HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026/02/02 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
FEBRUARY 2, 2026
6:00 p.m. Economic Development Authority meeting – Council Chambers
1. Call to order.
2. Approve agenda.
3. Minutes.
a.EDA meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
4. Consent items.
a.Approve EDA disbursements
b.Resolution supporting Sentinel Management’s application for the Hennepin County Transit
Oriented Communities grant to support the Wooddale Station redevelopment project - Ward 2
5. Public hearings – none.
6. Regular business – none.
7. Communications and announcements – none.
8. Adjournment.
6:15 p.m. City council meeting – Council Chambers
1.Call to order.
a.Roll call.
b.Pledge of Allegiance.
2.Approve agenda.
3.Presentations.
a.Proclamation observing Black History Month
b.Recognition of donations
4.Minutes.
a.Study session meeting minutes of January 12, 2026
b.City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
c.Special study session meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
5.Consent items.
a.Approve city disbursements
b.Resolution accepting a donation to the city to support the police department's K9 program
c.Resolution accepting a donation to the city for Rita Vorpahl to attend the 2026 Minnesota Public
Employer Labor Relations Association winter conference
d.Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
e.Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant
Agreement
Agenda EDA, city council and special study session meetings of February 2, 2026
f. Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report
6. Public hearing.
a.Public hearing for Greenway-Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank Restoration project (4025-
2000) - Ward 2
7. Regular business.
a.Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management Project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
b.Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka
Boulevard - Ward 3
c.Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving
variance for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
8. Communications and announcements – none.
9. Adjournment.
Following city council meeting – Special study session – Community Room
Discussion item
1. Discuss federal actions
Members of the public can attend St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and city council meetings
in person. At regular city council meetings, members of the public may comment on any item on the agenda
by attending the meeting in-person or by submitting written comments to info@stlouisparkmn.gov by noon
the day of the meeting. Official minutes of meetings are available on the city website once approved.
Watch St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority or regular city council meetings live at
bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or at www.parktv.org, or on local cable (Comcast SD channel 14/HD channel 798).
Recordings of the meetings are available to watch on the city's YouTube channel at
www.youtube.com/@slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the meeting’s end.
City council study sessions are not broadcast.
Generally, it is not council practice to receive public comment during study sessions.
The council chambers are equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505.
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
EDA meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Jan. 20, 2026
1. Call to order.
President Farris called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
Commissioners present: Jim Engelking, Sue Budd, Nadia Mohamed, Paul Baudhuin, President
Yolanda Farris
Commissioners absent: Daniel Bashore, Tim Brausen
Staff present: administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), community engagement
coordinator (Mr. Coleman), engineering director (Ms. Heiser), city manager (Ms. Keller), city
attorney (Mr. Mattick), deputy engineering director (Mr. Sullivan), deputy city manager (Ms.
Walsh), deputy community development director (Mr. Walther) engineering project manager
(Mr. Wiesen)
2. Approve agenda.
It was moved by Commissioner Mohamed, seconded by Commissioner Baudhuin, to approve the
EDA agenda as presented.
The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioners Bashore and Brausen absent)
3. Minutes.
a. EDA meeting minutes of January 5, 2026
Commissioner Budd proposed an amendment to reflect that President Budd passed the gavel
to newly elected President Farris.
It was moved by Commissioner Mohamed, seconded by Commissioner Baudhuin, to approve the
minutes as amended.
The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioners Bashore and Brausen absent)
5. Consent items.
a. EDA Resolution No. 26-03 approving subordination agreement for The Mera project -
Ward 4
b. EDA Resolution No. 26-04 approving administrative revisions to contracts related to the
public parking ramp within the Beltline Station redevelopment - Ward 1
Economic development authority meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
It was moved by Commissioner Mohamed, seconded by Commissioner Baudhuin, to approve the
minutes as amended.
The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioners Bashore and Brausen absent)
6. Public hearings – none.
7. Regular business – none.
8. Communications and announcements – none.
9. Adjournment.
The EDA meeting was adjourned at 6:04 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, EDA secretary Yolanda Farris, EDA president
These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then edited
and finalized by a city staff person.
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Approve EDA disbursements
Recommended action: Motion to approve EDA disbursement claims for the period of Dec.24,
2025, through Jan. 26, 2026.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA approve the disbursements listed for the period ending Jan.
26, 2026?
Summary: The finance division prepares this report monthly for the EDA to review and approve.
The attached report shows both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire
transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of disbursements by the EDA is
required and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: EDA disbursement summary
Prepared by: Estela Mulugeta, accounting specialist
Reviewed by: Amelia Cruver , finance director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
12,064.80APEX ENGINEERING GROUP INC Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
12,064.80
978.40CENTERPOINT ENERGY EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Heating Gas Utility
978.40
140.00CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES Development - EDA G&A Repairs and Maintenance
140.00
9,100.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC General Fund BS GENERAL
1,451.25EDA - Beltline SWLRT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
885.00EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,153.75Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
13,590.00
9,512.50HKGIDevelopment - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
9,512.50
338.00KUTAK ROCK LLP General Fund BS GENERAL
4,654.00EDA - Beltline SWLRT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
330.00Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,322.00
15.19MONSON JENNIFER EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Repairs and Maintenance
56.28Development - EDA G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
71.47
42.42NELSON DEAN PORTER Community Development G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
42.42
29.50QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER General Fund BS GENERAL
29.50
238.99XCEL ENERGY EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Electric Utility
238.99
Report Totals 41,990.08
gĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ25ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ27ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ2ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ2ŽĨ2kĞďƌƵĂƌLJ2Ϯ͕2ϮϬϮϲ2;qƚĞŵ2EŽ͘2ϰĂͿ2
dŝƚůĞ͗27ƉƉƌŽǀĞ2g572ĚŝƐďƵƌƐĞŵĞŶƚƐ WĂŐĞ2Ϯ
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Resolution supporting Sentinel Management’s application for the Hennepin County
Transit Oriented Communities grant to support the Wooddale Station redevelopment
project- Ward 2
Recommended action: Motion to adopt a resolution supporting the Sentinel Management
Company’s application for the Hennepin County Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) grant to
support the Wooddale Station redevelopment project.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to support the Sentinel Management Company’s
application for the Hennepin County TOC grant to support the Wooddale Station
redevelopment project?
Summary: At a special study session on Jan. 12, 2026, and following review of proposals and
interviews with development firms, staff recommended the EDA enter into a Purchase and
Development Agreement (PDA) with Sentinel Management Company for the Wooddale Avenue
Station site. Staff anticipate bringing the PDA forward for consideration at a future meeting.
Ahead of formal PDA approval, Sentinel Management Company intends to submit an
application for a TOC grant ahead of the program’s deadline. The TOC application is based on
the redevelopment concept presented during the study session, which includes the purchase
and redevelopment of the EDA-owned property at 5950 36th St. W. and the adjacent Standal
property into a mixed-use, mixed-income transit-oriented development.
The proposed project includes a five- and six-story building with approximately 265 residential
units, of which 21% (58 units) would be affordable, approximately 10,500 square feet of
ground-floor commercial space, and a public plaza. The project is well positioned to be
competitive for TOC funding and aligns with both TOC grant requirements and the city’s vision
for the site.
Financial or budget considerations: None. If funding is awarded, the funds will go directly to
the developer. The EDA will not receive any funds as part of this project.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Clancy Ferris, legislative & grants analyst
Reviewed by: Dean Porter-Nelson, redevelopment administrator
Karen Barton, community development director/EDA executive director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Economic development authority meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Resolution supporting Sentinel Management’s application for the Hennepin County Transit Oriented
Communities grant to support the Wooddale Station redevelopment project- Ward 2
EDA Resolution No. 26-___
Supporting Sentinel Management Company’s application for the Hennepin
County Transit Oriented Communities grant to support the Wooddale Station
redevelopment project
Whereas, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is supportive of the
Sentinel Management Company’s application for the Hennepin County Transit Oriented
Communities (TOC) grant program to support the Wooddale Station redevelopment project;
and
Whereas, the grant funds will be used to support the Wooddale Station redevelopment
project in the City of St. Louis Park; and
Whereas, the grant application requires a resolution that demonstrates awareness and
support of the project by the municipality,
Now therefore be it resolved that the EDA is supportive of the Sentinel Management
Company’s application to the Hennepin County TOC grant program to support the Wooddale
Station redevelopment project.
Reviewed for administration:
____________________________________
Karen Barton, executive director
Attest:
____________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, secretary
Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority February 2, 2026:
____________________________________
Yolanda Farris, president
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Presentation: 3a
Executive summary
Title: Proclamation observing Black History Month
Recommended action: Mayor to read proclamation observing Black History Month
Policy consideration: None.
Summary: Black History Month is observed annually in the United States in February to
officially recognize and honor the history, leadership and countless contributions of Black
people in the United States and across the world. This celebration started from a “Negro
History Week” celebration in 1926 by Dr. Carter G. Woodson, a Harvard scholar, and spread
across schools, then college campuses, and grew into a month-long observance that became
federally recognized in 1976. 2026 marks 100 years of national commemorations of Black
history as it continues to be one of the most recognized cultural heritage months in the United
States.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: Proclamation
Resource page
Prepared by: Jocelyn I Hernandez Guitron, racial equity and inclusion specialist
Black, Indigenous and People of Color Employee Resource Group
Reviewed by: Pa Dao Yang, racial equity and inclusion director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Proclamation observing Black History Month
Resource page
In observance of 100 years of Black History Month, the City of St. Louis Park invites you to:
Learn about Black history in Minnesota and the United States.
o Journey of Black History Month | National Museum of African American History
and Culture
o Black history sites in Minnesota | MPR News
o Minnesota’s Black Pioneers | TPT Originals
Explore local events in honor of Black History Month
o Celebrate Black History Month in Minneapolis | Meet Minneapolis | Meet
Minneapolis
o Events – Minnesota African American Heritage Museum and Gallery
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Proclamation observing Black History Month
Proclamation
“Black History Month”
Whereas, Black History Month started as a way to gain rightful recognition for the
significant importance Black people hold in American history; and
Whereas, Black Americans have made significant contributions to the nation’s culture,
politics, workforce, medicine, science, economic, business, education, arts and legacy that have
too often been overlooked and undermined; and
Whereas, this history includes the courageous work led by Black people for the
advancement of civil rights despite the consequences of challenging long-standing racist laws
and beliefs. Their efforts ensured protections from discrimination based on a person’s skin
color; rights that we continue to defend today; and
Whereas, St. Louis Park celebrates Juneteenth annually to recognize and acknowledge
the end of slavery and honoring the Black/African American history of freedom, resilience and
ongoing pursuit of justice; and
Whereas, St. Louis Park residents, businesses and visitors are encouraged to learn about
the continued legacy of Black History Month,
Now therefore let it be known that the mayor and city council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, hereby proclaim February 2026 as Black History Month in our community.
Wherefore, I set my hand and cause the
Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be
affixed this 2nd of February 2026.
_________________________________
Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Presentation: 3b
Executive summary
Title: Recognition of donations
Recommended action: Mayor announce and express appreciation for the following donations
to the city and listed on the consent agenda.
From Donation For
American Legion Post 282 through the
Community Charities of Minnesota $4,000 Donation for police expenses related
to the K9 program
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None.
Prepared by: Amanda Scott-Lerdal, deputy city clerk
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Minutes: 4a
Unofficial minutes
City council study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Jan. 12, 2026
The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m.
Council members present: Daniel Bashore, Jim Engelking, Sue Budd, Tim Brausen, Yolanda
Farris, Paul Baudhuin, Mayor Nadia Mohamed
Council members absent: none
Staff present: Ms. Keller (city manager), Ms. Cruver (finance director), Ms. Brodeen
(administrative services director), Mr. Porter-Nelson (redevelopment administrator), Ms.
Monson (economic development manager), Mr. Coleman (community engagement
coordinator), Mr. Walther (planning manager)
Guests: Fabrizio Montermini, Managing Director; Paola Bernardi Sipe, President, Sentinel
Management Company; Burt Coffin, ESG Architecture
Mayor Mohamed acknowledged the recent loss of Renée Good, who was shot and killed by an
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent. Mayor Mohamed called for a moment of
silence to honor Ms. Good’s life.
Mayor Mohamed shared that she had been in conversations with mayors from surrounding
cities including Hopkins, Richfield, Minnetonka, Eden Prairie, Edina, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn
Center, Golden Valley, Minneapolis and Bloomington. She and Ms. Keller plan to meet with city
managers and police chiefs to discuss the situation and share information.
Council Member Budd expressed concern from residents who were asking what they could do
and what the city was doing. She suggested creating something more specific on the
community resources page related to the current situation rather than having residents search
through the extensive list of organizations currently available.
Council Member Farris shared that she had been in contact with friends of Somali heritage in St.
Louis Park who were afraid. She plans to meet with them to understand their needs. She
expressed concern for children walking to bus stops alone and the need for guidance on how to
respond if approached by ICE.
Council Member Baudhuin described the situation as chaotic with ICE agents intimidating
people. He expressed concern about city properties and whether the city had policies regarding
ICE presence at places like the nature center.
Council Member Bashore stated that residents feel local governments are not supporting them
against people who are breaking the law. He emphasized the need to support residents in any
way possible.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Study session meeting minutes of January 12, 2026
Council Member Engelking noted the violence and brutality displayed by ICE agents as
evidenced by videos and news reports. He suggested the city invest resources to protect the
election team to ensure the November 2026 elections can be conducted safely and properly.
Ms. Keller addressed several points raised by city council members. She shared that staff would
create a coordinated communications channel to ensure council members receive consistent
information. Staff is also working on improving the community resources page and had
instructed their lobbyist team to inform them about any announcements that federal funding
might be stopped. Staff were meeting with small businesses and with staff from Minneapolis
and St. Paul to learn from their approaches.
Mayor Mohamed raised a question about the legality of local police arresting ICE agents, which
had been mentioned by some residents. Ms. Keller explained there is an intersection between
the inability of law enforcement to interfere with another agency's legal enforcement and the
duty to intervene when harm is being caused.
Discussion items
1. Wooddale Station redevelopment update – Ward 2
Mr. Porter-Nelson presented a redevelopment proposal for the Wooddale Station site at 5950
and 5802 36th Street West from Sentinel Management Company. He explained the site
includes the EDA-owned former Nash frame store property (1.68 acres) and an adjacent
privately-owned commercial building (Standal Properties).
Mr. Porter-Nelson reviewed the history of the site, noting the request for proposals issued in
2019 sought substantial affordable housing including multicultural living spaces, small-scale
businesses on the ground floor, attractive architecture, green features and transit and bicycle
accommodations. He mentioned two prior development agreements that were terminated -
one with Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies in 2023, and another with Roers Companies
in early 2025.
Mr. Montermini presented Sentinel Management Company’s proposal, noting the company has
been in business since 1972 and focuses on multi-family apartments, retail and medical
properties. He emphasized their strategy of long-term ownership and local focus.
Mr. Coffin from ESG architecture described the proposed five and six-story building featuring a
parking garage wrapped with active uses and a public plaza. He explained the retail spaces
would be double-height on the first two floors with housing above. The design includes
stepping down the building on the north and east sides creating a south facing courtyard that
would receive good sunlight.
Mr. Montermini highlighted that the parking garage would be hidden, with no surface or
underground parking, which would help avoid costs associated with environmental
contamination on the site.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Study session meeting minutes of January 12, 2026
Ms. Monson noted she had spoken with Standal Properties regarding their interest in
redeveloping their site and had reworked their leases to include redevelopment clauses.
Mr. Porter-Nelson indicated Sentinel Management Company anticipates a financing gap due to
extraordinary costs including public improvements, environmental cleanup and affordable
housing. They expect to apply for financial assistance from the city.
Council Member Engelking welcomed the development team to Ward 2 and expressed hope
that this third attempt would succeed. He appreciated the open design providing visibility to
the light rail station and suggested they consider how to prevent commuters from using the
parking facility all day.
Council Member Baudhuin asked about the distribution of affordable units among two- and
three-bedroom apartments. Mr. Montermini confirmed they intended to distribute affordable
units proportionally with at least one three-bedroom affordable unit at 50% Area Median
Income (AMI) and one at 60% AMI.
Council Member Brausen asked about parking and ride-sharing accommodations given the
transit-oriented nature of the development. He also encouraged making more of the three-
bedroom units affordable as those are in high demand for families with lower incomes.
Council Member Farris supported having more affordable three-bedroom units and confirmed
there would be studio apartments included in the project.
Council Member Budd asked about the timeframe for the $2 million in grants and the overall
project timeline. Mr. Porter-Nelson explained that granting agencies were generally willing to
extend deadlines for viable projects. Ms. Monson noted the process would take approximately
six to nine months for city approvals followed by financing and construction.
Council Member Bashore expressed concerns about traffic impacts and appreciated that staff
were working with tenants of the existing commercial property to find relocation options.
Mayor Mohamed expressed support for the project and appreciated that Sentinel Management
Company would be both the developer and manager of the property, which would help ensure
the continuity of values and agreements.
2. Public art policy
Ms. Brodeen presented a proposed public art policy for the city. She provided background on
public art in St. Louis Park noting the 2020 adoption of a strategic roadmap for advancing arts
and culture.
