel station with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner
Robertson seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
A study session began at 6:55 p.m.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, provided background on the proposal of
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital to construct a flood wall, storm sewer modifications,
and construction of compensating flood storage within the wetlands on the property. A
conditional use permit and variance will be required. He noted that a neighborhood
meeting is planned and a public hearing would be held by the Planning Commission on
May 18, 2016.
Mr. Walther provided a general update on the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan
and information about the process to update the Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2018.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. Each year the City is required to hold a public
meeting to provide an opportunity for residents to review and comment on its Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan and its storm water management program. This agenda item serves to
meet this requirement. After a staff presentation the Mayor is asked to open up the meeting for
public comment.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council have questions or concerns regarding the
City’s storm water management program?
SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to provide the Council with a summary of stormwater
activities conducted in 2015 and to solicit comments from the public on the operation and
management of the storm water system throughout the City of St. Louis Park as a part of the City’s
Municipal Separate Stormwater System (MS4) permit.
The City of St. Louis Park has a permit with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for
the discharge of stormwater from the city. This permit is required based on the 1987 amendment
to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Water Act, through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). St Louis Park, along with over 200 other Minnesota
cities, is permitted as a Municipal Separate Stormwater System (MS4).
As a part of the MS4 permit, the City is required to hold a public meeting in which residents have
an opportunity to review the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and comment
on its stormwater management program. These comments are then recorded and considered for
incorporation in the City’s SWPPP. This meeting is held at the City Council to increase awareness
of this important initiative.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2015 SWPPP Activity Highlights
Comments Received Prior to Annual Meeting
2016 SWPPP Initiatives
Prepared by: Erick Francis, Water Resources Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a) Page 2
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting
DISCUSSION
Each year the City of St. Louis Park is required to prepare an annual report which discusses the
status of compliance with NPDES MS4 Stormwater Permit Conditions. Cities use programmatic
requirements to reduce pollutants discharged to the “maximum extent practicable” through the
implementation of Best Management Practices. The City’s SWPPP exceeds the minimum
requirements of the MPCA for this permit.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) are practices, techniques, and measures that prevent or reduce
water pollution from nonpoint sources by using the most effective and practicable means of
achieving water quality goals. Best management practices include, but are not limited to, official
controls, structural and nonstructural controls, and operation and maintenance procedures.
The information requested from the MPCA is meant to provide the basis for an assessment of the
appropriateness of the BMPs and the progress that has been made toward achieving the identified
goals for each of the minimum control measures. This assessment is based on results collected and
analyzed from inspection findings and public input received during the reporting period.
The City continues to move forward with the SWPPP and the Minimum Control Measures (MCM)
identified in the city’s SWPPP. The following outlines a few of the 2016 Initiatives:
High Priority issue for 2016 is Illicit Discharge, which includes the following:
o Implement city staff training program on Illicit Discharge
o Implement new web page for public education and reporting of Illicit Discharge
Partner with Clean Water Minnesota Collaborative to include focused messaging to single
family homeowners and trackable results
Hold additional public open house in April 2017 to receive comments on the city’s SWPPP
Develop a Living Streets Policy for City led street projects.
Develop a “Leave it Where it Falls” BMP grant program for residents
Begin updating of the city’s Local Stormwater Management Plan
While we are always continuing to refine our process to reduce pollutants from entering our surface
waters and record keeping procedures, we do not anticipate any significant changes or
modifications to the SWPPP in 2016.
Highlight of Activities
for the
2015 City of St. Louis Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
Outlined below are the stormwater management responsibilities that have been accomplished during the
2015 calendar year.
These responsibilities are required and were completed in conjunction with the City of St. Louis Park’s
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued that is issued by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
MCM‐1 Public Education and Outreach Activities
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement a public education program that informs the public of the impact
that stormwater discharges have on water bodies and to includes actions that citizens can
take to reduce the discharge of pollutants into stormwater and surface waters.
Activities Competed:
Selected a high priority stormwater related issue for review and updating
Obtain construction stormwater management permitting authority from the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Provide training to City staff on construction stormwater management
Distributed stormwater management related educational materials
Sun Sailor (circulation of 28,070 residents)
Radio (available listener area of 45,000 residents)
Park TV (access to 13,000 residents)
City website (1,178 clicks)
School presentations (39,324 students educated at Westwood Hills Nature
Center)
Participated in 27 workshops and educational forums related to stormwater
management
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 3
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2015 Stormwater Management Activity Highlights
Description of Activity Date
Westwood Hills Nature Center Programs start for new year -
many surface water programs for all ages 1/1/2015
Home Remodel Fair - Storm brochures passed out 2/15/2015
Bass Lake EAW meeting 3/3/2015
Spring Landscaping Workshop - Surface water BMPs promoted
and brochures handed out 3/24/2015
Lions Club Breakfast 3/29/2015
Yard Waste collection 4/6/2015
CAMP Program Begins (ends October 31) Citizen Assisted Lake
Monitoring Program 4/13/2015
Organic Living Workshop 4/18/2015
Earth Day - Beautify the Park begins (cleaning up of all parks,
creek, lakes in SLP ) 600 volunteers 4/22/2015
Annual Park Commission Creek Clean-up 5/2/2015
Tree Sale Distribution - 350 trees for planting on private property
in SLP 5/2/2015
Arbor Day Celebration 5/9/2015
Beautify the Park 5/13/2015
Boulevard Tree Planting begins - planted 250 trees and 50 trees
at Nature Center 5/15/2015
Metro Blooms Raingarden Workshop 5/28/2015
Presentation on the Riley Site 6/3/2015
Household Hazardous Waste Drop-off in SLP (through Saturday,
June 6th) 6/4/2015
Spring Clean up 6/6/2015
Park the Street 6/7/2015
Annual MS4 Presentation to City Council 6/15/2015
Parktacluar Celebration 6/18/2015
Eco Fair @ Parktacular 6/20/2015
Copy: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District trail/boardwalk
grand opening 7/23/2015
National Night Out 8/4/2015
Climate resilience event 8/11/2015
Fall Clean-up Day 9/26/2015
Pitch a Pumpkin 11/1/2015
MCM‐2 Public Involvement and Participation
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement Public Participation/Involvement program to solicit public input
on the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Activities Competed:
Held additional public open house on April 19th 2016 to receive comments on the
city’s SWPPP
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 4
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2015 Stormwater Management Activity Highlights
Received one written comment (attached)
Held Public meeting to receive comments on the SWPPP on June 6, 2016
MCM‐3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges
into the City’s storm sewer system.
Activities Competed:
Observed six Illicit Discharges and responded with verbal warnings and letters of
warning on Illicit Discharge
Monitored for illicit stormwater discharges as part of performing routine duties
Developed a comprehensive training program for City Staff and webpage for Illicit
Discharge detection
MCM‐4 Construction Site Storm Water Run‐off Control
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
program that reduces pollutants in stormwater runoff related to construction activity.
Activities Competed:
Performed 218 compliance inspections on 19 projects greater than once acre
Performed over 652 inspections on 74 projects smaller than one acre
Issued 44 notices of violation for noncompliance
o No monetary fines or site shutdowns were issued
Obtained Erosion Control Permitting from the MCWD 03/10/2016
o Publicize permitting authority to local builders and developers through
postcards, city website, and social media
MCM‐5 Post Construction Runoff Control
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Program that prevents or reduces water pollution after construction activity is completed.
Activities Competed:
Provided plan review for 10 new developments greater than one acre
o BMPs included underground treatment cells, ponds, and rain gardens
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 5
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2015 Stormwater Management Activity Highlights
MCM‐6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall develop and implement an operations and maintenance program that
prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from permittee owned and operated facilities.
Activities Competed:
Inspected over 116 outfalls within the City of St. Louis Park
Inspected over 17 ponds within the City of St. Louis Park
Inspected 615 manholes
Inspected 1,263 catch basins
Televised 37,971 feet of storm sewer
Swept over 620 miles of streets (155 miles within City 4 times)
Removed approximately 6,500 cubic yards of material from city streets
Removed sediment from over 7.2 miles of storm sewer
Removed approximately 11 tons of sediment
Inspected stockpile and storage areas quarterly
Continued to evaluate operations policies and practices and to look for areas to
improve process and reduce pollution
Residents of the City of St. Louis Park are encouraged to review and comment on the City’s SWPPP, which
can be found on the City’s Stormwater Page:
http://www.stlouispark.org/storm-water/pollution-prevention-plan.html
For additional information on the Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, which
provides the guidance for the aforementioned items, can be found on the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency’s website:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/municipal-
stormwater/municipal-separate-storm-sewer-systems-ms4.html
If you have further questions on the stormwater pollution prevention program and stormwater
management within the City of St. Louis Park, feel free to contact Erick Francis, the City’s Wat er Resources
Manager, at 952-924-2690 or at efrancis@stlouispark.org.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 6
May 19, 2016
Stormwater Pollution Plan: Comments for the Public Record
My name is Scott Carpenter. I’m president of the Friends of Bass Lake and a 35
year resident of the Minikahda Oaks neighborhood. We should all understand
from the outset that the restoration of Bass Lake can’t happen without a plan to
clean up the polluted water flowing into the wetland. The core of this plan must
include capital improvement projects that reduce the volume of water flowing
into the lake basin.
Last year, during the open meeting permit process the City Council asked the
following question of City Staff; “How many residents requested a copy of the
MS4 permit?” The answer was, “Only one; a member from the Friends of Bass
Lake.”
This might lead residents to believe that SLP citizens don’t really care about
cleaning up stormwater or restoring Bass Lake. While many residents
acknowledge they want clean water, and Governor Dayton has made clean water
his legacy issue, it seems most residents are quickly distracted from the diligence
required to achieve the goal.
I’d like to offer a personal insight on why it’s been so difficult to get progress on
the restoration of Bass Lake. I’ve been a Boy Scout leader in SLP for 6 years.
Scouting, of course, is built around the development of youth skills in the
outdoors. The Bass Lake Preserve is the kind of place Scout Leaders look to for
skill training and recreation. These quiet places of solitude and natural wonder
capture the attention of boys and girls alike. That interest when fostered can lead
to successful careers in forestry, biology, chemistry, and engineering.
Many Boy Scouts don’t fit well into organized sports. It’s not that parents don’t
try, it’s that families are quickly exhausted and financially depleted going from
baseball to hockey to football to soccer without igniting any deep interest or skill
in the boy.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 7
It’s also not unusual that 30% of the boys in a scout troop are on an ADHD
medication. Another 10% may be on meds for Asperger’s Syndrome. Many of
these families have limited social capital given the nature of the condition and the
stress placed upon the family.
I believe that families exhibiting a combination of limited social capital and non-
participation in organized team sports are at a huge disadvantage when it comes
to promoting recreational assets like Bass Lake—losing out time after time to the
well-organized, socially connected team sport participants.
The following excerpts taken from a letter written 38 years ago to the City
Council illustrates the point.
October 12, 1978 “Treasure to Trash”
I have been a resident of St. Louis Park for 36 years. Since our two sons were old
enough to trap muskrats at Bass Lake. I have been fascinated by the potential of
this area as a unique recreational, nature, and wildlife opportunity. Some of the
real old-timers told of fishing at Bass Lake. Wild pheasants, ducks, and flowers
abounded there in the 60’s.
We became deeply concerned in the late 60’s when steady deterioration of the
area became increasingly evident. Meetings to discuss the situation were held at
the City Hall. We were greatly encouraged when a plan for development of Bass
Lake was drawn up. Elaborate, detailed drawings were exhibited. Our group of
concerned citizens was relieved in the belief that the encroachment and
deterioration processes were to be turned around. To our great dismay, the
‘project’ ended right there.
We who have so closely followed the Bass Lake situation theses past 10 years
were recently shook up, or more accurately enraged by a recent article in Sun
Newspaper quoting a councilman as follows: “The City should consider developing
playing fields on the site instead of the proposed open space.”
What do we who pray for the preservation and improvement of a priceless and
unreplaceable treasure have to show for our concern and efforts: 1. Eleven years
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 8
of frustration. 2. An ugly dumping grounds. 3. A badly scarred lake. 4. Wildlife
exiting before encroachment. 5. Still no concrete viable plan for the best and most
sensible development of this unique treasure. God forbid burying it under a totally
unnecessary ball diamond.