Ms. Brodeen outlined goals for the policy including creating a shared understanding ensuring
public art in all areas of the city including community voice maintaining a sustainable policy and
properly resourcing public art.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Study session meeting minutes of January 12, 2026
Ms. Cruver explained the funding approach which would plan for an additional budget equal to
1% of above-ground construction costs from significant capital improvement projects to public
art. Eligible funding sources would include bond proceeds property tax levy or potentially
excess franchise fees.
Ms. Brodeen described the selection process, which involves partnering with a qualified arts
organization, issuing a formal request for qualifications and organizing a selection committee
that includes community members, staff and maintenance personnel.
Upcoming projects included art at the Dakota Bridge site, the Oxford/Louisiana reconstruction
area and light rail stations.
Council Member Farris suggested including children in future art projects.
Mayor Mohamed supported the policy highlighting how public art can transform spaces and
make them more lively and suggested incorporating cultural aspects representing the diverse
communities in St. Louis Park.
Council Member Engelking suggested including privately funded - but publicly accessible - art
on the city's art map.
Council Member Baudhuin asked for clarification on what constitutes a qualified arts
organization and Ms. Brodeen confirmed they would need to be registered nonprofits.
The city council indicated support for the policy.
Written reports
3. 2026 Pavement Management Project update (4026-1000) – Ward 1
4. Community + Civic Engagement system kick-off
Council Member Budd raised concerns about timing of a meeting with neighborhood groups
scheduled in January regarding funding applications given the upcoming policy discussion by
council in February 2026.
Ms. Keller indicated staff could delay the meeting with neighborhood groups until after the
Council's policy discussion on Feb. 17, 2026.
Council Members agreed delaying the meeting would be beneficial.
5. Racial equity and inclusion updated 2026 cultural observances and proclamations
Mayor Mohamed briefly noted appreciation for new cultural observances being added
including Deaf History Month, Genocide Awareness Month and Nowruz/Persian New Year.
The meeting adjourned at 7:54 p.m.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Study session meeting minutes of January 12, 2026
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Minutes: 4b
Unofficial minutes
City council meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Jan. 20, 2026
1. Call to Order
Mayor Mohamed called the meeting to order at 6:15 p.m.
Mayor Mohamed took a moment to reflect on the significance of the pledge, emphasizing its
commitment to liberty and justice for all. She noted that given recent events in the city, it was
important to remember what the pledge signifies, particularly in the face of what she described
as trauma experienced from the federal government. Mayor Mohamed invited those present to
join her in the pledge, emphasizing that it represented a commitment to uphold justice and
liberty for all.
a. Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Brausen thanked Mayor Mohamed for her words, noting that her remarks
were emotional and important given current events.
b. Roll Call
Council members present: Jim Engelking, Sue Budd, Tim Brausen, Yolanda Farris, Paul
Baudhuin, Mayor Nadia Mohamed
Council member absent: Daniel Bashore
Staff present: administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), community engagement
coordinator (Mr. Coleman), engineering director (Ms. Heiser), city manager (Ms. Keller), city
attorney (Mr. Mattick), deputy engineering director (Mr. Sullivan), deputy city manager (Ms.
Walsh), deputy community development director (Mr. Walther) engineering project manager
(Mr. Wiesen)
2. Approve agenda.
It was moved by Council Member Baudhuin, seconded by Council Member Farris, to approve the
agenda.
The motion passed 6-0 (Council Member Bashore absent).
3. Presentations.
a. Proclamation observing International Holocaust Remembrance Day
Mayor Mohamed read the proclamation declaring January 27, 2026, as International Holocaust
Remembrance Day in St. Louis Park. The proclamation acknowledged the horrors of the
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Holocaust, the importance of educating people about these events, the commitment of St.
Louis Park to racial equity and inclusion, and the opportunity this day presents to stand against
government actions that dehumanize or bring violence to any group of people.
Mayor Mohamed noted the rich history of Jewish residents in St. Louis Park and the city's
commitment to their safety. She also remarked that parts of the proclamation echoed current
events in a concerning way.
Council Member Baudhuin emphasized the vital importance of remembering the Holocaust,
sharing his personal experience learning about it as a child from a survivor who lived in his
neighborhood. He expressed concern about efforts to remove the Holocaust from history books
and noted that while the United States is not at the point of the slaughter of six million Jewish
people, some current tactics are eerily similar to past events.
b. Proclamation observing Winter Salt Week
Mayor Mohamed read the proclamation declaring January 26 through 30, 2026, as Winter Salt
Week in St. Louis Park. The proclamation highlighted the environmental impact of road salt on
freshwater resources, the importance of winter maintenance best practices, and the need for
community education on proper salt application.
Mayor Mohamed noted that since she first joined the city council, balancing winter
maintenance needs with environmental protection has been an ongoing challenge.
Council Member Budd encouraged residents to participate in smart salt training, which she had
personally found enlightening for maintaining safe driveways and sidewalks while preserving
water quality.
c. Recognition of donations
Mayor Mohamed recognized donations from 281 individuals who contributed $4,060 to
support Access to Fun programs, and from Westopolis, which donated $2,500 for Jason West to
attend the Sports Events and Tourism Association symposium.
4. Minutes
a. Study session meeting minutes of December 8, 2025
b. City council meeting minutes of January 5, 2026
It was moved by Council Member Budd, seconded by Council Member Brausen, to approve the
minutes of the study session meeting on Dec. 8, 2025 and the city council meeting on Jan. 5,
2026 as presented.
The motion passed 6-0 (Council Member Bashore absent).
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
5. Consent items.
a. Resolution No. 26-009 accepting donations to the city to support the Access to Fun
scholarship program
b. Resolution No. 26-010 accepting donation to the city for Jason West to attend the 2026
Sports Events & Tourism Association (ETA) Symposium
c. Resolution No. 26-011 establishing 2026 Alley reconstruction project (4026-1500),
approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids – Ward 3
d. Resolution No. 26-012 accepting previously awarded grant funds
e. Resolution No. 26-013 authorizing application for the U.S. Department of
Transportation BUILD grant
f. Resolution No. 26-014 approving 2026-2028 International Union of Operating Engineer
Local #49 labor agreement
Mayor Mohamed noted she was particularly interested in item 5b regarding parks and
recreation director Mr. West’s planned attendance at the tourism association symposium. She
expressed curiosity about what conversations might occur regarding Minnesota's current
situation and how it might impact tourism and sporting events coming to the state.
Council Member Budd highlighted item 5c, noting she had attended the open house to review
the plans for the alley reconstruction project in Ward 3. She shared that residents along those
alleys were looking forward to the improvements.
It was moved by Council Member Farris, seconded by Council Member Engelking, to approve the
consent items as listed; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0 (Council Member Bashore absent).
6. Public hearing.
a. Public hearing for 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Mr. Wiesen presented the staff report. He explained that the project focuses on maintaining
residential streets in the Bronx Park neighborhood, which typically require reconstruction every
30-50 years.
Mr. Wiesen detailed the project scope, which includes:
● Removing and recycling existing pavement
● Replacing water mains and services on select streets
● Repairing storm and sanitary sewer structures
● Installing new sidewalks in certain areas
● Incorporating stormwater management features
He described the sidewalk recommendations, which included installing a new sidewalk on the
north side of 29th Street between Louisiana and Brunswick Avenues while reducing street
width from 30 to 26 feet. The project would remove four trees totaling 27 caliper inches. Tree
replacement would follow city ordinance requirements.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Mr. Wiesen explained the street width recommendations, proposing to reduce streets from 30
feet to 28 feet where curbs were being removed, and from 30 feet to 26 feet on 29th Street to
accommodate the new sidewalk. The narrower streets align with the city's Living Streets Policy
principles, including pedestrian safety, improved space for street trees, stormwater
management, traffic calming and cost savings.
The estimated project cost is $8,460,000, funded through franchise fees, utility funds and
general obligation bonds. The council will be asked to vote on the project at the city council
meeting on Feb. 2, 2026.
Council Member Baudhuin asked clarifying questions about the sidewalk on 29th Street, tree
removal, and the rationale for narrowing streets.
Mr. Wiesen stated the sidewalk design included narrowing the street by four feet, then adding
a four-foot grass boulevard and a five-foot sidewalk. For reference, the proposed sidewalk
would be located in the vicinity of the back of the existing curb. There will be adjustments made
to the five-foot sidewalk and a four-foot boulevard designed to preserve trees and limit private
impacts. Mr. Wiesen described tree removal as including a 12-inch tree, a nine inch tree and
several smaller trees. Most of the trees in the corridor can be preserved and will not affect the
tree canopy in a negative way. The rationale for narrowing the street is alignment with the
Living Streets Policy including tree preservation and snow storage. He offered to bring further
data back for the Feb. 2, 2026, city council meeting, including factors on traffic calming and
safety.
Council Member Baudhuin inquired about examples of streets in St. Louis Park that are already
at the proposed widths so residents could see how they function.
Mr. Wiesen described Ottawa Avenue north of Minnetonka Boulevard as a good example of a
26-foot wide street with parking on one side of the street.
Council Member Baudhuin described parking concerns and asked about alternative parking
locations during snow events.
Mr. Wiesen stated that he would gather some additional information on alternative parking
and bring it before the council on Feb. 2, 2026.
Mayor Mohamed noted that Council Member Bashore, who represents the project’s location in
Ward 1, was unable to attend this public hearing. However, he had been working actively with
city staff and neighbors to understand the project. She encouraged residents to reach out to
Council Member Bashore to share their concerns.
Council Member Budd asked Mr. Wiesen to reiterate the statistics regarding how much
roadway would be reduced from 30 to 28 feet versus 30 to 26 feet.
Mr. Wiesen stated that 1.7 miles of roadway are recommended to go from 30 to 28 feet and
0.6 miles are recommended to go from 30 to 26 feet.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Mayor Mohamed reminded attendees that the city council would not be voting on the project
until Feb. 2, 2026.
Mayor Mohamed opened the public hearing.
Abraham Ahmed, 2857 Jersey Avenue, expressed concerns about basement flooding if a tree
that absorbs water is removed. He shared potential safety issues with narrower streets,
referencing a similar corridor on Cedar Lake and Louisiana Avenue where drivers have driven
through barriers.
Dave Schreck, 2908 Jersey Avenue, opposed the street narrowing, stating it would not leave
enough room for emergency vehicles, especially in winter when snow further reduces street
width. He also expressed concerns about pedestrian safety when entering or exiting vehicles on
narrower streets.
Robin Carney, 2809 Kentucky Avenue, questioned the rationale for narrowing selected streets,
noting the streets are already tight, especially during winter. She reported polling neighbors
who did not understand or want the changes and expressed concern about high taxes. She
added concerns about future parking issues with multiple drivers in her household.
Andy Carney, 2809 Kentucky Avenue, raised concerns about wider sidewalks requiring more
salt, questioned whether emergency services had evaluated the impact of narrower streets on
their operations, and asked about snow emergency routes and parking arrangements.
Kathy Pitcher, 2843 Kentucky Avenue, stated that she was also speaking on behalf of five
neighbors. She strongly opposed narrowing streets from 30 to 28 feet. She disputed the stated
benefits, noting there were no speeding problems, wider boulevards would require more
fertilizer, and narrower streets would create difficulties for large vehicles including emergency
vehicles.
Jane Ahrens, 2844 Kentucky Avenue, expressed her appreciation for new street surfaces and
water mains but opposed street narrowing. She described witnessing tight situations with
delivery trucks, a disabled neighbor's service vehicle blocking a snowplow, and a pedestrian
with a dog making a street temporarily impassable.
Sonya Gondeck, 2854 Kentucky Avenue, expressed concern about the impact on both sides of
her corner property. She stated she has never felt unsafe with the current street configuration
but fears narrower streets would create more safety issues for her children by giving cars less
room to maneuver around them.
Virg Hammack, 2013 Kentucky Avenue, supported previous speakers' concerns about street
width, recommending council members drive through 28th Street and Alabama Avenue to
experience two cars passing each other in a tight space.
Tim Werts, 2712 Kentucky Avenue, noted that a 26-foot road with single-side parking is not
comparable to a 28-foot road with double-sided parking, as parking reduces the effective width
to just 12 feet for emergency services.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
John Simonson, 2856 Edgewood Avenue, addressed the sidewalks on 29th Street, noting
previous assurances that no sidewalks would be installed there. He questioned the $400,000
cost estimate for the sidewalk and expressed concerns about trash collection operations and
snow storage if the street is narrowed.
Sylvie Hyman, 9200 West 28th Street, spoke in support of street narrowing as a forward-
thinking approach to reduce the footprint of car space. She suggested that new sidewalks
should be publicly maintained rather than by property owners, noting the inconsistency of
privately maintained sidewalks in winter. She recommended investing in smaller emergency
vehicles and snowplows that can navigate narrower streets.
Phil Smith, Avenue, 2844 Kentucky Avenue, raised concerns about utility poles and other
infrastructure that would need to be relocated due to the project.
Christine Gensinger expressed concerns about neighbors who could no longer park in their
driveways if they were shortened, which would force more street parking though less would be
available. She also mentioned property owners potentially losing fences and gardens.
Carol Donlin, 2729 Brunswick Avenue, asked about the impact on utilities like USI Internet,
which had recently installed equipment in her boulevard, and what would happen to her
recently replaced sidewalk.
Mayor Mohamed closed the public hearing.
Council Member Baudhuin asked whether the project would infringe on private property.
Mr. Wiesen confirmed it would remain within public right-of-way. He noted some fences in the
public right-of-way might be impacted and the city responsible for replacement costs.
Mayor Mohamed asked for clarification on emergency vehicle access.
Mr. Wiesen explained that the city had established guidelines with the police and fire
departments for emergency services. To ensure emergency vehicle access, 28-foot streets allow
two-sided parking, streets 24 to 27 feet wide allow one-sided parking and streets under 24 feet
have no street parking.
7. Regular business – none.
8. Communications and announcements.
Mayor Mohamed announced that approximately 400 students at St. Louis Park High School had
participated in a walkout that day.
Ms. Keller made three announcements:
● A warning about bitterly cold weather expected Thursday through Saturday
● A new rental assistance program called "Bring It Home" offering 52 additional vouchers,
with applications opening January 26 through 28, 2026
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
Title: City council meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
● An upcoming meeting about signal replacement at Trunk Highway 169 and Cedar Lake
Road on Jan. 26, 2026, at Westwood Hills Nature Center
Mayor Mohamed noted that the city had held its fourth annual day of racial healing, led by
SOAR students, the previous day.
9. Adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then edited
and finalized by a city staff person.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Minutes: 4c
Unofficial minutes
City council special study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Jan. 20, 2026
The meeting convened at 7:38 p.m.
Council members present: Jim Engelking, Sue Budd, Tim Brausen, Yolanda Farris, Paul
Baudhuin, Mayor Nadia Mohamed
Council member absent: Daniel Bashore
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), administrative
services director (Ms. Brodeen), community engagement coordinator (Mr. Coleman), planning
manager/deputy community development director (Mr. Walther)
Guests: Kate Noble and Nadia Akhtar, TerraLuna Collaborative
Discussion item
1. Vision 4.0 strategic priority facilitated discussion
Mayor Mohamed welcomed everyone and expressed excitement about the Vision 4.0 strategic
priorities discussion.
Ms. Brodeen introduced the TerraLuna consultants who would be facilitating the session.
Ms. Akhtar from TerraLuna Collaborative introduced herself and her colleague Ms. Noble. She
explained that TerraLuna is a member-owned cooperative firm in the Twin Cities whose mission
aligns with the city's values around centering people's experiences and building a just and
equitable world.
Ms. Noble explained that the purpose of the session was to orient council members to the work
ahead focusing on Vision 4.0 strategic priorities. She outlined how community input combined
with staff and council expertise would help create consensus on priorities that would guide city
staff action.
Council members and staff introduced themselves with brief personal statements about their
connection to the city:
Mayor Mohamed shared she was starting her seventh year with the city, having served as a
council member for four years before becoming mayor. She appreciated the compassion and
strategic approach the city takes on important issues.
Council Member Engelking noted he had been in his role for 15 days and appreciated that St.
Louis Park's size allows the council to make meaningful differences and execute strategies
effectively.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Council Member Farris explained she was appointed in 2023 and joined the city council to
connect communities that did not know or trust the city, particularly focusing on helping
underprivileged residents.
Council Member Brausen mentioned he was in his thirteenth year on council and appreciated
the city's diverse, progressive, welcoming and caring character.
Council Member Budd stated she was beginning her second term as council member, now in
her fifth year. She valued the ability to connect with people locally within the community.
Council Member Baudhuin shared that he was starting his third year on council. He explained
that St. Louis Park was the first place that felt like home when he moved there 14 years ago,
which motivated him to run for council.
Ms. Keller noted she was completing her fifth year with the city in August 2026. She
appreciated the thoughtful dialogue in St. Louis Park, even on contentious issues.
Ms. Noble presented an overview of the timeline for developing strategic priorities, explaining
that after this meeting, consultants would schedule one-on-one check-ins with each council
member to understand their individual perspectives and priorities.
Ms. Akhtar led an interactive exercise where council members provided feedback on five
thematic areas from the Vision 4.0 report: safety, infrastructure, sustainability, community and
belonging, housing and affordability. A sixth area on governance was also included based on
staff recommendations.
Council members discussed patterns they noticed in the feedback:
Council Member Brausen observed that everyone seemed to like the idea of public spaces.
Council Member Budd noted there were many concerns listed under sustainability.
Council Member Engelking suggested that financial sustainability should perhaps be separated
from environmental sustainability, with the former possibly being placed under governance. He
explained that people typically associate "sustainability" with environmental concerns.