Signed: Otis Dypwick, Martin Fowler, Lee Humphrys, Jeffrey Dypwick
Concerned citizens today could write a similar letter. A multimillion dollar outdoor
hockey rink is under construction across the street at the Rec Center. The
proposal to use one million dollars of funds for soccer field renovation and
flooding at Carpenter Park as part of the Bass Lake project is also under
consideration.
The 1978 letter mentioned above and my experience growing up on the east side
of Lake Harriet in the 1960’s taught me two valuable lessons:
1. Don’t expect banquet dinners and award ceremonies for environmental effort.
The fight for natural recreational spaces is hard solitary work.
2. Champions must step forward. As a boy, I grew up next door to Clifton French.
He helped build the Hennepin County Park Preserve system. He inspired my
father and another neighbor to run for the Minneapolis Park Board. In 1968 they
fought the battle for walking and biking paths around the city lakes, opening them
up for the recreation of all citizens.
The Friends of Bass Lake is looking for champions on the SLP City Council;
members who will lend a voice and lead the way. The reward for such leadership
is only recognized in historical perspective and by the quiet gratitude of a long
underserved group of St. Louis Park citizens.
Scott Carpenter
President, Friends of Bass Lake
www.friendsofbasslake.com
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 9
Stormwater Initiatives
for the
2016 City of St. Louis Park Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
Outlined below are the stormwater management initiatives that will be proposed during the 2016
calendar year.
These responsibilities are required and were completed in conjunction with the City of St. Louis Park’s
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued that is issued by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
MCM‐1 Public Education and Outreach Activities
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement a public education program that informs the public of the impact
that stormwater discharges have on water bodies and to includes actions that citizens can
take to reduce the discharge of pollutants into stormwater and surface waters.
Activities to Initiate:
Select high priority stormwater related issue
o Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Continue to promote stormwater pollution prevention throughout the city
including
o Sun Sailor
o Radio Ad during Minnesota Twins Game
o Partner with Clean Water Minnesota Collaborative to include focused
messaging to single family homeowners
o Partner with other city activities and workshops
o Continue Westwood Hills Nature Center educational programs
MCM‐2 Public Involvement and Participation
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement Public Participation/Involvement program to solicit public input
on the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Activities to Initiate:
Hold public open house to receive comments in April 2017
Hold annual public meeting to present SWPPP to City Council in June 2017
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 10
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2016 Stormwater Management Initiatives
MCM‐3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges
into the City’s storm sewer system.
Activities to Initiate:
Illicit Discharge is be the High Priority stormwater related issue for 2016
o Implement city staff training program on Illicit Discharge
o Implement web page for public education and reporting of Illicit Discharge
MCM‐4 Construction Site Storm Water Run‐off Control
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
program that reduces pollutants in stormwater runoff related to construction activity.
Activities to Initiate:
Continue erosion control site plan review, site inspection, and enforcement
Continue to educate city staff and the public about the importance of construction
stormwater management and erosion and sediment control
MCM‐5 Post Construction Runoff Control
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall implement and enforce a Post-Construction Stormwater Management
Program that prevents or reduces water pollution after construction activity is completed.
Activities to Initiate:
Continue to review plans and work with local watersheds to maintain compliance
MCM‐6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Permit Requirement:
Permittee’s shall develop and implement an operations and maintenance program that
prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from permittee owned and operated facilities.
Activities to Initiate:
Continue routine inspections and maintenance practices, i.e. street sweeping,
storm sewer inspection, and maintenance work in 2016
Continue the use of Cartegraph in 2016, which is an asset management software,
that categorically identifies, documents, and tracks inspection findings and
communicates suggested maintenance
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 11
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
2016 Stormwater Management Initiatives
Residents of the City of St. Louis Park are encouraged to review and comment on the City’s SWPPP, which
can be found on the City’s Stormwater Page:
http://www.stlouispark.org/storm-water/pollution-prevention-plan.html
For additional information on the Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, which
provides the guidance for the afore mentioned items, can be found on the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency’s website:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/municipal-
stormwater/municipal-separate-storm-sewer-systems-ms4.html
If you have further questions on the stormwater pollution prevention program and stormwater
management within the City of St. Louis Park, feel free to contact Erick Francis, the City’s Water Resources
Manager, at 952-924-2690 or at efrancis@stlouispark.org.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6a)
Title: 2015 Annual MS4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Meeting Page 12
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Zarthan Avenue South Right of Way Vacation
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open public hearing, solicit comments and close public
hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance vacating the right-of-way and set the
Second Reading of the Ordinance for June 20, 2016. (Minimum five votes required.)
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: City staff is requesting the vacation of the Zarthan Ave right-of-way, located just
north and east of 36th St and Wooddale Ave near the future Wooddale LRT station, for the purpose
of preparing the land for future redevelopment. This property is currently owned by the City and
used for public parking. The right-of-way is not needed for public purposes, therefore, it can be
vacated and combined with the adjacent properties. The city owns the adjacent properties to the
west and east of the subject right-of-way, so it will receive the majority of the land. A small piece
of the right-of-way at the north end will go to the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority
because it owns the property located at the north end of the right-of-way.
The attached aerial photo shows the location of the right-of-way to be vacated, and illustrates how
the land will be allocated to the adjacent properties.
A public hearing is required for the vacation request. The second reading is tentatively scheduled
for the June 20, 2016 Council meeting, on the Consent Agenda.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance
Right of Way Vacation Exhibit
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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Title: Zarthan Avenue South Right of Way Vacation
ORDINANCE NO.____-16
AN ORDINANCE VACATING ZARTHAN AVENUE SOUTH
RIGHT-OF-WAY
LYING NORTH OF 36TH STREET WEST
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. The petition to vacate the right-of-way was initiated by the City. The City
is the owner of the majority of all properties abutting upon both sides of the right-of-way proposed
to be vacated. The notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on
May 26, 2016, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has
determined that the right-of-way is not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best interest
of the public that said right-of-way be vacated.
Section 2. The following described right-of-way as now dedicated and laid out within
the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated:
All that part of Earle St., aka Zarthan Ave., dedicated by the “Plat of St. Louis Park”,
according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Hennepin County
Registrar of Titles, lying northerly of Highland Ave., aka 36th St., and southerly of the
westerly extension of the north line of the alley situated in Block 29, “Plat of St. Louis
Park”.