Mayor Mohamed emphasized the importance of acknowledging that the definition of safety in
the plan was created before recent events, and the language would need to reflect current
realities while remaining relevant for the next decade.
Council Member Baudhuin added that recent safety concerns would necessitate a new
approach to policing that was not reflected in the initial work.
Council Member Engelking appreciated that safety encompassed both physical and
psychological aspects, and while specific threats might change over time, these core principles
remain important.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Ms. Noble then led a reflection activity on four questions related to establishing strategic
priorities:
● How council members felt about establishing one strategic priority for each Vision 4.0
theme
● Reactions to including a priority on governance
● What number of strategic priorities feels realistic
● Whether the outlined roles for city council and staff felt appropriate
Council Member Brausen suggested adding a public hearing before adopting the strategic
priorities and including explicit references to equity and inclusion. This was a previous strategic
priority he felt had not been fully achieved.
Council Member Baudhuin expressed concern that staff feasibility assessments might limit what
priorities could be considered. He emphasized that priorities should drive staffing structure
rather than existing staff structure limiting priorities.
Ms. Keller clarified that city staff would provide input on what would be required to implement
priorities, which might include additional resources or staff changes.
Council Member Budd suggested that boards and commissions should have a role in the
process and potentially provide input before a public hearing.
Council Member Engelking recommended periodic check-ins every few years to ensure the
priorities remain relevant as conditions change, without necessarily changing the priorities
themselves, but possibly adjusting implementation.
Council Member Baudhuin agreed, citing how the affordable housing priority had evolved over
time to focus more specifically on "missing middle" housing as needs changed.
Most city council members supported including a governance priority, though Council Member
Baudhuin noted he had an undefined concern about it that he needed to reflect on further.
Council Member Brausen emphasized that financial and fiscal responsibility should be included
in the strategic priorities but should not be placed under sustainability.
Regarding whether to have one priority per theme, Council Member Budd highlighted the
advantage of simplicity. She noted that having fewer, clearer priorities helps keep them as
“living” guidance that is regularly referenced in city communications and staff reports.
Council Member Baudhuin added that priorities need to be malleable enough to adapt to
change while being specific enough to guide decisions about what not to do.
The council agreed to continue discussions at the upcoming retreat; Council Member Engelking
volunteered to connect with Council Member Bashore to update him on the discussion.
Ms. Akhtar mentioned that photos of the feedback boards would be sent to council members
before their next meeting.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of January 20, 2026
Written reports
2. Environment and sustainability commission advisory communication to the city
council regarding Vision 4.0 report themes
Council Member Brausen expressed appreciation for the Environment and Sustainability
Commission's thoughts shared with the council, noting that their input was important and
aligned with his own thinking.
3. Greenway-Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank Restoration project update (4025-
2000) - Ward 2
Council Member Engelking commented on the Cedar Trail project, noting that the trails serve as
superhighways for bikes but currently have limited access points. He explained that adding
connections to the Meadowbrook and Minnehaha Creek areas would be a significant
enhancement for the city.
Council Member Baudhuin agreed with the assessment.
The meeting adjourned at 9:18 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5a
Executive summary
Title: Approve city disbursements
Recommended action: Motion to approve city disbursement claims for the period of Dec. 24,
2025, through Jan. 26, 2026.
Policy consideration: Does the city council approve city disbursements for the period ending
Jan. 26, 2026?
Summary: The finance department prepares this report monthly for the city council to review
and approve. The attached report shows both city disbursements paid by physical check and
those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information by council is
required by the city charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Disbursement summary
Prepared by: Estela Mulugeta, accounting specialist
Reviewed by: Amelia Cruver, finance director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
750.003RD LAIR Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
750.00
650.00ABDI SAIDA REI G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
650.00
44.80ABERNATHY, LISA Organized Rec G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
44.80
225.00ACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC Housing Rehab G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
225.00
819.00ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
819.00Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
819.00Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,457.00
127.56ALEXANDER PLUMBING LLC Building and Energy G&A
127.56
741.33ALL CITY ELEVATOR INC Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
741.33
1,133.00ALLEGION ACCESS TECH LLC Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
1,133.00
318.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC Facilties Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
318.00
4,046.57ALLSTREAMIT G&A Telephone Communications
4,046.57
1,239.04ALTEC INDUSTRIES INC General Fund BS Inventory
1,239.04
245.00ALVAREZ ANDREA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
235.14AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES Police G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
486.30Police G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
97.88Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 2
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
149.63Technology G&A Technology Supplies
856.62Technology G&A Technology Devices
627.90Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Hardware
2,453.47
684.99AMERICAN SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
684.99
294.00ANDERSON ISABLE Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
294.00
12,064.80APEX ENGINEERING GROUP INC Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
12,064.80
501.00APOLLO MEDICAL TRAINING Police G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
501.00
850.00APPLEMAN MICHAEL & MICHELLE General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
850.00
160.48ARC DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS LLC Technology G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
160.48
713.68ARC DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC Technology G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
713.68
458.00ASCAPOrganized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
458.00
3,583.36ASCENTEK INC General Fund BS Inventory
485.42Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
4,068.78
1,669.66ASPEN MILLS Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,669.66
350.00AT&T Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
350.00
1,379.49AUDIO VIDEO ELECTRONICS LLC Facilties Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
1,379.49
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 3
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
4,000.90AUTO ELECTRIC SERVICE General Fund BS Inventory
4,000.90
6,000.00AVIGDOR GOLDBERGER General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
6,000.00
2,715.33AXON ENTERPRISE, INC.Technology G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,715.33
13.87BAILEY LEAH Water G&A
13.87
370.00BANG ELECTRIC Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
370.00
245.00BASHORE DANIEL Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
26,121.00BASSETT CREEK WMC Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
26,121.00
49.00BAUER ABIGAIL Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
49.00
2,530.90BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS Rec Center Gen Division G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
2,530.90
245.00BENEKE JAMES Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
1,572.00BERNATELLO'S FOODS Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,572.00
657.74BERRY COFFEE COMPANY Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
657.74
2,870.00BLACK & VEATCH CORPORATION Water G&A
2,870.00
3,305.25BLACKWELLRec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 4
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,951.16ROC Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
6,256.41
15,819.46BLUE PEAK CONSULTING LLC Fire Department G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
15,819.46
459.00BMIRec Center Gen Division G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
459.00
12.25BOLTON & MENK INC Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
52.68Franchise Fees G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
23.20Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
210.98Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5.89Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
305.00
475.00BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 2019A G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
158.332018A G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
475.002019C G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
575.002012A G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
158.332017A GO DEBT SERV G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
475.002016A GO DEBT SERV G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
475.00LA CRT 2022A Refund 2010C G&A Other Debt Serv Expend
158.342017A Revenue Bonds Other Debt Serv Expend
158.342018A Revenue Bonds Other Debt Serv Expend
158.332017A Revenue Bonds Other Debt Serv Expend
158.332018A Revenue Bonds Other Debt Serv Expend
3,425.00
711.63BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,916.74Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
3,628.37
147.00BRANDLI AMY Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
278.35BRAUSEN, TIM City Council G&A Out-of-State Travel
278.35
5,600.00BROWN DAN General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
5,600.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 5
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,775.20-BUCKINGHAM TRUCKING LLC Solid Waste G&A Refunds/Reimbursements
185,880.10Solid Waste G&A Solid Waste Utility
112,300.21Solid Waste G&A Recycling Utility
296,405.11
225.10BUILDING CONTROLS & SOLUTIONS Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
225.10Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
450.20
316.28BUSINESS ESSENTIALS Comm & Marketing G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
316.28
40.88BYERS SAVANNAH Comm & Marketing G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
40.88
4,553.80CADWELL MARK Climate Investment G&A
4,553.80
86,400.00CALGON CARBON CORP Water G&A
86,400.00
18,840.00CALYPTUS CONSULTING GROUP INC REI G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
18,840.00
203.94CAMPBELL KNUTSON,P.A.General Fund BS GENERAL
32,274.67City Clerk's Office G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
370.80Comm & Marketing G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
370.80Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
565.53MSA Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,823.62Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
35,609.36
7,070.80CANON FINANCIAL Technology G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
312.60Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Hardware
7,383.40
425.60CAR WASH PARTNERS, INC.Vehicle Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
425.60
45.48CASEY TYLER Water G&A
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 6
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
45.48
20,000.00CBIZ BENEFITS & INSURANCE SERVICES INC Employee Benefits G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
20,000.00
106.05CDW GOVERNMENT INC Technology G&A Technology Supplies
3,809.21Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Hardware
3,915.26
2,195.00CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Sustainability G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,735.00Climate Investment G&A
103,550.00Affordable H Trust G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
525.00Housing Rehab G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
108,005.00
18,758.61CENTERPOINT ENERGY Facilties Maintenance G&A Heating Gas Utility
73.74Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
978.40EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Heating Gas Utility
11.57Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,070.73Water G&A Heating Gas Utility
478.17Water Reilly G&A Heating Gas Utility
.26Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
646.63Sewer G&A Heating Gas Utility
5.63Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
10,595.29Park Maintenance G&A Heating Gas Utility
39,619.03
158.45CENTRAL MCGOWAN INC Aquatic Division G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
158.45
16,335.65CENTRAL PENSION FUND Employee Benefits BS OTHER RETIREMENT
16,335.65
71.52CENTURY LINK IT G&A Telephone Communications
583.52Technology G&A Other Communications
655.04
26.18CHAMBERLAIN LAURA Community Development G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
26.18
2,096.50CHUXRec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 7
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,096.50
268.15CINTAS CORPORATION Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
18.19Public Works G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
258.50Water G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
30.12Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
79.31Park Maintenance G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
504.51Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
468.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
45.18Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
40.96Vehicle Maintenance G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
101.55Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,814.47
10,043.19CITIES DIGITAL Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
10,043.19
302.50CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK Westwood G&A Refunds/Reimbursements
302.50
1,800.00CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS RECEIVABLES Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,800.00
9,615.63CITY OF MINNETONKA Aquatic Division G&A
9,615.63
22,694.00CITY OF SLP HA-KIDS IN THE PARK Affordable H Trust G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
22,694.00
68.60CLARKE LISA Assessing G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
68.60
1,200.00CMC NEPTUNE LLC Aquatic Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,200.00
352.04COLE PAPERS Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
352.04
9,762.00COLICH & ASSOCIATES Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
9,762.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 8
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
9,950.00COLLINS ELECTRICAL Sewer G&A Repairs and Maintenance
815.67Property Casualty G&A Property Insurance
10,765.67
70.95COMCASTPolice G&A Electric Utility
104.67Fire Department G&A Electric Utility
167.31Cable TV G&A Other Communications
30.03Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
372.96
1,800.00COMPASS PEER GROUPS LLC Adminstrative Operations G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
1,800.00
1,399.00COMPLETELY IT Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,399.00
472.00CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP Rec Center Gen Division G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
472.00
196.00CONWAY SHELBY Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
2,212.18CORE & MAIN LP Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,212.18
2,010.00CORPORATE MECHANICAL Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs and Maintenance
2,010.00
1,321.12CREATIVE RESOURCES Organized Rec G&A Postage & Delivery
1,321.12
121.91CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
121.91
38.13CRNALIC ASIM Water G&A
38.13
18.95CROWN MARKING INC.Adminstrative Operations G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
52.76City Council G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
71.71
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 9
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
119.00CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
119.00
6,230.00CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD Building and Energy G&A
6,230.00
5,700.00CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,578.50SSD 1 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,270.07SSD 2 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,564.48SSD 3 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,627.90SSD 4 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
4,228.35SSD 5 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
489.92SSD 5 G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,554.00SSD 6 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
489.92SSD 6 G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
140.00Development - EDA G&A Repairs and Maintenance
13,900.00Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,700.00Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
46,243.14
3,415.59DALCO ENTERPRISES INC Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
3,415.59
381.91DALY JANET Water G&A
381.91
3,654.00DAVID RIVERA Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,654.00
19.23DEIS SARAH Water G&A
19.23
3,256.66DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY Building and Energy G&A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
3,256.66
931.94DEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTEmployee Benefits G&A UNEMPLOYMENT
931.94
294.00DIVECHA MIA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
294.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 10
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
196.00DIXON JILLIAN Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
4,090.60DO-GOOD.BIZ INC Comm & Marketing G&A Postage & Delivery
257.97Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
29.27Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
11.32Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
44.57Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
4,433.73
460.82DTN, LLC.Public Works G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
460.82
245.00DYER RUDYARD Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
400.00EARLEY NATHAN Climate Investment G&A
400.00
245.00ECKHOLM MATTHEW Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
122.50ECM PUBLISHERS INC City Clerk's Office G&A Postage & Delivery
122.50
8,382.00EDEN PRAIRIE POLICE DEPARTMENT Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,382.00
84.52EDINA REALTY RELOCATION Water G&A
84.52
397.54EGAN MICHAEL Water G&A
397.54
13,100.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC General Fund BS GENERAL
2,096.93Mera Wayzata Project TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93 Beltline Residences TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Wooddale Ave Ap TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Texa Tonka TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,451.25EDA - Beltline SWLRT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
885.00EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 11
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,096.96Parkway Residual TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Bridgewater Bank TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Wooddale Station TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Duke West End TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,153.75Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,129.43Park Commons TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.93Rise on 7 TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,096.92Hwy 7 Business Center TIF G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
41,688.75
63.44EILERS MARK Water G&A
63.44
80.00ELIA DAVID Building and Energy G&A
80.00
1,606.18EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE General Fund BS Inventory
1,606.18
1,728.00ENDURING CITIES LLC Building and Energy G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,728.00
2,985.09ENTERPRISE FM TRUST Vehicle Maintenance G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
2,985.09
1,966.50ENVIROTECH SERVICES INC Public Works G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,966.50
196.00EUGENE SAUL Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
955.69FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO General Fund BS Inventory
955.69
182.44FARRIS YOLANDA City Council G&A Out-of-State Travel
182.44
16.49FASHINGBAUER, CLAUDIA Water G&A
16.49
205.73FASTSIGNSOrganized Rec G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 12
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
205.73
73.31FAUST LANCE Water G&A
73.31
85.16FEDOR ANDREW Water G&A
85.16
831.58FERGUSON WATERWORKS Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
831.58
23.55FERRELLGASVehicle Maintenance G&A Vehicle Fuels
23.55
375.00FIDELIS SAFETY SOLUTIONS Fire Department G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
375.00
8.75FILEK KATRINA A Cable TV G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
8.75
2,470.81FINE PROP OF MN Climate Investment G&A
2,470.81
180.65FIRE SAFETY USA INC Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
180.65
56.74FIRST ADVANTAGE Human Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
56.74
2,685.00FLAGSHIP RECREATION LLC Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,685.00
15,000.00FLOCK GROUP INC Vehicles & Equipment G&A Technology Devices
15,000.00
11,794.00FORCAST PUBLIC ART Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
11,794.00
99.18FORCE AMERICA, INC.Public Works G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
99.18
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 13
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
6.99FRATTALLONESPark Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
29.99Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
36.98
86.80FRIEDERICH NIKKI Organized Rec G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
86.80
74,263.00FRIENDS OF THE ARTS Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
74,263.00
11,500.00FRSECURE LLC IT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
11,500.00
294.00GAMRADT KARL R Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
294.00
98.97GANDIER MICHAEL & CECELIA Water G&A
98.97
147.00GILARDO TATIANA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
31.43GISCH KAYLA Water G&A
31.43
6,575.00GOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY INC Franchise Fees G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
6,575.00
2,383.05GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM INC Human Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,383.05
290.65GRAINGER INC.Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
17.59Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
308.24
525.00GRANT WRITING USA Fire Department G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
525.00
145,600.00GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO Public Works G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
145,600.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 14
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
604.00GRIMCO INC Public Works G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
604.00
1,052.54GUARDIAN FLEET SAFETY Vehicle Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
1,052.54
175.00GUTKNECHT, MARY ELLEN Westwood G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
175.00
392.73GUTZMER VERONICA Water G&A
392.73
6,516.00H & L MESABI General Fund BS Inventory
6,516.00
333.05HACH CO Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
333.05
3,000.00HAMILTON, DEAN Climate Investment G&A
3,000.00
142.96HAMPTON SELINA Water G&A
142.96
2,000.00HANSELL CAMEO Climate Investment G&A
2,000.00
129.24HASSELMANN RONALD Water G&A
129.24
25,161.00HAWKINS INC Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
25,161.00
478.30HEIMER ZACH Water G&A
478.30
8.00HEISER, DEBRA Engineering G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
8.00
147.00HELSETH KATI Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 15
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
245.00HENDRIX JESSICA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
330.00HENKLES GREG Building and Energy G&A
330.00
7,446.00HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,330.40Fire Department G&A Radio Communications
262.17Public Works G&A Radio Communications
262.17Water G&A Radio Communications
262.17Sewer G&A Radio Communications
262.17Storm Water Utility G&A Radio Communications
276.21Park Maintenance G&A Solid Waste Utility
11,101.29
690.00HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE-ACHPolice G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
16,465.19Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
17,155.19
51.75HENNEPIN COUNTY DISTRICT COURT REPORTERPolice G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
51.75
9,056.88-HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER City Clerk's Office G&A State Aid
7,286.00City Clerk's Office G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
4,096.46City Clerk's Office G&A Postage & Delivery
270.00City Clerk's Office G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
2,818.75City Clerk's Office G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
736.00Park Maintenance G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
926.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
7,076.33
2,568.00HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE Fire Department G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,568.00
9,512.50HKGIDevelopment - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
9,512.50
100.00HOLIDAY GAS-LAKE ST Police G&A
100.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 16
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
28.74HOMES FOR CASH LLC Water G&A
28.74
157.81HOMES WITHIN REACH Water G&A
157.81
547.14HOTSY MINNESOTA Vehicle Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
547.14
765.00HUMERA TECH INC Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,100.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
2,865.00
196.00HYMAN SYLVIE Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
3,570.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 Employee Benefits BS UNION DUES
3,570.00
1,200.00ICMAAdminstrative Operations G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
1,200.00
910.00IMPACT POWER TO CONNECT Water G&A Postage & Delivery
910.00Sewer G&A Postage & Delivery
910.00Solid Waste G&A Postage & Delivery
910.00Storm Water Utility G&A Postage & Delivery
3,640.00
695.69INGCO INTERNATIONAL Comm & Marketing G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
695.69
8,917.00INTECH SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS INC City Clerk's Office G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
8,917.00
4,474.32INVER GROVE FORD Vehicle Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
375.19Vehicle Maintenance G&A Vehicles/Machinery Purch
4,849.51
69.00ISI SPORTS INDUSTRY Rec Center Gen Division G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
69.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 17
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
260.08I-STATE TRUCK CENTER General Fund BS Inventory
260.08
500.00JANICE M REISCH Human Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
500.00
1,300.33JAYTECH, INC.Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,300.33
37,257.16JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
37,257.16
7.36JENSEN VIRGINIA Water G&A
7.36
5,250.00JOHNSON AVERY Employee Benefits G&A
5,250.00
1,015.90JOHNSON PAPER & SUPPLY CO.Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
251.70Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,267.60
1,250.00JONES LEVY Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,250.00
196.00KAY JACKIE Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
1,715.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN City Clerk's Office G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,715.00
1,050.00KEYSTONE COMPENSATION GROUP LLC Human Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,050.00
5,204.70KFI ENGINEERS Municipal Building & Infra G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,204.70
3,000.00KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC Public Works G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,000.00
18,617.73KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 18
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
26,794.10MSA Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,112.39Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
817.22Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,216.87Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
51,558.31
167.42KINGS III EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS LLC Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
167.42
3,020.00KJOS GREGORY Climate Investment G&A
3,020.00
9,094.00KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC Water G&A Repairs and Maintenance
1,160.00Sewer G&A Repairs and Maintenance
10,254.00
3,000.00KLEINER SAMANTHA Climate Investment G&A
3,000.00
102.37KOEHLER CHARLES Water G&A
102.37
13,763.50KRAEMER MINING & MATERIALS INC Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
13,763.50
1,825.00KRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,825.00
98.00KREBS AVITAL Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
98.00
3,630.00KRECH, O'BRIEN, MUELLER & ASSOCIATES INC Park Improvement G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,630.00
338.00KUTAK ROCK LLP General Fund BS GENERAL
4,654.00EDA - Beltline SWLRT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
330.00Development - EDA G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,322.00
137.24KUZNIA MADISON Water G&A
137.24
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 19
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,000.00LADD JOSH General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
2,000.00
298.02LADUKE MARTIN Water G&A
298.02
5,484.57LANO EQUIPMENT INC Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
5,484.57
9,008.24LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC Employee Benefits BS UNION DUES
9,008.24
618.10LAWSON PRODUCTS INC Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
618.10
6,750.00LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST Police G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
1,920.00Storm Water Utility G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
27,301.50Property Casualty G&A Property Insurance
35,971.50
2,200.00LEDBETTER MATTHEW & CASEY General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
2,200.00
885.00LEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES Water Reilly G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
885.00
360.45LEMKE EUGENE Water G&A
360.45
3,678.56LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC IT G&A Telephone Communications
3,678.56
10,848.05LEXIPOL, LLC.Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
10,848.05
666.67LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS Police G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
666.67
3,797.32LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
355.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 20
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
4,152.32
364.00LIFESAVER FIRE PROTECTION Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
364.00
50.00LINDSAY NORTHQUEST Building and Energy G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
1,596.70Employee Benefits G&A
1,646.70
1,902.46LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC Property Casualty G&A Property Insurance
1,902.46
34,950.00LOCALITY MEDIA INC Technology G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
34,950.00
191.00LOCKGUARD LOCKSMITHS Facilties Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
191.00
1,495.35LOFFLERTechnology G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
720.00Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
2,215.35
313.02LOFFLER COMPANIES INC Technology G&A Short Term Lease/Rentals Pay
313.02
41,275.39LOGISTechnology G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,079.58Technology G&A Computers/Tech Services
17,013.57Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
199.67Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Hardware
60,568.21
102.50LOMICKA AARON Water G&A
102.50
7,321.73LYNDLY F OPTIZ & ASSOCIATES INC Climate Investment G&A
7,321.73
331.84M G INCENTIVES Human Resources G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
331.84
60.00MAMAAdminstrative Operations G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 21
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
60.00
21,774.15MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY OF GAINSVILLE, INC General Fund BS Inventory
21,774.15
4,190.00MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW LLC Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
4,190.00
162.07MARKS MARY Water G&A
162.07
266.49MARQUARDT KELSEY Water G&A
266.49
150.00MARSALU INC Building and Energy G&A
150.00
335.86MARTINSON MELVIN Water G&A
335.86
48.24MATHESON TRI-GAS, INC.Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
48.24
275.00MAXWELL THOMASSAN & DEBORAH HARTLEY Building and Energy G&A
275.00
296.72MAYNARD'S LLC Organized Rec G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
296.72
26.18MCCONNELL, BECKY Westwood G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
26.18
5,178.20MCCULLOUGH TURQOISHA Employee Benefits G&A
5,178.20
65.74MCDANIEL ELLEN Water G&A
65.74
60,000.00MCPHILLIPS BROS ROOFING COMPANY Water G&A
60,000.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 22
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
8,000.00METRO BLOOMS DESIGN + BUILD LLC Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,000.00
400.00METRO CHIEF FIRE OFFICERS ASSOC.Fire Department G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
400.00
13,570.00METRO CITIES Adminstrative Operations G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
13,570.00
3,400.00METRO WATERSHED PARTNERS Storm Water Utility G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
3,400.00
4,920.30METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Building and Energy G&A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
474,319.79Sewer G&A Water Utility
479,240.09
1,269.74MICHAEL CHRISTINA Climate Investment G&A
317.44Park Improvement G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,587.18
250.00MID-STATES ORGANIZED CRIME INFO CENTER Police G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
250.00
27.63MIDWEST EXTERIORS MN Building and Energy G&A
27.63
193.40MILLER SADIE Climate Investment G&A
82.89Park Improvement G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
276.29
4,095.95MINNEAPOLIS SAW COMPANY INC Natural Resources G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
4,095.95
594.00MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION Police G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
594.00
2,353.86MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR Employee Benefits BS WAGE GARNISHMENTS
2,353.86
1,200.00MINNESOTA CONTROL SYSTEMS, LLC.Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
1,200.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 23
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
60.25MINNESOTA DEPT PUBLIC SAFETY Vehicle Maintenance G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
60.25
12.36MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT General Fund BS Inventory
552.11Property Casualty G&A Property Insurance
564.47
640.00MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROLAGENCY Sewer G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
640.00
59.00MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC Facilties Maintenance G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
217.50Facilties Maintenance G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
354.00Organized Rec G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
1,662.50Organized Rec G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
59.00Park Maintenance G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
177.50Park Maintenance G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
217.50Natural Resources G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
217.50Westwood G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
402.50Rec Center Gen Division G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
3,367.00
2,310.95MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
362.68Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8.29Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
176.04Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,857.96
107.59MOHAGEN HARRISON Water G&A
107.59
8,240.00MOMENTUM ADVOCACY LLP Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,240.00
1,500.00MONEY ARLENE Climate Investment G&A
1,500.00
15.19MONSON JENNIFER EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Repairs and Maintenance
56.28Development - EDA G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
71.47
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 24
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
466.00MR CUTTING EDGE Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs and Maintenance
466.00
49.92MURRAY MAUREEN Water G&A
49.92
196.00MYHRAN BENNETT Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
559.00NAFA FLEET MANAGEMENT ASSOC.Vehicle Maintenance G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
559.00
1,934.38NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)General Fund BS Inventory
2,996.80Vehicle Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
4,931.18
50.00NATIONAL TACTICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Police G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
50.00
50.00NATOACable TV G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
1,075.00Cable TV G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
1,125.00
9,505.99NEARMAP US INC Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
9,505.99
1,300.00NEDRUD PAUL Climate Investment G&A
1,300.00
42.42NELSON DEAN PORTER Community Development G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
42.42
4,260.00NELSON JONATHAN Climate Investment G&A
4,260.00
8,032.50NEWPUBLICASustainability G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,032.50
4,465.00NOBLE ROBERT Climate Investment G&A
4,465.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 25
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
219.95NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
219.95
23.98NOON PATRICK Water G&A
23.98
4,588.45NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Vehicles & Equipment G&A Vehicles/Machinery Purch
4,588.45
184.94NORTHSTAR MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT INC Organized Rec G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
184.94
88,350.92NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC.Franchise Fees BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
21,648.90Franchise Fees G&A
11,448.04Sewer BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
20,798.87-Sewer G&A
8,768.45Storm Water Utility BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
53,035.70Storm Water Utility G&A
162,453.14
253.19ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC City Clerk's Office G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
351.22Human Resources G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
141.38Comm & Marketing G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
366.18Finance G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
112.85Community Development G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
31.20Police G&A Postage & Delivery
29.22Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
97.13Building and Energy G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
119.51Public Works G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
175.59Organized Rec G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
71.20Westwood G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
1,748.67
90.30OELRICH JETHRO Assessing G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
90.30
69.30OESTREICH, MARK Westwood G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
69.30
817.65OFFICE OF MNIT SERVICES Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
817.65
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 26
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
30.00OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE City Clerk's Office G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
30.00
196.00OIEN ADAM Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
400.00Climate Investment G&A
596.00
200.00OLSON FRED Water G&A
200.00
4,424.00OLSON-EHLERT KRISTOPHER Employee Benefits G&A
4,424.00
44.00ON SITE SANITATION Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
268.00Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
37.50Westwood G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
349.50
23,342.56OPENGOV INC Public Works G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
11,671.28Water G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
11,671.28Sewer G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
11,671.29Solid Waste G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
58,356.41
101.03O'REILLY FIRST CALL General Fund BS Inventory
101.03
8,201.86OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY OF THE NORTHLANDFacilties Maintenance G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
8,201.86
240.00OVERLAND MISSIONS Westwood G&A Refunds/Reimbursements
240.00
457.69OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
457.69
997.00PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC Water Reilly G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
997.00
200.00PANNELL LISA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 27
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
200.00
1,300.00PARENTEAU SANDRA Climate Investment G&A
1,300.00
35,069.63-PARK CONSTRUCTION CO Street Capital BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
701,392.55Street Capital G&A
1,116.53-Franchise Fees BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
22,330.66Franchise Fees G&A
401.50-Water BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
8,029.772025A GO Utility Revenue G&A
306.46-Sewer BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
6,129.24Sewer G&A
2,219.62-Storm Water Utility BS RETAINAGE PAYABLE
44,392.49Storm Water Utility G&A
743,160.97
328.06PARK FUNDING LLC Water G&A
328.06
3,528.00PARK TAVERN Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,528.00
48.56PARKER MARY Water G&A
48.56
10,000.00PARKTACULAR FESTIVAL Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
10,000.00
301.05PEITZ MELISSA Water G&A
301.05
78.50PERFECTION PLUMBING LLC Building and Energy G&A
78.50
732.50PERKINS TURNER Climate Investment G&A
732.50
120.20PETERSON BRANDON Water G&A
120.20
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 28
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
4,110.28PMA ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC CITY POOLED INVESTMENTS Misc Expenditures
4,110.28
1,506.88POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC General Fund BS Inventory
1,506.88
3.64PORTER LEAH Public Works G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
3.64
654.36POTTER WILLIAM Climate Investment G&A
280.44Park Improvement G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
934.80
1,242.00PRECISE MRM, LLC.Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,242.00
4,386.57PREFERRED COMMUNICATIONS Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
4,386.57
165.96PREMIUM WATERS Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
165.96
171.60PROOPS CHARLIE Building and Energy G&A
171.60
11,936.16PRO-TREE OUTDOOR SERVICES Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
11,936.16
5,000.00PUMP & METER SERVICE General Fund BS GENERAL
5,000.00
29.50QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER General Fund BS GENERAL
29.50
630.00REACH MEDIA NETWORK Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
630.00
500.00RENEW BY GREWE RESTORATION LLC Building and Energy G&A
500.00
9,326.21REPUBLIC SERVICES Facilties Maintenance G&A Solid Waste Utility
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 29
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
78,778.93Solid Waste G&A Organics Utility Expense
8,075.49Rec Center Gen Division G&A Solid Waste Utility
96,180.63
196.00RICH LESLIE Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
147.00RIPPE SONYA L Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
519.48ROBERT B HILL CO Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
519.48
190.86ROMANOWSKI BRIAN Water G&A
190.86
536.55ROSE, NANCY Climate Investment G&A
134.14Park Improvement G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
670.69
650.00ROSENFIELD PHILP Climate Investment G&A
650.00
245.00RYDBERG MICHAEL PHILIP Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
98,806.39SAFE STEP LLC Public Works G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
98,806.39
550.80SAFE-FAST INC Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
550.80
2,536.99SAFTEY VEHICLE SOLUTIONS Vehicles & Equipment G&A Vehicles/Machinery Purch
2,536.99
223.00SALYYEV MEHRIDIN Building and Energy G&A
223.00
1,406.05SAND CREEK EAP LLC Employee Benefits G&A HEALTH INSURANCE
1,406.05
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 30
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
49.96SATERDALEN JEFFREY Water G&A
49.96
2,758.74SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.Park Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,758.74
52.36SCHUCHART JESSICA Water G&A
52.36
500.00SCOTT COUNTY TREASURER Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
500.00
7,800.00SELA GROUP LLC Affordable H Trust G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
7,800.00
1,278.00SESACRec Center Gen Division G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
1,278.00
31,830.00SHADYWOOD TREE EXPERTS & LANDSCAPING Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
31,830.00
245.00SHAHIDI SASHA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
121,000.00SHERMAN ASSOCIATES INC General Fund BS UNION PARK APTS
121,000.00
2,070.48SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,831.94Franchise Fees G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,382.07Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,852.30Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
563.68Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
10,700.47
476.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC ROC Division G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
476.00
72.83SIMON GEORGE Water G&A
72.83
147.00SLAATS KONNOR Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 31
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
147.00
294.00SLAIS DIANE LYNN Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
294.00
6,550.11SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 Employee Benefits BS UNION DUES
6,550.11
108.07SMITH ELLEN L Water G&A
108.07
2,240.00SOCCER SHOTS Organized Rec G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,240.00
262.05SORLIE SHAY Water G&A
262.05
2,249.75SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC Engineering G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
11,673.85Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
13,923.60
75.00ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY EDUCATION - ADUL Organized Rec G&A Refunds/Reimbursements
75.00
21,400.00ST. LOUIS PARK EMERGENCY PROGRAM Community Development G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
21,400.00
206.53STARK KYLE Water G&A
206.53
909,000.00STATE OF MINNESOTA Development - EDA G&A
909,000.00
245.00STAUTZ KAYLA Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
25.14STERICYCLE, INC.Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
28.58Finance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
324.48Community Development G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
152.82Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
174.03Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 32
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
50.13Public Works G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
755.18
78.00STEWART PLUMBING INC Building and Energy G&A
78.00
196.00STOCKTON DANIEL Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
196.00
72.22STOKES TARA Water G&A
72.22
276.00STOP STICK, LTD Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
276.00
245.00STRAIN SARAH Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
5,450.00STRATUS BUILDING SOLUTIONS OF ST. PAUL Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,850.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
8,300.00
245.00STRAUS BENJAMIN Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
16,781.25STREICHER'S Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
16,781.25
848.14SUBURBAN CHEVROLET Vehicle Maintenance G&A Repairs and Maintenance
848.14
7,214.00SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC Water Reilly G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
7,214.00
559.15SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
559.15
4,518.70SUNDERMEYER SAM Climate Investment G&A
4,518.70
50.00SURPLUS SERVICES Aquatic Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 33
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
50.00
1,050.00SUSA TREASURER Water G&A Dues, Memberships, Licenses
1,050.00
2,953.27SVL SERVICE Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,953.27
3,417.19SYSCO-MINNESOTA INC Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
3,417.19
795.00TACTICAL ACTION GROUP Fire Department G&A Other Travel, Conv & Conf
795.00
33.39TANSOM ADDISON Solid Waste G&A Employee Mileage Reimbursement
33.39
325.00TEE JAY NORTH, INC.Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
325.00
1,549.45TERMINIX COMMERCIAL Facilties Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
92.90Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
293.44Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,935.79
3,333.85THE ESTATE OF YURI P BOTELHO Engineering G&A SALARIES - REGULAR EMPLOYEES
3,333.85
1,414.68THE MPX GROUP Comm & Marketing G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
1,414.68
17.84THE SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
17.84
116.00THE SIGN PRODUCERS INC Facilties Maintenance G&A Admin/Office Supplies & Mat
73.00Facilties Maintenance G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
189.00
755.15TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL City Clerk's Office G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
755.15
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 34
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
24.18TITLE SMART INC Water G&A Misc Expenditures
24.18
1,302.91TK ELEVATOR CORPORATION Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs and Maintenance
1,302.91
50.00T-MOBILE USA INC Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
50.00
13.64TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY Water G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
13.64
780.00TOTAL MECHANICAL SERVICES, INC.Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,388.65Rec Center Gen Division G&A Repairs, Maint, Serv on Tech
3,168.65
809.58TOWMASTERGeneral Fund BS Inventory
809.58
85,514.68TRASH CONTRACORS LLC Solid Waste G&A Yard Waste Utility
85,514.68
7,644.80TREE TRUST Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
7,644.80
90.00TRI-COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOC. Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
90.00
1,500.00TRIPLESEAT SOFTWARE LLC Westwood G&A Software Licensing Less 12 Mo
1,500.00
6,050.00TRITECH SOFTWARE SYSTEMS Technology G&A Capitalized Tech Software
6,050.00
175.00TRONSGARD PAUL Building and Energy G&A
175.00
2,420.00TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC SSD 1 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
852.50SSD 3 G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,272.50
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 35
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,124.16ULINERec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,124.16
60.00ULTIMATE SAFETY CONCEPTS INC Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
60.00
281.25UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS Police G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
281.25
147.00UPSHER VALLY Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
999.41USDA, APHIS, GENERAL Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
999.41
38,928.90VALLEY-RICH CO INC Water G&A Repairs and Maintenance
38,928.90
4,360.00VEIT & CO Sewer G&A Repairs and Maintenance
4,360.00
145.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS LLC.Human Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
145.00
27,396.46VERIZONIT G&A Telephone Communications
27,396.46
644.42VET PARTNERS PET HOSPITAL - APPLE VALLEY Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
644.42
375.00VETERAN ELECTRIC Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
475.00Rec Center Gen Division G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
850.00
2,733.75VINCENT PROMOTIONS LLC Police G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
2,733.75
1,692.02VISTAR-PERFORMANCE FOOD SERVICE Rec Center Gen Division G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
1,692.02
710.00WAHLSTROM LISA Climate Investment G&A
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 36
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
710.00
1,465.00WARNER CARILEE Climate Investment G&A
1,465.00
1,934.73WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC Water G&A Repairs and Maintenance
1,934.73
245.00WEBER THOMAS Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
68.00WELD & SONS PLUMBING Building and Energy G&A
68.00
368.88WELSCH HEIDI Water G&A
368.88
1,640.00WESSBERG GRAHAM Employee Benefits G&A
1,640.00
235,000.00WEST HENNEPIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAND TRAffordable H Trust G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
235,000.00
364.84WEST, JASON Organized Rec G&A Out-of-State Travel
364.84
1,272.50WETMORE ANNA Climate Investment G&A
1,272.50
719.80WHIPPER SNAPPER LAWN SERVICE Natural Resources G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
719.80
2,900.00WILLETTE ANDREW Climate Investment G&A
2,900.00
732.50WISE JONATHAN Climate Investment G&A
732.50
82.40WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC Fire Department G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
82.40
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 37
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
245.00WOLKENBROD JAY Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
245.00
122.73WOO JON Water G&A
122.73
452.00WSB ASSOC INC IT G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
792.00Engineering G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
881.25Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,125.25
31,323.68XCEL ENERGY Facilties Maintenance G&A Electric Utility
16,978.44Public Works G&A Electric Utility
31.92Street Capital G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
238.99EDA - 4300 36 1/2 G&A Electric Utility
5.01Water G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
48,492.12Water G&A Electric Utility
1,869.85Water Reilly G&A Electric Utility
.11Sewer G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
5,976.77Sewer G&A Electric Utility
2.43Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
2,749.48Storm Water Utility G&A Electric Utility
100.15Park Maintenance G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
149.86Park Maintenance G&A Electric Utility
23,739.97Rec Center Gen Division G&A Electric Utility
131,658.78
147.00YAKES DAVID Adminstrative Operations G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
147.00
4,500.00YORKS BRUCE Climate Investment G&A
4,500.00
3,546.26YOUNG ENV. CONSULTING GROUP, LLC. Storm Water Utility G&A Consulting Fees/Fees For Serv
3,546.26
2,250.00ZACHARY BEIREIS Climate Investment G&A
2,250.00
5,844.93ZEBRA ATHLETICS Municipal Building & Infra G&A Operations Supplies & Mat
5,844.93
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 38
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
1/26/202612/24/2025 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
449.74ZIEGLER INC General Fund BS Inventory
449.74
218.61ZOBEL AMANDA Water G&A
218.61
Report Totals 5,371,866.70
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 39
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5b
Executive summary
Title: Resolution accepting donation to the city to support the police department’s K9 program
Recommended action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving donations in the amount of
$4,000 to the city for police department expenses related to the K9 program.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept these donations?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expensed.