Section 3. 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.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
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
Public Hearing/First Reading June 6, 2016
Second Reading June 20, 2016
Date of Publication June 30, 2016
Date Ordinance takes effect July 15, 2016
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 6b) Page 3
Title: Zarthan Avenue South Right of Way Vacation
Right-of-Way Vacation Exhibit:
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use
Permit to allow a motor fuel station with conditions as recommended by staff.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the application meet the requirements for the issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit
SUMMARY: The applicant, Mr. Yousef Abumayaleh, has made application to reopen the vacant
motor fuel station located at the intersection of Minnetonka Boulevard and Dakota Avenue and
operate it as a Super America Express gas station (SA). A motor fuel station is allowed in the C-
1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district by Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A CUP, however,
was not previously approved on this site; therefore, a CUP must be approved before the fuel station
can reopen.
Mr. Abumayaleh intends to reopen the fuel station as it exists today, with some minor site changes
to improve traffic flow through the site, and bring the property closer to compliance with
landscaping and lighting. The changes are summarized in the attached discussion.
A neighborhood meeting was conducted on April 14, 2016. Ten residents attended, and were
supportive of the proposal to reopen the fuel station. Screening of the fuel station from the
residential properties to the west and south was an important concern.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 4, 2016. One person spoke in favor
of the application. His comments are included in the attached Planning Commission minutes. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the application with conditions as recommended
by staff on a 6-0 vote.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Aerial Photo
Resolution
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Drawing of Staff Recommendation
Site Plan
Landscaping Plan
Store Floor Plan
Lighting Plan
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
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial
Zoning: C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
Neighborhood: Lenox
REQUEST:
The applicant, Mr. Abumayaleh, has made application to reopen the vacant motor fuel station
located at the intersection of Minnetonka Boulevard and Dakota Avenue and operate it as a Super
America Express gas station. A motor fuel station is allowed in the C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial zoning district by Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
LOCATION:
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
ZONING ANALYSIS:
Proposed Use: The motor fuel station was constructed in 1940, and operated until approximately
2010. The applicant purchased the property in 2014, and has been unable to find a tenant to occupy
the space since then. He has been working over the past two years to reopen the station, and has
recently signed a contract with Super America to reopen as a Super America Express. SA Express
is a smaller version of a SA station with fuel and a smaller than usual convenience store.
The applicant will use the station as it is currently laid out. The pumps will be replaced with SA
pumps. The 1,450 square foot building will be reused as is, but remodeled inside. Signage will
be approved under a separate permit to brand the site as a SA station.
There are four underground fuel tanks which the MPCA has ruled must be replaced. The applicant
appealed the decision to the Commissioner of the MPCA, and the appeal was denied. Therefore,
they must be replaced before the station can reopen.
Zoning Regulations: A motor fuel station is allowed in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
zoning district as a conditional use. However, a CUP or Special Permit does not exist on this
property, therefore, the station was operating legally non-conforming to City Code before it closed.
Since the station has been vacant for approximately five years, the city is requiring a CUP be issued
before the station can reopen.
Plan Requirements: The exhibits are proposing the following changes to the site:
1. Closing the northerly driveway on Dakota Ave.
2. Replacing/modifying lights to comply with code while maintaining safety.
3. Installing fences to meet screening requirements.
4. Installing landscaping.
5. Increasing the landscaped area at the northwest corner to improve vehicular safety at the
driveway.
6. Modifying the access on Minnetonka Blvd, closest to Dakota Ave, to discourage customer
use.
In addition to the above changes, staff is requesting that the applicant remove the pavement on the
west and southwest portions of the property, and install landscaping to improve screening to
adjacent properties and infiltration of water. This pavement was installed last year without a
permit, and after staff asked him to refrain from paving the site until completion of the CUP
process. Staff asked that he wait so the process could be completed, and the site analyzed to
determine the minimum amount of pavement necessary to meet parking and traffic needs, but also
maximize the space for landscaping and screening requirements. The attached site plan indicates
the paved area to be removed.
Vehicular Access: Commercial districts do not allow vehicular access within 50 feet of an
intersection. The property currently has four vehicular access driveways, including two that are
located closer than 50 feet from the Minnetonka and Dakota intersection.
The applicant is proposing to remove the northern driveway on Dakota Avenue, and replace it with
sidewalk and landscaping.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
The second driveway is located on Minnetonka Blvd, and will remain open, but will be modified
to discourage customer use. Minnetonka Blvd is a county road, and the county has requested that
it be closed. The driveway, however, is needed to facilitate movement of the fuel tankers through
the property. Therefore, the county is willing to compromise by leaving it open for the tankers,
however, they are requesting that it be modified to discourage use by the station customers. The
county suggests this be accomplished by altering the curb from the standard template to a
surmountable curb, which closely resembles the typical non-driveway street curb. The county is
also requesting a strip of landscaping pavers that will allow growth of grass through them, but can
withstand the weight of traffic driving on them. A picture below illustrates what this would look
like, although it would be a much smaller scale on the subject property. The county is proposing
a small strip approximately three feet wide and the width of the driveway. It would connect to,
and extend, the existing landscaping between the sidewalk and the fuel station. The intent of the
strip of landscaping is to provide a visual barrier that, when combined with the surmountable curb,
will discourage people from using that access.
Parking: Per the zoning ordinance, a motor fuel station is required to provide three off-street
parking spaces. They are also required to provide spaces for the retail store at a rate of one space
per 250 square feet. Given the store size, six spaces are required for the store, and three for the
station. The site has eight parking spaces, and six additional spaces at the fuel pumps, for a total
of 13 spaces. Staff finds that the parking requirements are met.
New sidewalk
Grass Grid
New Curb
Closed Driveway
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Landscaping: Per the zoning ordinance, a minimum of nine canopy or evergreen trees are required
for this site. The applicant’s landscape plan shows one tree along Minnetonka Blvd and the
addition of shrubs. Staff is recommending additional trees as shown on the staff comments plan.
The plan would result in eight trees and additional shrubs.
It is also required that all open areas of a lot that are not used for buildings, required parking or
circulation areas shall be landscaped. The applicant’s site layout plan includes a paved area directly
west and southwest of the building, which is not required for parking, circulation, patios, or
storage. This area was originally paved when the station was constructed in 1940, but had
completely deteriorated by 2015. As noted above, staff advised the applicant not to pave the area
pending the outcome of the CUP process. Staff also advised that a permit is required for the
paving, and that one would not be issued until the CUP process was complete. Despite staff’s
comments, the applicant proceeded to pave the area in 2015. Staff is recommending that a portion
of the pavement be removed and landscaped. Removing the paved area will be consistent with the
requirement noted above, will bring the property closer to compliance with the landscaping
requirements, and reduce impervious surface.
Screening: City code requires an eight foot fence between the commercial use and residential
properties. There is currently a four foot chain link fence along the west property line that was
constructed on top of a retaining wall. The fence belongs to the neighbor. An eight foot privacy
fence is required. To meet this requirement, a six foot privacy fence is proposed to be constructed
on top of the retaining wall. Together, the fence and retaining wall meet the eight foot barrier.
Similarly there is a six foot fence on the residential property to the south across the alley. The
applicant spoke with the owner of that property, and came to an agreement to replace that fence
with an eight foot fence. Locating the fence on the neighbor’s property has the advantage of
allowing the station owner access to the property from the alley, and provides better screening for
the resident. Staff is recommending that this fence requirement be met on the neighbor’s property
with the condition that if it is ever removed, then the screening requirements must be met on the
station property. Also, that an agreement regarding the installation and maintenance of the fence
be submitted to the city.
Lighting: The applicant is proposing to replace the light fixture at the Dakota Avenue driveway.
The new fixture will meet the city’s standards for cut-off.
Outdoor lighting must also be designed and arranged to limit spill light and glare on adjacent
properties. Reflected glare or spill light cannot exceed five-tenths (0.5) foot-candle when the
source of light abuts any residential property. The applicant’s lighting plan shows a wall light on
the west side of the building that results in spill light significantly exceeding 0.5 foot-candle, as
well as the pole light in the northwest corner that results in spill light of 0.8 foot-candle. The wall
pack shall be modified to comply with code, and the light on the northwest corner shall be removed
from the plan.
Conditional Use Permit - Conditions of Approval: A motor fuel station use is allowed in the C-1
Neighborhood Commercial zoning district by CUP with some conditions specific to this use. A
review of these conditions follows:
a. Hours of operation shall be between 6:00 a.m. and 11:30 p.m.
The applicant is proposing hours of operation of 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. The applicant is not
planning to provide 24-hour pay at the pump service. This condition is satisfied.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
b. The gasoline pump islands, dispenser type and location shall be designed so that no more than
eight vehicles can be refueled at any given time.
The station will have three gasoline pump islands which will accommodate up to six (6)
vehicles being able to refuel at one time. This condition is satisfied.
c. The number of service stalls shall not exceed two.
The station will not have any service stalls. This condition is satisfied.
d. All pump islands, air dispensers and other service devices shall be installed at least 12 feet off
and toward the interior of the lot from the required yard line, and no display, servicing of
vehicles, parking or dispensing of gasoline shall take place within the required yard. On sites
where pump islands have been constructed at the required yard line, a landscaped area of
eight feet shall be installed in the required yard.
The required yard line is 5 feet (front) from Minnetonka Boulevard and 15 feet (side) from
Dakota Avenue. The applicant is planning to use the existing pump islands, which are all
located more than 12 feet toward the interior of the lot from the required yard line. This
condition is satisfied.
e. All on site utility installations shall be placed underground.
No new site utility installations are anticipated. This condition is satisfied.
f. No outside sale or display shall be permitted except gasoline and other goods consumed in the
normal operation of a car limited to the following kinds of products: oil, gasoline and oil
additives, windshield cleaner, windshield wipers, tires and batteries. No products shall be sold
or displayed in any required yard nor shall the total display area occupy more than 150 square
feet in area or be more than five feet in height. No other vehicular parts and non-automobile
oriented goods shall be displayed or sold outside.
The applicant agrees to adhere to the above outside sale and display restrictions. This condition
is satisfied.
g. Modification of the requirement of this section may be made for service stations in existence
on the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, if the city council
finds that, because of the shape of the lot, size of the lot, the location of the principal building
on the lot or similar circumstances, it would be impossible to satisfy the strict terms of this
section or that they could be satisfied only by imposing exceptional or undue hardship upon
the owner of the lot.
Staff does not find that this lot has unique circumstances that warrant any modifications to the
requirements of this section.
h. No public address system shall be audible from any property located within an R district.
There are residential lots directly adjacent to the property on the west and south sides. The
applicant will have to meet this condition.
i. Canopy and canopy support systems shall be constructed using architectural design and
materials which are compatible with the principal structure.
The applicant is proposing to retain the site’s existing canopy and canopy support systems,
which are compatible with the principal structure. This condition is satisfied.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
j. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the
redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which
it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement.
The property is guided commercial in the comprehensive plan, and it is located on the north
edge of the Lenox neighborhood, with the Bronx Park neighborhood just across Minnetonka
Boulevard. The Minnetonka and Dakota neighborhood commercial node straddles both
neighborhoods. The Lenox plan by neighborhood chapter of the comprehensive plan calls for:
Preserve and support small and start-up businesses in neighborhood commercial areas
Maintain and add more trees in the neighborhood
The Bronx Park plan by neighborhood chapter of the comprehensive plan calls for:
Revitalize Minnetonka & Dakota neighborhood commercial node
Encourage the addition of neighborhood-oriented retail businesses in commercial
nodes
The proposed gas station is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and the plan by
neighborhood policies.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 8
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Aerial Photo:
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 9
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER
SECTION 36-196(d)(1) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A MOTOR FUEL STATION FOR
PROPERTY ZONED C-1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
LOCATED AT 6405 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Yousef Abumayaleh has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit
under Section 36-196(d)(1) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of permitting
a motor fuel station within a C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District located at 6405 Minnetonka
Boulevard for the legal description as follows, to-wit:
Lots One (1), Two (2) and Three (3), Block One (1), Lenox, St Louis Park, according
to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Excepting therefrom the below described tract:
All that part of Lot 1, Block 1 “Lenox,” according to the plat thereof, lying
Northeasterly of a line drawn from a point on the East Line of said Lot distant 12 feet
South of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the North line of said lot distant
12 feet west of said Northeast corner; also the East 3 feet of the South 10 feet of the
North 77 feet of said Lot 1.