Americal Legion Post 282, through the Community Charities of Minnesota, has graciously
donated up to $4,000 for police expenses related to the K9 program. The donated money is
intended to be used for expenses like K9 training, equipment, veterinary visits and food.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Paul Barnes, lieutenant
Reviewed by: Bryan Kruelle, police chief
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Page 2 City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5b)
Title: Resolution accepting donation
Resolution No. 26 - ___
Approving acceptance of donations to the City of St. Louis Park
Be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as follows:
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by State Statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the donation from American Legion Post 282, through the Community
Charities of Minnesota, is given to the city and restricted to K9 program spending,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of St. Louis Park that these
donations are hereby accepted with thanks and appreciation.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5c
Executive summary
Title: Resolution accepting a donation to the city for Rita Vorpahl to attend the 2026 Minnesota
Public Employer Labor Relations Association winter conference
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolution accepting a donation in an amount not to
exceed $250 to the city for Rita Vorpahl, HR director, to attend the Minnesota Public Employer
Labor Relations Association (MNPELRA) in 2026.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the donation with restrictions on its
use?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expensed.
MNPELRA is graciously donating up to $250 for conference registration for Rita Vorpahl, Human
Resources director, to attend the upcoming 2026 MNPELRA winter conference. Ms. Vorpahl
would attend this educational event with other labor relations and human resources
professionals around the state. The conference features a variety of timely and relevant
sessions including Minnesota state family paid leave, updates on new employment laws,
current information on bargaining and other human resources and labor relations topics.
The city attorney has reviewed this matter. His opinion is that state law permits the payment of
such expenses by this organization, regardless of whether the funds come from primary or
secondary sources. It is treated as a gift to the city and needs to be a resolution adopted by
the city council determining that attendance at this event serves a public purpose and
accepting the gift. The resolution needs to be adopted before attendance at the conference.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used toward the expenses incurred by
Rita Vorpahl’s attendance at the 2026 MNPELRA conference.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Rita Vorpahl, HR director
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5c) Page 2
Title: Resolution accepting a donation to the city for Rita Vorpahl to attend the 2026 Minnesota Public Employer
Labor Relations Association winter conference
Resolution No. 26 - ___
Approving acceptance of donation to the City of St. Louis Park in an amount not
to exceed $250 for Rita Vorpahl, HR director, to attend the Minnesota Public
Employer Labor Relations Association in 2026.
Be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as follows:
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, the donation from MNPELRA is given to the city to compensate up to $250 in
costs for the city's Human Resources director, Rita Vorpahl, to attend the 2026 Minnesota
Public Employer Labor Relations Association winter conference,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift
is hereby accepted with thanks and appreciation.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5d
Executive summary
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolution approving the renewal of liquor licenses for
the license term March 1, 2026, through Feb. 28, 2027.
Policy consideration: Do the applicants meet the requirements of the city and state for renewal
of their liquor licenses?
Summary: On Nov. 17, 2025, the city clerk’s office distributed materials to current liquor license
holders to renew their licenses for the period of March 1, 2026, to Feb. 28, 2027. Renewal
materials include state and city renewal applications, proof of liquor liability insurance, proof of
workers compensation insurance, CPA statements when required by code and license fees.
During the 2025-2026 licensing period, the following licensing changes took place:
• Chi-Chi’s – new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
• Lago Tacos – new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
• Rosalia Texa Tonka – new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
• The Taco Shop – new on-sale intoxicating liquor license
• Rojo Mexican Grill – closed
• Urban Wok – new on-sale wine license in March 2025, closed November 2025
• Westside Wine Bar & Cheese Market – new on-sale wine license
Establishments listed in Exhibit A have met the criteria necessary for renewal of their liquor
license. If all eligible licenses are renewed, the city will have a total of 61 liquor licenses.
Financial or budget considerations: Liquor license fees are set by city code and state statute
and are reviewed annually.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Exhibit A – list of establishments and license fees
Prepared by: Amanda Scott-Lerdal, deputy city clerk
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5d) Page 2
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Discussion
Background: Liquor licensing is regulated by St. Louis Park City Code, Chapter 3 and Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 340A. The licensing period for liquor is one year, beginning March 1 and
ending on February 28.
In addition to reviewing overall compliance with the rules and regulations set forth in city code
and state statute related to the sale and service of alcohol and the requirements for licensure,
staff also review renewal applications to ensure they align with the following sections of the
city code:
City code Sec. 3-64. Renewal application.
(a) Applications for the renewal of an existing liquor license shall be made at least 45 days
prior to the date of the expiration of the license and shall state that everything in the prior
application remains true and correct except as otherwise indicated on the renewal application.
(b) Renewal applications for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license for a restaurant shall
include a certified public accountant's statement showing total sales, food sales, liquor sales
and percentage of total sales of the restaurant for the previous year.
City code Sections 3-57 and 3-70 require the holders of on-sale intoxicating and on-sale wine
licenses to comply with the following requirements:
• On-sale intoxicating liquor license - must have a minimum of 40 percent of gross
receipts attributable to the sale of food.
• On-sale wine license - The holder of a wine license, who is also licensed to sell 3.2
percent malt liquor on-sale and whose gross receipts are at least 60 percent attributable
to the sale of food, may also sell intoxicating malt liquor at on-sale without an additional
license.
o Note: this is a statutory provision that only applies to those licensees who want
to maintain authorization to sell on-sale intoxicating malt liquor (strong beer) in
conjunction with their wine license. If the licensee does not want this
authorization, they need not comply.
As required in city code section 3-70, all property tax payments for licensed establishments are
current.
Staff Recommendation: The city clerk’s office reviews all application information and works
with the police department and the State of Minnesota to ensure that all licensees meet the
necessary criteria for renewal of their liquor license. All license renewals and applications listed
on Exhibit A of the resolution have met the requirements in city code and state law. Staff
recommend approval and issuance of the appropriate license to each establishment listed on
Exhibit A for the license period of March 1, 2026, to Feb. 28, 2027.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5d) Page 3
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Resolution No. 26-____
Approving renewal of liquor licenses
for the license period March 1, 2026 through February 28, 2027
Whereas, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 340A and St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3
provide for liquor licensing in cooperation with the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division
of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety; and
Whereas, no license may be issued or renewed if required criteria have not been met; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the St. Louis Park City Council that the applicants and
establishments listed in Exhibit A have met the criteria necessary for issuance of their
respective liquor licenses, and the applications are hereby approved for March 1, 2026, to
February 28, 2027.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5d) Page 4
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Exhibit A
Establishment Name Address License Type Total Fee
AC St. Louis Park 5075 Wayzata Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Applebee's Neighborhood Grill &
Bar
8312 Highway 7 on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Boketto 1607 West End Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Bunny's 5916 Excelsior Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Chi-Chi’s 1602 West End Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Copperwing Distillery 6409 Cambridge Street Micro distillery off-sale; cocktail
room on-sale
$800.00
Costco Wholesale #377 5801 W 16th St off-sale $380.00
Courtyard Minneapolis West 9980 Wayzata Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Crave 1603 West End Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Cub Foods 5370 16th Street W off-sale 3.2 $200.00
Cub Foods Knollwood 3620 Texas Ave S off-sale 3.2 $200.00
Cub Liquor 5370 16th Street W off-sale $380.00
Dancing Ganesha 8124 Hwy. 7 on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
DoubleTree Minneapolis Park
Place
1500 Park Place Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Frank Lundberg American Legion
Post 282
6509 Walker St. on-sale intoxicating club &
Sunday sales
$700.00
Fresh Thyme Farmers Market 4840 Excelsior Blvd.,
Suite A
off-sale 3.2 $200.00
Fresh Thyme Liquor 4840 Excelsior Blvd.,
Suite B
off-sale $380.00
Game Show Battle Rooms 1661 West End Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Haggard Barrel Brewing Co., LLC 6413 Cambridge Street brewer off-sale; taproom on-sale
& Sunday sales
$1,000.00
Hazelwood Food and Drink - St.
Louis Park
4450 Excelsior Blvd.#120 on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Homewood Suites 5305 Wayzata Blvd 3.2 on-sale & on-sale Sunday $750.00
Hope Breakfast Bar 5377 West 16th Street on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Lago Tacos 3801 Grand Way on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Life Café 5525 Cedar Lake Road on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Liquor Boy 5620 Cedar Lake Rd off-sale $380.00
Lunds & Byerlys St. Louis Park 3777 Park Ctr Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5d) Page 5
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Lunds & Byerlys Wines & Spirits 3785 Park Ctr Blvd off-sale $380.00
Marcus West End Cinema 1625 West End Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Marriott Minneapolis West 9960 Wayzata Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Mill Valley Kitchen 3906 Excelsior Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Minneapolis Golf Club 2001 Flag Ave S on-sale intoxicating club &
Sunday sales
$700.00
Park Tavern Lounge & Lanes 3401 Louisiana Ave S on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Parkway Pizza 6325 Minnetonka Blvd. on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Punch Bowl Social 1691 Park Place Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Punch Neapolitan Pizza 5799 West 16th Street,
Suite 100
on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Raku Sushi & Lounge 5371 16th St W. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Rosalia Texa Tonka 8028 Minnetonka Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Sato Fusion 4224 Minnetonka Blvd. on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
St. Louis Park Liquor 6316 Minnetonka Blvd off-sale $380.00
Steel Toe Brewing 4848 35th Street W. brewer off-sale; taproom on-sale
& Sunday sales
$1,000.00
Target Store T-2189 8900 Highway 7 off-sale $380.00
Taste of India 5617 Wayzata Blvd on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Texas-Tonka Liquor 8242 Minnetonka Blvd off-sale $380.00
Texa-Tonka Lanes 8200 Minnetonka Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
The Block Restaurant 7007 Walker St. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
The Dampfwerk Distillery Co. 6311 Cambridge St. Micro distillery off-sale; cocktail
room on-sale & Sunday sales
$1,000.00
The Local - West End 1607 Park Place Blvd on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
The Loop 5331 16th Street W. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
The Taco Shop 5618 West 36th Street on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Top Ten Liquors 5111 Excelsior Blvd off-sale $380.00
Total Wine & More 8100 MN-7 off-sale $380.00
Trader Joe's #710 4500 Excelsior Blvd off-sale $380.00
Ullsperger Brewing, LLC 2314 Louisiana Avenue
S.
brewer off-sale; taproom on-sale
& Sunday sales
$1,000.00
Wells Roadside 3712 Quebec Ave S on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Westside Wine Bar & Cheese
Market
8020 Minnetonka Blvd. on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5d) Page 6
Title: Resolution approving annual liquor license renewals
Westside Wine & Spirits 8016 Minnetonka Blvd. off-sale $380.00
Westwood Liquors 2304 Louisiana Ave S off-sale $380.00
Wok in the Park 3005 Utah Ave South on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Yangtze River Restaurant 5625 Wayzata Blvd on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Yard House #8354 1665 Park Place Blvd. on-sale intoxicating & Sunday
sales
$8,950.00
Yum! Kitchen and Bakery 4000 Minnetonka Blvd. on-sale wine & 3.2 $2,750.00
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5e
Executive summary
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant
agreement
Recommended action: Motion to adopt a resolution authorizing the Hennepin County Grant
agreement to partially fund the city’s residential waste reduction, curbside recycling and
organics programs and multifamily waste reduction and recycling programs.
Policy consideration: Does the council wish to receive funding from the county to help pay for
our residential and multifamily waste reduction, recycling and organics programs?
Summary: Each year, the city submits a grant report and application for SCORE (Select
Committee On Recycling and the Environment) funding for residential curbside waste reduction
and recycling. SCORE provides funding for waste reduction and recycling programs in
Minnesota. SCORE funds are derived from the State of Minnesota’s solid waste management
tax on garbage services. The funds are distributed to counties for these programs. Since 1988,
the city has received annual grants from Hennepin County as aid in supporting our programs.
The county’s share of SCORE funds is divided between cities on a proportional basis by the
number of households for residential recycling and multifamily recycling. Funds for residential
organics are now provided based on a participation target of 60% set by the county.
The county’s funding policy (grant program) covers the period from Jan. 1, 2026 – Dec. 31,
2028. The agreement provides for the distribution of SCORE funds that the county receives
from the state. The grant program splits funds between residential recycling (40%), multifamily
recycling (10%) and organics recycling (50%).
This report and request are based on a Hennepin County requirement to provide a council
resolution authorizing each agreement. This particular resolution covers the Residential Waste
Reduction and Recycling Grant Agreement which terminated on Dec. 31, 2025. The amounts for
2026 are not yet known, though it is expected to be slightly less than the previous agreement as
other cities expand their organics program. Funding for 2025 was $193,732.09.