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 16-06-CUP) and the effect of the proposed motor fuel station 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 motor fuel station 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 motor fuel
station is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 16-06-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 for a motor fuel station at the location described is granted based on
the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a building permit or land disturbing activities, the developer and contractor
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 10
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
shall follow the procedures and requirements for this development as required for major
additions to single-family homes are required to do under City Code 6-71 Construction
Management Plan.
2. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Official
Exhibits:
a. Site Plan & Tanker Truck Movement Plan.
b. Landscaping Plan.
c. Illumination Plan.
3. The hours of operation shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 11:30 p.m.
4. The existing driveway on Dakota Avenue located closest to Minnetonka Boulevard shall be
removed. The curb and sidewalk shall be replaced to city standards, and a five foot minimum
landscaped area shall be installed between the sidewalk and the fuel station driveway/parking
lot.
5. The existing driveway on Minnetonka located closest to Dakota Avenue shall be modified as
required by Hennepin County to discourage vehicular use, yet allow access for fuel tanker
trucks. The curb and sidewalk shall be installed to meet city and county standards.
6. The existing driveway on the west side of the property shall be modified by removing the
parking space closest to Minnetonka Boulevard, and converted to landscaping.
7. A six foot privacy fence shall be constructed along the west property line on top of the retaining
wall. The height shall be reduced to four feet for that portion of the property line adjacent to
the neighbor’s front yard.
8. Existing wood fence on property to the south shall be removed and replaced with 8 foot high
wood privacy fence for screening. An agreement between the applicant and the neighbor shall
be signed giving permission to install the fence on the neighbor’s property, and stating who
shall be responsible for maintenance. If this fence is removed or not adequately maintained in
the future, the motor fuel station owner shall meet the screening requirements on the station
property.
9. A minimum of three parking spaces shall be provided on the south side of the building.
10. The pavement recently installed on the west and southwest portion of the property shall be
removed and landscaped.
11. The Site and Landscaping Plan shall be modified in the following manner:
a. Three trees and shrubs shall be planted along Dakota Ave.
b. The west and southwest portion of the property that was recently paved, shall be shown as
landscaping with at least three trees and sufficient shrubs.
c. The existing northern driveway on Dakota Avenue, which is to be removed, shall be
replaced with landscaping and sidewalk.
12. The applicant shall modify the illumination plan to comply with code.
13. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met:
a. Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant and property
owner(s).
b. All necessary permits must be obtained, including City and MCWD erosion control and
stormwater permits.
c. 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, utilities,
street lights, landscaping, irrigation, etc.) and private site landscaping.
14. The site shall meet all fire lane requirements.
15. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
b. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 11
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
order to mitigate the impact of excavation on surrounding properties.
16. 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.
17. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or
structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
18. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with Official Exhibits
incorporated by reference herein.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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 June 6, 2016
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 12
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
EXCERPT OF UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
May 4, 2016 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Richard
Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Torrey Kanne, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther, Jennifer Monson
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Motor Fuel Station
Location: 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Applicant: Yousef Abumayaleh
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The application
is made to reopen the vacant motor fuel station and operate it as a Super America Express
gas station.
Mr. Morrison reviewed conditions of approval. He discussed the County’s request to close
the eastern access on Minnetonka Blvd. It has been noted that the entrance is necessary to
facilitate the movement of the fuel truck. The County is willing to allow the access to be
altered to discourage use by the customers. A surmountable curb would be installed. This
would require a replacement of the sidewalk. The County recommends installation of grid
grass adjacent to the sidewalk.
Mr. Morrison said staff is recommending that the northerly access on Dakota Ave. be
closed. Staff is asking that the landscaped island on the northwest corner of the property
be expanded upon. Staff also asks that some of the pavement be removed along the west
property line to increase the amount of pervious surface of the property. The remainder of
the pavement could and should remain.
Mr. Morrison spoke about canopy and/or ornamental trees that will need to be planted
along Dakota Ave.
Mr. Morrison discussed the lighting plan, screening and fence.
Chair Johnston-Madison asked about screening of rooftop equipment on the south.
Mr. Morrison said screening is required however, the city doesn’t generally require
compliance until the roof is scheduled to be replaced, and sufficient structural support can
be installed.
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 13
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
Mr. Morrison and Commissioner Peilen discussed access points.
Commissioner Robertson and Mr. Morrison discussed whether or not the building would
be sprinklered and whether or not a door exit on the west would be needed. He added if
that door exit remains accessible then landscaping at that point would not be needed. Mr.
Morrison said the placement of the door will depend on the final floor plan.
Commissioner Tatalovich said he appreciates how the applicant and neighbor worked
together on the screening on the south end. He asked about the surmountable curb and
whether that design was used throughout the city. He asked if vehicles with higher
clearance would also try to use that curb; in addition to the fuel trucks.
Mr. Morrison responded the surmountable curb provides access and is a standard curbing
used in other cities, but not often used in St. Louis Park. He said in this case the design
intent is visual. It does not invite traffic or make it obvious that it can be used.
Commissioner Carper asked about public sidewalks, screening and landscaping.
Mr. Morrison illustrated sidewalk location. He discussed screening, shrubs and pedestrian
visibility.
Commissioner Robertson asked the desired permeability ratio for this zoning district.
Mr. Morrison responded that there isn’t a maximum impervious requirement. In the C-1
District a conditional use permit is required to exceed 70% impervious.
Commissioner Person and Mr. Morrison discussed lighting.
Yousef Abumayaleh, applicant, said his only concern is changing the southwest corner.
The pavement gives him options for additional parking, a dumpster or snow removal. He
said that concern is not a defining obstacle. He is in agreement with staff on all other
conditions.
Commissioner Peilen asked the applicant when he hopes to open the business.
Mr. Abumayaleh said he is hoping to open in the fall.
The Chair opened the public hearing.
Terry Warner, 3020 Florida, 29 year resident, said he lives one block away from the site,
said he supports the project and the improvement. He spoke about vacant and abandoned
store fronts on Minnetonka Blvd. between Hwy. 100 and 169. He spoke about walkability
and the desire for shops and grocery businesses on Minnetonka Blvd. to uphold property
values in the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Robertson said he agrees with Mr. Warner’s remarks. He said he thinks it
is a great project. He said the surmountable curb is a very good solution. He said he isn’t
a huge fan of grid grass in Minnesota due to upkeep. He suggested that the applicant and
staff keep thinking of other ways to keep traffic from going through there. Perhaps signage
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Page 14
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard
indicating “not an entrance, not an exit”. He said he is a little ambivalent to changing the
west side as it has been paved and especially since there isn’t a stated required impervious
percentage. Perhaps a picnic table there would make it softer. That paved area would also
be good for snow storage. Commissioner Robertson said it is clear there has been a lot of
good discussion and compromise on how to make a tough site work and he’s excited to see
it happen.
Commissioner Peilen said she will support a motion in favor. She said she agreed that
nothing looks worse than an abandoned building and nothing looks better than having a
business there. It’s a good thing for the neighborhood and small business.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of a conditional use permit
to allow a motor fuel station with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner
Robertson seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
6. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Existing
Building
Replace pavement
with landscaping
Staff Recommendations
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard Page 15
Existing
Building
Minnetonka Blvd
curb closure
Grid Grass
Dakota Ave
curb closure
Replace pavement
with landscaping
Add landscaping to
Improve parking visibility
New landscaping
Staff Recommendations
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka Boulevard Page 17
City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka BoulevardPage 18
intent as compliant with any applicable regulatory code requirements with the exception of those specifically stated on drawings created and submitted by RAB.The Lighting design is issued, in whole or in part, as advisory documents for informational purposes and is not intended for construction nor as being part of aproject's construction documentation package.The Lighting Analysis, ezLayout, Energy Analysis and/or Visual Simulation ("Lighting Design") provided by the RAB Lighting Inc. ("RAB") represent an anticipatedprediction of lighting system performance based upon design parameters and information supplied by others. These design parameters and informationprovided by others have not been field verified by RAB and therefore actual measured r esults may vary from the actual field conditions. RAB recommendsthat design parameters and other information be field verified to reduce variation.RAB neither warranties, either implied or stated with regard to actual measured light levels or energy consumption levels as compared to those illustratedby the Lighting Design. RAB neither warranties, either implied or stated, nor represents the appropriateness, completeness or suitability of the Lighting DesignFilename: C:\Users\jodil\Desktop\Pregame\Super America 00023975A.AGIScale: as notedDate:2/16/2016Filename: Super America 00023975A.AGIDrawn By:JLednickyPrepared For:Rouzer Group2738 Winnetka Ave NoNew Hope, MN 55427Job Name:Super AmericaMinneapolis, MNLighting LayoutVersion ACASE # :00023975Scale: 1 inch= 20 Ft.0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 2600102030405060708090100110120130140150160BBCCCCCCCCCCAAA0.00.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.00.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.10.2 0.4 1.2 2.3 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.3 1.0 1.8 0.50.4 0.5 2.6 10.4 2.9 0.4 0.2 0.5 2.3 5.2 1.81.8 2.0 0.5 3.2 9.4 3.94.7 10.5 0.7 3.4 9.2 3.82.2 2.7 1.0 3.0 6.0 2.00.5 0.3 0.3 1.0 2.7 2.8 3.0 3.1 3.3 5.4 1.60.1 0.2 0.4 1.9 7.2 6.3 6.8 7.6 4.8 8.5 3.00.1 0.3 0.7 2.0 7.4 7.0 7.4 7.7 4.6 10.5 3.40.1 1.3 1.4 1.5 4.0 8.1 8.1 4.2 3.6 6.6 2.20.5 5.2 3.1 1.3 2.6 8.0 7.8 2.5 1.7 2.6 0.70.8 11.4 5.8 1.2 1.9 6.8 6.7 1.7 0.8 0.8 0.20.7 14.8 6.0 0.9 0.7 1.2 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.5 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.8 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.00.1 0.2 0.6 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.3 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.1 0.1 0.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.20.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 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 0.00.4 7.6 4.9 1.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.2 2.3 2.0 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.250.250.50.51110.250.5City Council Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 8a) Title: Conditional Use Permit – Super America Express, 6405 Minnetonka BoulevardPage 19
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: June 6, 2016
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: PLACE Development Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. PLACE representatives will at the meeting to
present the site plan and discuss their current development program.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the concept plans presented by PLACE in general alignment
with the Council’s expectations for the redevelopment of the area in question?
SUMMARY:
Site Plan - Attached is a concept plan for the site showing development on both sides of the rail/trail
corridor. It shows e-generation and 198 residential units on the north side and a 110-room hotel,
and 102 residential and live-work units on the south side of the corridor. Additional uses include
commercial/retail on the south side, including a restaurant and coffee shop. A daycare is no longer
in the proposed development program.
Staff has not yet analyzed the concept plan details, including specific building locations, heights,
residential densities, parking, setbacks, access and circulation, etc. The site plan will be reviewed
and refined over the coming months, prior to a formal application.
Traffic – The traffic review has been largely completed. It shows that the development program
can work, with certain stipulations. These include gaining driveway access over the property to
the east to Yosemite Avenue, limiting the driveway access to 36th Street to a right-in/right-out
only, creating a left-turn lane from 36th Street to Xenwood going north, and creating a left-in only
to the north development frontage road. Additional details are in the discussion section.
Hennepin County – Staff is working with Hennepin County on the Nash Frame property which is
owned by the County’s Rail Authority. It is expected the property will be conveyed to the City
and then sold to PLACE. Also, the City has received a Transit-oriented Development (TOD) grant
from the County for the PLACE development for acquisition, demolition and infrastructure.