Financial or budget considerations: The funding from this ongoing grant program is used to
help pay for the city’s waste reduction, recycling and organics programs.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: Resolution; Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant
Agreement and 2026-2028 Funding Policy (Attachment A)
Prepared by: Kala Fisher, public services superintendent/deputy public works director
Reviewed by: Jay Hall, public works director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Page 2 City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Resolution No. 26-___
Approving the 2026-2028 Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling
Grant agreement with Hennepin County
Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 115A.552, counties shall ensure that
residents have an opportunity to recycle; and
Whereas, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires that each city implement
and maintain a recycling and organics recycling program; and
Whereas, the Hennepin County Board at its November 6, 2025 meeting adopted a funding
policy to continue to fund cities within Hennepin County for the contract period of January
1, 2026 through December 31, 2028; and
Whereas, in order to receive grant funds, the city must sign the agreement; and
Whereas, the city wishes to receive these grant funds each year,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that the proposed agreement is accepted.
It is further resolved that the city council authorizes the city manager or their designee to
execute such Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant Agreement with the county.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council on
February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025)1
Grant Agreement No:PR00008084
RESIDENTIAL WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
This Grant Agreement is between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA, A-
2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, on behalf of the Hennepin County
Environment and Energy Department, 300 South Sixth Street, MC 679, Minneapolis, Minnesota
5 CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK, 7305 Oxford Street, Saint Louis
Park, Minnesota, 55426
The parties agree as follows:
1. TERM AND AMOUNT OF GRANT
This Agreement shall commence following execution by all parties. GRANTEE shall
complete all Grant Requirements, as defined below, and submit all required
documentation on or before December 31, 2028, unless this Agreement is terminated
earlier in accordance with the provisions herein.
2. GRANT REQUIREMENTS
GRANTEE shall apply for annual grant funds and operate its Waste Reduction and
Recycling Programs as more fully described in Attachment A, the Residential Waste
Reduction and Recycling Funding Policy.
In addition to any other reporting requirements contained in this Agreement, including in
submit grant progress reports to the COUNTY in the manner directed by COUNTY and
which may include summarizing activities and outcomes for the given period, goals,
objectives, activities, outcomes, challenges, lessons learned, financial information, and/or
administrative/programmatic monitoring descriptions.
3. GRANT FUNDS DISBURSEMENT
The COUNTY will distribute SCORE funds that the COUNTY receives from the state to
Hennepin County municipalities. SCORE funds will be dedicated to the following
different purposes: 1) general funding for waste reduction and recycling programs, 2)
curbside organics recycling programs, 3) organics drop-off sites, 4) multifamily waste
reduction and recycling.
SCORE funds are based on revenue received by the State of Minnesota from the solid
waste management tax (SWMT) on garbage services and are subject to change based on
the SWMT revenue received by the state and funds allocated by the legislature. Funds
ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚ
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϱĞͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƉƉƌŽǀŝŶŐ IĞŶŶĞƉŝŶ /ŽƵŶƚLJ wĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů tĂƐƚĞ wĞĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ wĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐ DƌĂŶƚ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚtĂŐĞ ϯ
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 2
distributed to municipalities for the current calendar year will be based on SCORE funds
received by the
The COUNTY will make two payments to the GRANTEE, according to the provisions
amount for general waste reduction and recycling programs, curbside organics recycling
programs, organics drop-off sites, and multifamily waste reduction and recycling. One
payment will be made after COUNTY receives the applications for funding from
GRANTEE. A second payment will be made after basic program requirements, education
and outreach requirements, and performance have been confirmed and approved. If
GRANTEE meets the requirements, both payments will be made during the same
calendar year.
A. Waste reduction and recycling programs
COUNTY will dedicate 40% of SCORE funds to provide funding for city waste
reduction and recycling programs. The following formula will be used to calculate
Number of eligible households
with curbside recycling in city
--------------------------------------
Total number of eligible
households with curbside
recycling in county
x
40% of SCORE
funds available
=
Waste reduction
and recycling
grant amount
available to the
city
Eligible households are defined as households in single-family through fourplex
residential buildings or other residential buildings where each household has its
own recycling collection container to set out for curbside collection and receives
recycling collection service through the city. In cities with open recycling
collection, eligible households are defined as households in single-family through
fourplex residential buildings where each household has its own recycling
collection container to set out for curbside collection. The number of eligible
households will be determined by counting the number of eligible households on
January 1 of each funding year. GRANTEE will report the number to COUNTY
in its annual application for funding.
B. Curbside organics recycling programs
COUNTY will dedicate 50% of SCORE funds to provide funding for curbside
organics recycling programs. Funds will be allocated using participation targets
for each eligible city. Funding is not contingent upon meeting the participation
target. The following formula will be used to calculate GRANT
organics recycling grant amount.
tĂŐĞ ϰCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 3
Target number of households with
curbside organics recycling in city
-----------------------------------
Total number of households with
curbside organics recycling in
county
x
50% of SCORE
funds available
=
Curbside organics
recycling grant
amount available to
the city
Initial participation targets (as a percent of households with curbside recycling
service):
60% for cities that contract for organics recycling service
30% for cities that require haulers to offer organics recycling service
COUNTY will provide a minimum grant of $3,300 per city for curbside organics
recycling programs.
C. Organics drop-off sites
COUNTY will dedicate up to $3,300 per eligible city to provide funding for
organics drop-off site expenses. Cities with a population of less than 10,000 are
eligible.
D. Multifamily waste reduction and recycling
COUNTY will take 10% of SCORE funds, subtract the amount allocated to
organics drop-off sites, and dedicate the remainder to provide funding for
multifamily waste reduction and recycling programs. For the purposes of this
policy, city multifamily waste reduction and recycling programs include organics
recycling. Funds will be allocated based on the number of multifamily
multifamily waste reduction and recycling grant amount.
Number of multifamily
households in city
--------------------------------------
Total number of multifamily
households in county
x
10% of SCORE
funds available
minus organics
drop-off funds
=
Multifamily waste
reduction and
recycling grant
amount available to
the city
If cities do not apply for available multifamily grant funds, the unclaimed funds
will be re-allocated to the cities that applied in proportion to the number of
multifamily households in those cities.
Multifamily households in cities with organized recycling collection are defined
as 1) households in buildings where each household does not have its own
recycling collection container to set out for curbside collection, or 2) households
in buildings that do not receive recycling collection service through the city,
tĂŐĞ ϱCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 4
including apartment buildings, condominiums, townhomes, and cooperative
housing units where a property manager or association coordinates collection
service. Multifamily households in cities with open recycling collection are
defined as households in residential buildings larger than a fourplex.
E. Cities of the first class
Cities
standards and report recycling rates and compliance rates to the COUNTY semi-
annually beginning February 15, 2026, and every August 15 and February 15
thereafter during the term of this Agreement. Cities of the first class must also
report semi-annually beginning February 15, 2026, and every August 15 and
February 15 thereafter, on specific steps for implementation that address the
-0296 R2. COUNTY will
determine annually whether the cities have implemented and satisfied
performance standards. If the COUNTY finds that the cities have not
implemented or satisfied the performance standards, the city must submit a waste
reduction and recycling improvement plan to COUNTY within 60 days of being
notified by COUNTY. The improvement plan must specify the efforts the city
will take to implement and satisfy the performance standards identified by the
COUNTY. The improvement plan must be negotiated with COUNTY and
approved by COUNTY. If COUNTY does not approve the improvement plan,
then it will withhold SCORE funding.
4.PARTY RELATIONSHIP
A. GRANTEE shall select the means, method, and manner of performing Grant
Requirements. Nothing is intended nor should be construed as creating or
establishing any relationship, besides that of grantor and grantee, between the
s vendor, contractor, agent, representative,
or employee for any purpose. GRANTEE shall secure at its own expense all
personnel and resources required in completing Grant Requirements under this
d to perform
any activities under this Agreement will have no contractual relationship with
COUNTY and will not be considered employees of COUNTY.
B. If GRANTEE enters into any agreement with any entity to provide goods or
performance of the Grant Requirements,
GRANTEE shall memorialize that relationship with a written and duly executed
agreement with said entity. That agreement will include, at minimum, the
following provisions:
(i) Neither GRANTEE nor the engaged entity is acting as agent(s) for the
County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota;
(ii) The parties expressly agree that the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota, is not a party to their agreement; and
tĂŐĞ ϲCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 5
(iii)The County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota is not responsible or
liable for any duty or obligation under their agreement, including but
not limited to paying any amount whatsoever under the agreement.
5.NON-DISCRIMINATION
exclude any person nor prohibit their participation in or the benefits of any program,
service or activity related to this Agreement on the grounds of any protected status or
class, including but not limited to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, gender
expression, gender identity, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, or public
assistance status. No person who is protected by applicable law against discrimination
shall be subjected to discrimination.
6. INDEMNIFICATION
GRANTEE shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless COUNTY, its present and former
officials, officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of
,
resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of GRANTEE, a subcontractor,
anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or
omissions they may be liable in the performance of the Grant Requirements in this
Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of GRANTEE to perform any
obligation under this Agreement. For clarification and not limitation, this obligation to
defend, indemnify and hold harmless includes but is not limited to any liability, claims or
actions resulting directly or indirectly from alleged infringement of any copyright or any
property right of another, the employment or alleged employment of GRANTEE
personnel, the unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data, or other noncompliance
with the requirements of these provisions.
7.INSURANCE
Each party warrants that it has purchased insurance or a self-insurance program sufficient
to meet its liability obligations and, at a minimum, to meet the maximum liability limits
of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver of
any immunity from liability under Chapter 466 or any other applicable law.
8. DUTY TO NOTIFY
GRANTEE shall promptly notify COUNTY of any demand, claim, action, cause of
action or litigation brought against GRANTEE, its employees, officers, agents or
subcontractors, which arises out of this Agreement. GRANTEE shall also notify
COUNTY whenever GRANTEE has a reasonable basis for believing that GRANTEE
and/or its employees, officers, agents or subcontractors, and/or COUNTY, might become
the subject of a demand, claim, action, cause of action, administrative action, criminal
arrest, criminal charge or litigation arising out of this Agreement.
tĂŐĞ ϳCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 6
9.DATA, SYSTEMS, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
A.GRANTEE, its officers, agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and
subcontractors shall, to the extent applicable, abide by the provisions of the
Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, chapter 13
(MGDPA) and all other applicable law, rules, regulations and orders relating to
data or the privacy, confidentiality or security of data. For clarification and not
limitation, COUNTY hereby notifies GRANTEE that the requirements of
Minnesota Statutes section 13.05, subd. 11, apply to this Agreement. GRANTEE
shall promptly notify COUNTY if GRANTEE becomes aware of any potential
claims, or facts giving rise to such claims, under the MGDPA or other data, data
security, privacy or confidentiality laws, and shall also comply with the other
requirements of this Section.
Classification of data, including trade secret data, will be determined pursuant to
GRANTEE does not necessarily make the data protected as such under any
applicable law.
B. In addition to the foregoing MGDPA and other applicable law obligations,
GRANTEE shall comply with the following duties and obligations regarding
County Data and County Systems (as each term is defined herein). As used
created by GRANTEE or acquired by GRANTEE from or through COUNTY
pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to handwriting, typewriting,
printing, photocopying, photographing, facsimile transmitting, and every other
means of recording any form of communication or representation, including
electronic media, email, letters, works, pictures, drawings, sounds, videos, or
symbols, or combinations thereof.
If GRANTEE has access to or possession/control of County Data, GRANTEE
shall safeguard and protect the County Data in accordance with generally
accepted industry standards, all laws, and all then applicable COUNTY policies,
procedures, rules and directions. To the extent of any inconsistency between
accepted industry standards and such COUNTY policies, procedures, rules and
directions, GRANTEE shall notify COUNTY of the inconsistency and follow
COUNTY direction. GRANTEE shall immediately notify COUNTY of any
known or suspected security breach or unauthorized access to County Data, then
comply with all responsive directions provided by COUNTY. The foregoing
shall not be construed as eliminating, limiting or otherwise modifying
.
C.INTENTIONALLY OMITTED.
tĂŐĞ ϴCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 7
D.Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement:
(1) At the discretion of COUNTY and as specified in writing by the Grant
Manager, GRANTEE shall deliver to the Grant Manager all County Data
so specified by COUNTY.
(2) COUNTY shall have full ownership and control of all such County Data.
If COUNTY permits GRANTEE to retain copies of the County Data,
GRANTEE shall not, without the prior written consent of COUNTY or
unless required by law, use any of the County Data for any purpose or in
any manner whatsoever; shall not assign, license, loan, sell, copyright,
patent and/or transfer any or all of such County Data; and shall not do
ownership and/or control of such County Data.
(3) Except to the extent required by law or as agreed to by COUNTY,
GRANTEE shall not retain any County Data that are confidential,
protected, privileged, not public, nonpublic, or private, as those
classifications are determined pursuant to applicable law. In addition,
County Data so specified by COUNTY.
10. RECORDS AVAILABILITY/ACCESS
Subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 6.551, the State Auditor, or any
of their authorized representatives, at any time during normal business hours, and as often
as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine,
audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are
pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of GRANTEE and involve
transactions relating to this Agreement. GRANTEE shall maintain these materials and
allow access during the period of this Agreement and for six (6) years after its expiration
or termination.
11.SUCCESSORS, SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS
A. GRANTEE binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to
COUNTY for all covenants, agreements and obligations herein.
B. GRANTEE shall not assign, transfer or pledge this Agreement and/or the
performance of the Grant Requirements, whether in whole or in part, nor assign any
monies due or to become due to it without the prior written consent of COUNTY. A
consent to assign shall be subject to such conditions and provisions as COUNTY may
deem necessary, accomplished by execution of a form prepared by COUNTY and
signed by GRANTEE, the assignee and COUNTY. Permission to assign, however,
tĂŐĞ ϵCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 8
shall under no circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations
under the Agreement.
C. GRANTEE shall not subcontract this Agreement whether in whole or in part, without
the prior written consent of COUNTY. Permission to subcontract, however, shall
under no circumstances relieve GRANTEE of its liabilities and obligations under the
Agreement. Further, GRANTEE shall be fully responsible for the acts, omissions,
and failure of its subcontractors in the performance of any specified contractual
services, and of person(s) directly or indirectly employed by subcontractors.
Contracts between GRANTEE and each subcontractor shall require that the
GRANTEE shall make contracts between GRANTEE and subcontractors available
upon request. For clarification and not limitation of the provisions herein, none of the
following constitutes assent by COUNTY to a contract between GRANTEE and a
with the requir
actions or omissions regarding such contracts.
D. As required by Minnesota Statutes section 471.425, subd. 4a, GRANTEE shall pay
COUNTY for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor, and GRANTEE
shall comply with all other provisions of that statute.
12.MERGER, MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY
A. The entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and supersedes all
oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject
matter. All items that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and
made a part of this Agreement. If there is any conflict between the terms of this
Agreement and referenced or attached items, the terms of this Agreement shall
prevail.
GRANTEE and/or COUNTY are each bound by its own electronic signature(s)
on this Agreement, and each agrees and accepts the electronic signature of the
other party.
B. Any alterations, variations or modifications of the provisions of this Agreement
shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to
this Agreement signed by the parties. Except as expressly provided, the
substantive legal terms contained in this Agreement, including but not limited to
Indemnification, Insurance, Merger, Modification and Severability, Default and
Termination, or Minnesota Law Governs may not be altered, varied, modified or
waived by any change in project scope, specifications, or other document.
tĂŐĞ ϭϬCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 9
C. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the
remaining provisions will not be affected.
13.DEFAULT AND TERMINATION
A. This Agreement may be terminated with or without cause by COUNTY upon
GRANTEE to perform Grant Requirements or failure of the Grant Requirements
to promote a public purpose. Additionally, failure to comply with the terms of
this Agreement shall be just cause for COUNTY to delay payment of Grant Funds
vent of a decision to withhold Grant
Funds, COUNTY shall furnish prior written notice to GRANTEE.
B. COUNTY may immediately terminate this Agreement if GRANTEE, or any
GRANTEE directors, employees, or other personnel are convicted of a criminal
offense relating to any COUNTY, State of Minnesota, or federal grant.
C.Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, GRANTEE
shall remain liable to COUNTY for damages sustained by COUNTY by virtue of
any breach of this Agreement by GRANTEE.
D.The above remedies shall be in addition to any other right or remedy available to
COUNTY under this Agreement, law, statute, rule, and/or equity.
E.
exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or
waiver of the same, unless consented to in writing. Such consent shall not
constitute a general waiver or relinquishment throughout the entire term of the
Agreement.
F. If this Agreement expires or is terminated, with or without cause, by either party,
at any time, GRANTEE shall not be entitled to any Grant Funds except for
reimbursements duly invoiced for completed Grant Requirements pursuant to this
Agreement.
G.Upon written notice, COUNTY may immediately suspend or terminate this
Agreement in the event any of the following occur: (i) COUNTY does not obtain
anticipated funding from an outside source for this project; (ii) funding for this
project from an outside source is withdrawn, frozen, shut down, is otherwise
made unavailable or COUNTY loses the outside funding for any other reason; or
(iii)COUNTY determines, in its sole discretion, that funding is, or has become,
insufficient. COUNTY is not obligated to pay for any Grant Funds related to the
performance of any Grant Requirements occurring after the notice and effective
date of the suspension or termination. In the event COUNTY suspends or
terminates this Agreement pursuant to this paragraph, COUNTY shall pay any
Grant Funds already invoiced by GRANTEE prior to the notice of suspension or
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϱĞͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƉƉƌŽǀŝŶŐ IĞŶŶĞƉŝŶ /ŽƵŶƚLJ wĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů tĂƐƚĞ wĞĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ wĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐ DƌĂŶƚ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚtĂŐĞ ϭϭ
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 10
termination, if those costs and supporting documentation are validated by
COUNTY, except that COUNTY shall not be obligated to pay any Grant Funds as
or for penalties, early termination fees, charges, time and materials for Grant
Requirements not already invoiced.