Community Meeting - PLACE will hold the fifth public community discussion on Thursday, June
23 from 6-8 pm at the SLP Fire Station One.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
PLACE Concept Plan
PLACE Area Circulation Illustration
Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: PLACE Development Update
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
Development Program – The revised PLACE development program is as follows:
North side of rail/trail corridor:
198 residential units
154 parking spaces
E-generation (anaerobic digester)
Greenhouse
Urban forest
South side of rail/trail corridor:
102 live-work residential units
Hotel – 110 rooms
19,439 sf retail space
28 on-grade parking spaces
233 ramp parking spaces
Commons area
Driveway and hotel drop-off
Traffic Review - Overall, the proposed development scenario with the improvements listed below
shows minimal impact to the existing roadway network in the 2020 traffic demand scenario. The
consultant provides the following conclusions and recommendations:
Study Conclusions:
1. The PLACE proposal (split north and south of the railroad/trail corridor) provides
acceptable level of service for opening day (2020).
2. The program uses trip reduction assignments that acknowledge Southwest Light Rail, the
Cedar Lake Regional Trail and the live-work housing units are part of the program.
3. The study assumes the improvements identified with the Southwest Light Rail project are
operational as part of this traffic analysis.
Study Recommendations:
Base Improvements:
1. All SWLRT base improvements are implemented:
a. Signals at the north and south ramps of Highway 7 at Wooddale Avenue
b. 4 lanes of traffic along Wooddale Avenue over Highway 7
c. Grade separated Cedar Lake Regional Trail at Wooddale Avenue.
Improvements Required for Acceptable Operations of PLACE
1. The left turn lane from southbound Wooddale to the east frontage road (to McGarvey) is
required for acceptable traffic operations.
2. The PLACE development (south side) access to 36th Street is right in/right out only.
3. The study indicates a drive access to 35th Street/Yosemite Avenue is needed to efficiently
handle development traffic.
4. The study indicates a left turn lane from east bound 36th Street to north bound Xenwood
Avenue is needed to efficiently handle development traffic. This includes flashing yellow
arrow signal heads for eastbound and westbound 36th Street at Xenwood Avenue.
5. U-turns are discouraged/prohibited as an option to access PLACE developments.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: PLACE Development Update
Costs and timing for the above listed improvements necessary to facilitate acceptable level of
service operations associated with the traffic generated by PLACE have not yet been identified.
There will be additional discussion and analysis on these components as PLACE continues to
refine the site plan.
Preliminary Development Agreement - On May.18, 2015 the EDA and City entered into a
Preliminary Development Agreement (PDA) with PLACE. The agreement outlines the parties’
respective roles and responsibilities in order to cooperatively bring a potential mixed use
redevelopment to fruition at Hwy 7 and Wooddale Ave. It also provides PLACE with exclusive
rights to negotiate acquisition of the properties on the north side of the Wooddale LRT station with
the EDA and City. On February 16, 2016, the EDA and City approved a First Amendment
extending the term of the PDA until February 28, 2017. The PDA will need to be further amended
to include the City/County properties on the south side of the Wooddale LRT station. Such an
amendment is scheduled for consideration on June 20th.
Hennepin County TOD grant – Hennepin County has awarded a $750,000 grant to the City for the
PLACE development. The grant is for acquisition, demolition, area infrastructure improvements
and other site improvements. This grant will run through the city, and the city will forward the
funds to PLACE as the eligible items are completed. In the next month or so, we will enter an
agreement on the grant with the County.
NEXT STEPS:
Staff is continuing to work with PLACE on the site plan, access requirements, and other items
over the next several months. PLACE would like to apply for City approvals in 3-4 months.
ST LOUIS PARK, MNSITE AND CONCEPT MAY 31, 2016Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 4
PROGRAM AND AREASPROGRAMCOUNT AVERAGE ENCLOSED OPEN OUTDOORSRESIDENTIAL 198 UNITS 934 SF 184,932 SFRESIDENTIAL LIVE/WORK 102 UNITS 1,212 SF 123,624 SFRESIDENTIAL TOTAL300 UNITS 1,029 SF 308,556 SFSTORAGE21,000 SFHOTEL110 KEYS 488 SF 53,656 SFCOMMERCIAL/RETAIL19,439 SFCOMMONS11,500 SF 11,500 SFE-GEN15,960 SFGREENHOUSE0 SFURBAN FOREST42,500 SFPARKINGSTRUCTURE 387 STALLS 350 SF 135,450 SFSTREET 56 STALLS 180 SF 10,080 SFSUBTOTAL 738,667 SF 135,450 SF 64,080 SFTOTAL BUILDING874,117 SF ST LOUIS PARK, MNPAGE 2MAY 31, 2016Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 5
10’ SETBACK20’ SETBACK45’ SEWER EASEMENT50’ ROADWAYEASEMENT10’ UTILITY EASEMENT20’ SETBACK10’ SETBACKSITE50’ ROADWAYEASEMENT45’ SEWER EASEMENT ST LOUIS PARK, MNPAGE 3MAY 31, 2016Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 6
CONCEPTBUILDING A:60 UNITSMAKER SPACE46 PARKING SPACESBUILDING B:138 UNITS108 PARKING SPACESBUILDING C:102 LIVE/WORK UNITSCOMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE233 PARKING SPACESHOTEL:110 KEYSE-GEN28 ON-STREET PARKING SPACES28 ON-GRADE PARKING SPACESLRT PASSENGER DROP-OFFCONNECTION TO YOSEMITE AVEHOTELDROP-OFF ST LOUIS PARK, MNPAGE 4MAY 31, 2016Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 7
GROUND PLANEEXISTING CURB CUTHOTEL DROP-OFFHOTELWORK HUBCOMMONCOMMERCIALCOFFEE HOUSECAFELOBBYPRIVATE-PARKINGPRIVATE-PARKINGE-GENLRT PASSENGER DROP-OFFLRTACCESSLRTACCESSLOBBYLOBBYMAKERSPACE ST LOUIS PARK, MNPAGE 5MAY 31, 2016Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 8
35th Street
36th StreetYosemite AveXenwood AveAREA CIRCULATION GRAPHIC
Assumes all SWLRT
improvements are in place
1.Left turn from SB
Wooddale to S. Frontage
Road
2.Place (South) –Right
in/Right out at access
3.Access from Place (South)
to 35th/Yosemite
4.Left turn lane from EB 36th
to NB Xenwood
PLACE
(SOUTH)
1
22
3
4
Special Study Session Meeting of June 6, 2016 (Item No. 2)
Title: PLACE Development Update Page 9