H.GRANTEE has an affirmative obligation, upon written notice by COUNTY that
this Agreement may be suspended or terminated, to follow reasonable directions
by COUNTY, or absent directions by COUNTY, to exercise a fiduciary
obligation to COUNTY, before incurring or making further costs, expenses,
obligations or encumbrances arising out of or related to this Agreement.
14. SURVIVAL OF PROVISIONS
Provisions that by their nature are intended to survive the term or termination of this
Agreement do survive such term or termination. Such provisions include but are not
limited to: PARTY RELATIONSHIP; INDEMNIFICATION; INSURANCE; DUTY TO
NOTIFY; DATA, SYSTEMS, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; RECORDS-
AVAILABILITY/ACCESS; DEFAULT AND TERMINATION; MEDIA OUTREACH;
and MINNESOTA LAW GOVERNS.
15. GRANT MANAGER
Kirsten Wahlberg
behalf of COUNTY and serve as liaison between COUNTY and GRANTEE.
Kala Fisher, kfisher@stlouisparkmn.gov, 952-924-2183 shall manage the Agreement on
behalf of GRANTEE. GRANTEE may replace such person but shall immediately give
written notice to COUNTY of the name, phone number and email (if available) of such
substitute person and of any other subsequent substitute person.
16. COMPLIANCE AND NON-DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION
A. GRANTEE shall comply with all applicable law, funding sources, regulations,
rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted.
B. GRANTEE certifies that it is not prohibited from doing business with either the
federal government or the state of Minnesota as a result of debarment or
suspension proceedings. GRANTEE shall immediately notify COUNTY if
GRANTEE is debarred or suspended during the term of this Agreement.
17.RECYCLING
COUNTY encourages GRANTEE to establish a recycling program for at least three
materials, such as newsprint, office paper, glass, plastic, and metal.
tĂŐĞ ϭϮCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 11
18. NOTICES
Unless the parties otherwise agree in writing, any notice or demand which must be given
or made by a party under this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing
and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to COUNTY shall be sent to the
Grant Administrator with a copy to the originating COUNTY department at the addresses
given in the opening paragraph of this Agreement. Notice to GRANTEE shall be sent to
the address stated in the opening paragraph of this Agreement or to the address stated in
-9 provided to COUNTY.
19. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
involvement in this Agreement does not result in a conflict or potential conflict of interest
with any party or entity which may be affected by the terms of this Agreement. Should
any conflict or potential conflict of interest become known to GRANTEE, GRANTEE
shall immediately notify COUNTY of the conflict or potential conflict, specifying the
part of this Agreement giving rise to the conflict or potential conflict, and advise
COUNTY whether GRANTEE will or will not resign from the other engagement or
for termination of this Agreement.
20.MEDIA OUTREACH
GRANTEE shall notify COUNTY, prior to publication, release or occurrence of any
Outreach (as defined below). The parties shall coordinate to produce collaborative and
mutually acceptable Outreach. For clarification and not limitation, all Outreach shall be
approved by COUNTY, by and through the Grant Administrator or his/her designee(s),
social media, news releases, external facing communications, advertising, marketing,
promotions, client lists, civic/community events or opportunities and/or other forms of
outreach created by, or on behalf of, GRANTEE (i) that reference or otherwise use the
to, reference or concern the County of Hennepin, this Agreement, the Grant
Requirements performed hereunder or COUNTY personnel, including but not limited to
COUNTY employees and elected officials.
21.MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN
The laws of the state of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations
concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations
between the parties. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation will be
those courts located within the County of Hennepin, state of Minnesota. Litigation,
however, in the federal courts involving the parties will be in the appropriate federal
court within the state of Minnesota.
tĂŐĞ ϭϯCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 12
22. PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX, PROPERTY TAX, AND INCOME TAX
A.GRANTEE affirms that it and its officers have paid all Hennepin County personal
property taxes and property taxes due on all of its Hennepin County properties for
taxes owed on or before the date of the execution of this Agreement. If COUNTY
finds that property taxes have not been paid b
Grant Funds or require the return of all or part of the Grant Funds already
disbursed.
B. GRANTEE acknowledges that Grant Funds may be subject to federal and/or state
or local taxes. Except as part of a tax-specific outreach program, COUNTY
cannot provide tax advice and encourages GRANTEE to consult with a
professional tax advisor.
THIS PORTION OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
tĂŐĞ ϭϰCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025)13
COUNTY BOARD AUTHORIZATION
Reviewed for COUNTY by
the County Attorney's Office:
{{Sig_es_:signer3:signature}}
{{userstamp3_es_:signer3:stamp}}
Reviewed for COUNTY by:
{{Sig_es_:signer4:signature}}
{{userstamp4_es_:signer4:stamp}}
Board Resolution No:
{{*BoardResolution_es_:signer4:brs}}
Document Assembled by:
{{Sig_es_:signer1:signature}}
{{userstamp1_es_:signer1:stamp}}
{{Exh_es_:signer1:attachment:label("Attachments")}}
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
By:
{{Sig_es_:signer6:signature}}
{{userstamp6_es_:signer6:stamp}}
ATTEST:
{{Sig_es_:signer7:signature}}
{{userstamp7_es_:signer7:stamp}}
By:
{{Sig_es_:signer5:signature}}
{{userstamp5_es_:signer5:stamp}}
tĂŐĞ ϭϱCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Grant Form 101 (Revised 9/2025) 14
GRANTEE
GRANTEE warrants that the person who executed this Agreement is authorized to do so on
behalf of GRANTEE as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances.*
By:
{{Sig_es_:signer2:signature}}
{{userstamp2_es_:signer2:stamp}}
{{ ttl_es_:signer2:title}}
*GRANTEE represents and warrants that it has submitted to COUNTY all applicable
documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances) that confirms the signatory's
delegation of authority. Documentation is not required for a sole proprietorship.
tĂŐĞ ϭϲCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
1
Residential
Waste Reduction and
Recycling Funding Policy
January 1, 2026 – December 31, 2028
tĂŐĞ ϭϳCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
2
I. Policy Overview
A.Background
The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners has determined that residential waste reduction
and recycling programs support county goals to make progress toward zero waste, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, and eliminate disparities associated with waste disposal. The county
has adopted the goals established in State Statute and by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) in its Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan and developed a
Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Funding Policy to help reach a 75% recycling rate by
2030.
B.SCORE funds
The county receives funding from the state’s Select Committee on Recycling and the
Environment (SCORE) for the development and implementation of waste reduction and
recycling programs. SCORE funds are based on revenue received by the State of Minnesota from
the solid waste management tax (SWMT) on garbage services and are subject to change based
on the SWMT revenue received by the state and funds allocated by the legislature.
C.Support for city programs
City recycling programs play an important role in the county’s integrated solid waste
management system. The county has funded city recycling programs for over 30 years and will
use this policy to make available all SCORE funds to cities for residential waste reduction and
recycling programs. SCORE funds will be dedicated to four different purposes: 1) general
funding for waste reduction and recycling programs, 2) curbside organics recycling programs, 3)
organics drop-off sites, and 4) multifamily waste reduction and recycling. Funds distributed to
cities for a calendar year will be based on SCORE funds received by the county in the state’s
corresponding fiscal year.
D.Term of the policy
Hennepin County is committed to implementing this policy from January 1, 2026, through
December 31, 2028. The county may revise this policy to align with strategic priorities developed
in the zero-waste plan or solid waste management plan. In addition, the county may revise this
policy, if it determines changes are needed to assure compliance with state law and MPCA goals
established for metropolitan counties. If SCORE funds are eliminated from the state budget or
significantly reduced, the county will consult with cities at that time and develop a
recommendation to the board on future funding for residential waste reduction and recycling
programs.
tĂŐĞ ϭϴCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
3
E.Grant agreements
Each city seeking funding under the terms of the Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling
Funding Policy must enter into a grant agreement with the county for a term concurrent with
the expiration of this policy, December 31, 2028. The grant agreement must be accompanied by
a resolution authorizing the city to enter into such an agreement. If cities form a joint powers
organization responsible for waste reduction and recycling programs, the county will enter into
a grant agreement with that entity and distribute funds to that organization.
II. Allocation of Funds
SCORE funds will be dedicated to the following purposes:
General funding for waste reduction and recycling programs
Curbside organics recycling programs
Organics drop-off sites
Multifamily waste reduction and recycling
A.Waste reduction and recycling programs
The county will dedicate 40% of SCORE funds to provide funding for city waste reduction and
recycling programs. For the purposes of this policy, city waste reduction and recycling programs
include organics recycling. Funds will be allocated based on number of eligible households with
curbside recycling service. The following formula will be used to calculate a city’s grant amount.
Number of eligible households
with curbside recycling in city
-------------------------------
Total number of eligible
households with curbside
recycling in county
x
40% of SCORE
funds available =
Waste reduction
and recycling
grant amount
available to the
city
Eligible households are defined as households in single family through fourplex residential
buildings or other residential buildings where each household has its own recycling collection
container to set out for curbside collection. The number of eligible households will be
determined by counting the number of eligible households on January 1 of each funding year.
The city will report the number in its application for funding.
tĂŐĞ ϭϵCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
4
B.Curbside organics recycling programs
The county will dedicate 50% of SCORE funds to provide funding for curbside organics recycling
programs. Funds will be allocated using participation targets for each city. Funding is not
contingent upon meeting the participation target. The following formula will be used to
calculate a city’s grant amount.
Target number of households
with curbside organics recycling
in city
-------------------------------
Total target number of
households with curbside
organics recycling in county
x 50% of SCORE
funds available =
Curbside organics
recycling grant
amount available
to the city
The county will provide a minimum grant of $3,300 per city for curbside organics recycling
programs.
Participation targets (as a percent of households with curbside recycling service):
60% for cities that contract for organics recycling service
30% for cities that require haulers to offer organics recycling service
C.Organics drop-off sites
The county will dedicate $3,300 per eligible city to provide funding for organics drop-off site
expenses. Cities with an organics drop-off and a population of less than 10,000 are eligible.
E. Multifamily waste reduction and recycling
The county will take 10% of SCORE funds, subtract the amount allocated to organics drop-off
sites, and dedicate the remainder to provide funding for multifamily waste reduction and
recycling programs. For the purposes of this policy, city waste reduction and recycling programs
include organics recycling. Funds will be allocated based on the number of multifamily
households. The following formula will be used to calculate a city’s grant amount.
Number of multifamily
households in city
-------------------------------
Total number of multifamily
households in county
x
10% of SCORE
funds available
minus organics
drop-off funds
=
Multifamily
waste reduction
and recycling
grant amount
available to the
city
tĂŐĞ ϮϬCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
5
If cities do not apply for available multifamily grant funds, the unclaimed funds will be re-
allocated to the cities that applied in proportion to the number of multifamily households in
those cities.
Multifamily households in cities with organized recycling collection are defined as 1) households
in buildings where each household does not have its own recycling collection container to set
out for curbside collection, or 2) households in buildings that do not receive recycling collection
service through the city, including apartment buildings, condominiums, townhomes, and
cooperative housing units where a property manager or association coordinates collection
service. Multifamily households in cities with open recycling collection are defined as
households in residential buildings larger than a fourplex.
III.ApplicationforFunding
A. General program and curbside organics application
To receive funding for waste reduction and recycling programs and curbside organics recycling,
each city must complete an annual grant application by February 15 of that year. The application
consists of a web-based report that requests the following: contract, program, tonnage, and
financial information. The participation rate for the curbside recycling program must also be
included in the web-based report. The city must calculate its participation rate during the month
of October. The methodology for measuring participation must be provided to the county upon
request. The county may request additional information, such as a planning document with a
description of activities the city will implement to increase recycling and make progress toward
county objectives.
B. Organics drop-off sites and multifamily supplementary application
To receive funding for organics drop-off sites and multifamily waste reduction and recycling, a
city must submit a supplementary grant application form annually. The county will provide this
form by February 15, and the city must complete it by March 15 of that year.
IV.Use of Funds
A. Conditions applying to all funds
The following requirements apply to the use of all funds:
1.Funds must be expended on eligible activities per Minnesota Statutes §115A.557.
tĂŐĞ ϮϭCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
6
2.All grant funds accepted from the county must be used in the year granted unless the
county agrees to an exception. The county will not provide any funds in excess of actual
expenses. Funds not spent must be returned to the county.
3.A city or joint powers organization may not charge its residents through property tax,
utility fees, waste fees, environmental fees, or any other method for the portion of its
waste reduction and recycling program costs that are funded by county grant funds.
4.Cities must track expenditures for waste reduction and recycling programs, curbside
organics recycling, organics drop-off sites, and multifamily waste reduction and recycling
and establish accounting mechanisms to provide the information requested in the
financial section of the annual grant application.
5.Waste reduction and recycling activities, revenues, and expenditures are subject to audit.
B. Curbside organics use of funds
Curbside organics grant funds may be used for program expenses, including the following:
•Incentives for participation (service discounts, countertop pails, compostable bags)
•City contract costs
•Education and outreach
•Carts
•Other expenses approved by the county
Yard waste expenses are not eligible. If organics are co-collected with other waste, the organics
expenses must be tracked separately. If a city passes funds through to a hauler, 100% of those
funds must be credited to residents’ bills.
C. Organicsdrop-off sites useof funds
Organics drop-off site grant funds may be used for program expenses, including the following:
•Hauling and disposal
•Dumpsters or carts
•Site construction
•Education and outreach
•Incentives for participation (countertop pails, compostable bags)
•Other expenses approved by the county
D. Multifamily waste reduction and recycling use of funds
Cities that choose to apply for multifamily waste reduction and recycling funding will work with
tĂŐĞ ϮϮCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
7
the county to identify eligible activities that are customized to the city’s goals and needs. These
activities will be determined through the supplementary grant application process.
Multifamily resources provided by the county, including reusable tote bags/baskets and
multifamily specific signs and labels, are not eligible expenses.
V.City Requirements
A. Materialsaccepted
A city’s curbside collection program must accept a list of mixed recyclables as selected by the
county in consultation with haulers, local material recovery facilities, and end markets. The
county will update the list of materials as needed, distribute the list to city recycling
coordinators, and post the list on the county’s website.
B. Education and outreach
The partnership between the county and cities has been highly effective in educating residents
and motivating behavior change. To continue this partnership and increase these efforts, city
waste reduction, recycling and organics recycling activities must be coordinated with county and
regional efforts. Municipalities must adhere to the following requirements:
1. Use county terminology on promotional and educational materials when describing
recycling and organics recycling guidelines, including the description of materials
accepted and not accepted, as well as when describing preparation guidelines.
2. Use images approved by the county if using images of mixed recyclables and organic
materials.
3. Provide the following information on the city’s website:
Recycling and organics recycling materials accepted and not accepted
Curbside collection calendar
Contact information for the city’s recycling coordinator
Links to city recycling resources and programs
Organics drop-off site(s) information
Links to county recycling resources and programs
4.Provide a guide on recycling and organics recycling to residents each year. The guide
shall contain information on curbside collection, materials accepted and not accepted,
organics drop off site information (if applicable), and a curbside collection calendar.
tĂŐĞ ϮϯCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
8
5. Complete two or more waste reduction, recycling and organics recycling educational
activities annually that include the promotion of curbside collection. The county will
provide a list of activities to city recycling coordinators. These activities are in addition to
the provision of an annual guide.
6. If a city develops its own educational materials, does not use a template produced by the
county, does not utilize design services offered by the county, or relies on a hauler to
provide an annual guide, then the city must submit the materials to the county for
approval.
C. Waste reduction and recycling performance
On an annual basis, cities must demonstrate that a reasonable effort has been made to improve
waste reduction and recycling programs. If a city does not demonstrate measurable progress, a
waste reduction and recycling improvement plan must be submitted by the city within 90 days
of being notified by the county. The waste reduction and recycling improvement plan must be
negotiated with the county and specify the efforts that will be undertaken by the city to improve
its program to yield the results necessary to achieve county objectives. In cooperation with the
county, the city may be required to participate in waste sorts and community engagement to
identify strategies to improve waste reduction and recycling outcomes.
D.Cities of the first class
Cities of the first class must comply with the county’s measurable performance standards and
report recycling rates and compliance rates to the county annually by February 15
. Cities of the first class must also report bi-annually on specific steps for
implementation that address the county's priorities.
The county will determine annually whether the cities have implemented and satisfied
performance standards. If the cities do not implement and satisfy the performance standards, a
waste reduction and recycling improvement plan must be submitted by the city within 0 days
of being notified by the county. The improvement plan must specify the efforts the city will take
to implement and satisfy the performance standards identified by the county. The improvement
plan must be negotiated with the county and approved by the county. If the county does not
approve the improvement plan, then SCORE funding will be withheld.
VI.Grant Payments
The county will make two payments to cities each year. Those two payments will provide the
sum of each city’s total grant amount for general waste reduction and recycling programs,
curbside organics recycling programs, organics drop-off sites, and multifamily waste reduction
and recycling. One payment will be made after the county receives the applications for funding.
A second payment will be made after basic program requirements, education and outreach
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϱĞͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƉƉƌŽǀŝŶŐ IĞŶŶĞƉŝŶ /ŽƵŶƚLJ wĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů tĂƐƚĞ wĞĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ wĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐ DƌĂŶƚ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚtĂŐĞ Ϯϰ
9
requirements, and performance have been confirmed and approved. If the city meets the county
requirements, both payments will be made during the same calendar year.
Cities are expected to fulfill the conditions of this policy and the requirements of the county’s
Ordinance 13. It is the responsibility of each city to meet the requirements of Ordinance 13.
The implementation of the county requirements for cities shall be the responsibility of each
respective city. If any city fails to establish or implement any or all of the city requirements in
Ordinance 13, all SCORE funding will be withheld until the city meets the requirements or a
waste reduction and recycling improvement plan is negotiated with the county.
tĂŐĞ ϮϱCity council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5e)
Title: Resolution approving Hennepin County Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant agreement
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Consent agenda item: 5f
Executive summary
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report
Recommended action: Motion to approve the 2025 Pay Equity Report.
Policy consideration: Is the city of St. Louis Park in compliance with Pay Equity parameters?
Summary: The city is required to comply with the 1984 Local Government Pay Equity Act, MS
471.991-471.999 and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 3920. The report is required every three
years, must include data as of Dec. 31, 2025, and be submitted to the Minnesota Management
and Budget office (MMB) by Jan. 31, 2026. This year, the City of St. Louis Park has received an
extension to file by to Feb. 6, 2026. Prior to submission to MMB, the governing body of
the jurisdiction must approve the report.
After approval by the city council, Human Resources will submit the report to MMB indicating
that the council has reviewed and approved the report. MMB will fully review the report
and notify the city in 2026 whether we are “in compliance” or “out of compliance.” A
preliminary statistical analysis of the data using the MMB Pay Equity Software shows that the
City of St. Louis Park is in compliance with Pay Equity parameters.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion, 2025 Pay Equity Report
Prepared by: Rita Vorpahl, HR Director
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f) Page 2
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report
Discussion
Background:
What is Pay Equity?
Pay Equity is a method of eliminating discrimination against women who are paid less than men
for jobs requiring comparable levels of expertise. This goes beyond the familiar idea of equal
pay for equal work where men and women with the same jobs must be paid equally. A policy to
establish pay equity usually means: 1) that all jobs will be evaluated and given points according
to the level of knowledge and responsibility required to do the job; and 2) that salary
adjustments will be made if it is discovered that women are consistently paid less than men for
jobs with similar points.
Which employees are included in the Pay Equity Report?
Only employees who work at least 14 hours per week and 67 days per year (100 days in the
case of students) are included on the attached report. Many of our seasonal, temporary or non-
benefited staff do not meet this threshold and are not included in the report.
How are “job points” determined?
Compensation consultant, Dr. Saado Abboud of Keystone Compensation, has analyzed all of our
positions and assigned job points based on the duties, responsibilities, minimum requirements,
complexities and unfavorable factors of each position.
What pay is reported?
The minimum and maximum monthly pay included in the report is the pay range applicable
to each position. If a position is eligible for city-provided insurance benefits, the maximum
available monthly contribution must be included in the monthly wage. For 2025, the maximum
monthly benefits contribution was $2,130 per month for family coverage. Therefore, the
maximum monthly salary in the report includes an additional $2,130 for benefits-eligible
positions. Positions that are not benefits-eligible are indicated with a (s) on the report and do
not include the additional monthly benefits contribution amount.
Why are years to max salary different for positions?
The city’s non-union compensation plan identifies seven (7) years as the goal for a new
employee to reach the maximum of the pay range, provided they are hired at the minimum.
Union positions have steps negotiated in the union contract that identify how many years it
takes to reach maximum pay. For non-benefited staff, movement through the range is based
solely on performance, therefore staff is required to enter zero (0) for years to max salary and
instead fill in the years of service column with the greatest number of years an employee has
been in the position.
What is exceptional service pay?
Any employee who is eligible for additional pay beyond the range maximum must
be indicated with exceptional service pay (longevity or performance pay). The union positions
of Firefighter and Fire Lieutenant are the only positions that have negotiated exceptional
service pay (longevity).
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f) Page 3
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report
Present considerations:
Is the city in compliance?
Although the city must wait until we receive official notice from MMB, the preliminary
statistical analysis using their software shows that City of St. Louis Park is in compliance. The
city’s underpayment ratio (percent of male classes below predicted pay divided by percent of
female classes below predicted pay) is 142.24. Results of 80 and above are passing.
Additionally, the city’s salary range test (average number of years to max salary for male jobs
divided by the average number of years to max salary for female jobs) result is 93.26. Again,
results of 80 and above are passing. Finally, the city’s exceptional service pay test shows a score
of 0, which is passing.
Next steps: Upon the city council’s approval, Human Resources will provide notice to exclusive
representatives of each bargaining group and post for all other employees for at least 90
days in accordance with MN Administrative Rules 3920.0300. Human Resources will
then submit the 2025 Pay Equity Report to the Minnesota Management & Budget Department
by Feb. 6, 2026, (given an extension past Jan. 31, 2026) as required.
Compliance Report
Jurisdiction: St. Louis Park Report Year: 2026
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard Case: 1 - 2026 DATA (Private (JurOnly))
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Contact: Rita Vorpahl Phone: (952) 928-2846 E-Mail: rvorpahl@stlouisparkmn.gov
The statistical analysis, salary range and exceptional service pay test results are shown below. Part I is general informationfrom your pay equity report data. Parts II, III and IV give you the test results.
For more detail on each test, refer to the Guide to Pay Equity Compliance and Computer Reports.
I. GENERAL JOB CLASS INFORMATION
Male Classes Female Classes Balanced Classes All Job Classes
# Job Classes 58 66 11 135
# Employees 167 94 75 336
Avg. Max Monthly Pay per employee 10934.68 10088.68 10778.24
II. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TEST
A. Underpayment Ratio = 142.2414 *
Male Classes Female Classes
a. # At or above Predicted Pay 23 38
b. # Below Predicted Pay 35 28
c. TOTAL 58 66
d. % Below Predicted Pay (b divided by c = d) 60.34 42.42
*(Result is % of male classes below predicted pay divided by % of female classes below predicted pay.)
B. T-test Results
Degrees of Freedom (DF) = 259 Value of T = -4.164
a. Avg. diff. in pay from predicted pay for male jobs = 20
b. Avg. diff. in pay from predicted pay for female jobs = 299
III. SALARY RANGE TEST = 93.26 (Result is A divided by B)
A. Avg. # of years to max salary for male jobs = 6.50
B. Avg. # of years to max salary for female jobs = 6.97
IV. EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE PAY TEST = 0.00 (Result is B divided by A)
A. % of male classes receiving ESP = 0.00 *
B. % of female classes receiving ESP = 0.00
*(If 20% or less, test result will be 0.00)
Page 1 of 1 1/27/2026 3:28:01 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 4
Job Class Data Entry Verification List
Case: 2026 DATA St. Louis Park LGID: 1286
Job Nbr Class Title NbrMales NbrFemales Non-Binary ClassType JobsPoints Min MoSalary Max Mo Salary Yrs to Max Salary Yrs ofService Exceptional Service Pay
1 Seasonal Maintenance I - Parks 5 1 0 M 80 2086.53 3644.50 7.00 0.00
2 Rec Center Maintenance (R, S, 1 1 0 B 80 2086.53 3644.50 7.00 0.00
3 Human Resources Intern 0 1 0 F 90 2334.35 4666.97 7.00 0.00
4 Police Cadet (T)- CSO 1 3 0 F 90 2334.35 4666.97 7.00 0.00
5 Elections Intern II 0 1 0 F 90 2334.35 5653.05 7.00 0.00
6 Police Intern- Crime Analyst 0 1 0 F 90 2334.35 4666.97 7.00 0.00
7 Customer Service Representativ 0 2 0 F 100 2826.52 5653.05 7.00 0.00
8 Tree Inspector (S)1 0 0 M 100 2826.52 5653.05 7.00 0.00
9 Summer/Winter/Special Event Su 0 1 0 F 100 2826.52 5653.05 7.00 0.00
10 Police Trainee 1 1 0 B 100 4445.08 5556.33 7.00 0.00
11 Customer Service Representativ 0 1 0 F 100 4445.08 5556.33 7.00 0.00
12 Office Assistant- Building and 0 1 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
13 Utility Billing Specialist 0 2 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
14 Accounting Specialist 1 1 0 B 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
15 Office Assistant- Public Works 0 3 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
16 Secretary/Program Aid WWH 0 1 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
17 Office Assistant II - Police 0 3 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
18 Office Assistant -Fire 0 1 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
19 Community Television Producer 1 0 0 M 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
20 Cash Management Accounting Cle 0 1 0 F 110 4948.67 8315.75 7.00 0.00
21 Custodian 3 0 0 M 115 4439.95 7292.61 4.00 0.00
22 Head Instructor (R)0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
23 Permit Technician 1 3 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
24 Forestry Technician 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
25 Maintenance Technician 2 0 0 M 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
26 Deputy City Clerk 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
27 Office Assistant - Admin 0 2 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
28 Multimedia Producer 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
29 Office Assistant- CD 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
30 Graphic Designer 1 0 0 M 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
31 Help Desk Technician 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
32 Office Assistant- Eng 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
Page 1 of 5 1/27/2026 3:28:08 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 5
Job Class Data Entry Verification List
Case: 2026 DATA St. Louis Park LGID: 1286
Job Nbr Class Title NbrMales NbrFemales Non-Binary ClassType JobsPoints Min MoSalary Max Mo Salary Yrs to Max Salary Yrs ofService Exceptional Service Pay
33 Assessing Technician 0 1 0 F 120 5478.25 8977.75 7.00 0.00
34 Public Service Worker 38 3 0 M 125 5072.49 8814.18 6.00 0.00
35 Plant Operator 3 0 0 M 125 6068.97 9231.83 4.00 0.00
36 Public Safety 911 Dispatcher 0 8 0 F 125 6155.62 9658.15 5.00 0.00
37 Fleet Mechanic 4 0 0 M 125 6088.03 9282.09 4.00 0.00
38 Naturalist 2 5 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
39 Elections Specialist 1 0 0 M 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
40 Housing Choice Voucher Special 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
41 Racial Equity and Inclusion Sp 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
42 Social Media Specialist 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
43 Property Maintenance Inspector 0 2 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
44 Solid Waste Specialist 1 1 0 B 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
45 Sustainability Specialist 0 2 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
46 Housing Assistance Specialist 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
47 Information Systems Specialist 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
48 Information Systems Specialist 2 0 0 M 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
49 Video Production Coordinator 1 0 0 M 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
50 Payroll Specialist 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
51 HR Technician 0 1 0 F 130 5990.42 9618.00 7.00 0.00
52 Engineering Technician II 1 0 0 M 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
53 Ecomonic Development Specialis 1 0 0 M 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
54 Associate Planner 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
55 Alternative Response Medic 1 0 0 M 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
56 Public Safety Data Analyst 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
57 Maintenance Mech. Coord (HA) 1 0 0 M 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
58 Administrative Coordinator 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
59 Property Manager/Housing Speci 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
60 Organizational Development Coo 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
61 Digital Services Coordinator 0 1 0 F 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
62 IT Technician 1 0 0 M 140 6537.50 10301.83 7.00 0.00
63 Firefighter 19 0 0 M 145 7004.10 11170.46 3.00 0.00
64 Fire Prevention 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
Page 2 of 5 1/27/2026 3:28:08 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 6
Job Class Data Entry Verification List
Case: 2026 DATA St. Louis Park LGID: 1286
Job Nbr Class Title NbrMales NbrFemales Non-Binary ClassType JobsPoints Min MoSalary Max Mo Salary Yrs to Max Salary Yrs ofService Exceptional Service Pay
65 Property Maintenance Inspector 8 0 0 M 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
66 Legislative and Grants Analyst 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
67 GIS Coordinator 1 0 0 M 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
68 Recreation Supervisor 1 2 0 B 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
69 Recreation Center Supervisor 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
70 Accountant 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
71 Appraiser I 1 0 0 M 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
72 Engineering Tech III 1 0 0 M 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
73 Public Housing Manager 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
74 Records Supervisor - Police 0 1 0 F 150 7147.50 11064.42 7.00 0.00
75 Police Officer 35 12 0 B 155 6960.20 11694.53 12.00 0.00
76 Field coordinator 7 0 0 M 155 7425.91 10821.00 4.00 0.00
77 Fire Lieutenant 5 2 0 B 155 9431.52 11876.64 3.00 0.00
78 Project Coordinator 3 1 0 B 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
79 Senior Planner 0 1 0 F 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
80 Community Engagement Coordinat 1 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
81 Redevelopment Administrator 1 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
82 IT Systems Administrator 1 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
83 HR Coordinator 0 1 0 F 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
84 Senior Construction Codes Insp 8 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
85 Zoning Administrator 1 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
86 Housing Assistance Administrat 0 1 0 F 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
87 Appraiser II 1 1 0 B 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
88 Dispatch Supervisor 1 0 0 M 160 7768.08 11840.08 7.00 0.00
89 Police Sergeant 11 0 0 M 165 11072.45 13637.77 2.00 0.00
90 Senior Accountant 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
91 Communications Manager 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
92 Financial Analyst 0 1 0 F 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
93 Natural Resources Manager 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
94 Nature Center Manager 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
95 Fleet Manager 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
Page 3 of 5 1/27/2026 3:28:08 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 7
Job Class Data Entry Verification List
Case: 2026 DATA St. Louis Park LGID: 1286
Job Nbr Class Title NbrMales NbrFemales Non-Binary ClassType JobsPoints Min MoSalary Max Mo Salary Yrs to Max Salary Yrs ofService Exceptional Service Pay
96 Appraiser III 0 1 0 F 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
97 Rec Center Manager 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
98 Water Resources Coordinator 1 0 0 M 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
99 City Clerk 0 1 0 F 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
100 Sustainability Manager 0 1 0 F 170 8386.75 12613.42 7.00 0.00
101 Operations Superintendent 1 0 0 M 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
102 Property Maintenance & Licensi 1 0 0 M 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
103 Public Services Superintendent 0 1 0 F 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
104 IT Manager 1 0 0 M 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
105 Housing Supervisor 0 1 0 F 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
106 Economic Development Manager 1 1 0 B 180 9070.25 13467.83 7.00 0.00
107 Battalion Chief 3 0 0 M 185 10013.42 13467.83 5.00 0.00
108 Police Lieutenant 3 0 0 M 185 12576.98 15308.32 2.00 0.00
109 Engineering Project Manager 2 0 0 M 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
110 Racial Equity and Inclusion Di 0 1 0 F 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
111 Recreation Superintendent 0 1 0 F 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
112 Engineering Services Manager 1 1 0 B 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
113 Chief Building Official 1 0 0 M 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
114 Facilities Superintendent 1 0 0 M 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
115 Park Superintendent 1 0 0 M 190 9834.08 14422.58 7.00 0.00
116 Deputy Fire Chief 3 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
117 Utilities Superintendent 1 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
118 Deputy Finance Director 1 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
119 Planning Manager/Deputy CD Dir 1 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
120 City Assessor 1 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
121 Deputy Engineering Director 1 0 0 M 200 10327.08 15038.83 7.00 0.00
Page 4 of 5 1/27/2026 3:28:08 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 8
Job Class Data Entry Verification List
Case: 2026 DATA St. Louis Park LGID: 1286
Job Nbr Class Title NbrMales NbrFemales Non-Binary ClassType JobsPoints Min MoSalary Max Mo Salary Yrs to Max Salary Yrs ofService Exceptional Service Pay
122 Human Resources Director 0 1 0 F 210 10884.67 15735.83 7.00 0.00
123 Deputy Police Chief 1 0 0 M 220 11477.25 16476.58 7.00 0.00
124 Fire Chief 1 0 0 M 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
125 Public Works Director 1 0 0 M 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
126 Engineering Director 0 1 0 F 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
127 Parks and Recreation Director 1 0 0 M 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
128 Communications and Technology 0 1 0 F 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
129 Finance Director 0 1 0 F 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
130 Building and Energy Director 1 0 0 M 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
131 Community Development Director 0 1 0 F 230 12087.25 17239.08 7.00 0.00
132 Administrative Services Direct 0 1 0 F 240 12688.67 17990.83 7.00 0.00
133 Police Chief 1 0 0 M 250 13291.67 18744.58 7.00 0.00
134 Deputy City Manager 0 1 0 F 260 13880.42 19480.58 7.00 0.00
135 City Manager 0 1 0 F 270 17642.25 24182.83 7.00 0.00
Job Number Count: 135
Page 5 of 5 1/27/2026 3:28:08 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Approve 2025 Pay Equity Report Page 9
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Public hearing: 6a
Executive summary
Title: Public hearing for Greenway-Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank Restoration project
(4025-2000) - Ward 2
Recommended action: Mayor to open the public hearing, take public testimony and close the
public hearing. The city council will be asked to act on this project at the council meeting on
Feb. 17, 2026.
Policy consideration: Does the city support partnering with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD) to construct the Minnehaha Creek Greenway–Cedar Trail connection?
Summary: MCWD has completed the final design for a 1,000‑foot paved multi-use trail that will
extend the existing trail system along Minnehaha Creek from Meadowbrook Road to the Cedar
Lake Regional Trail. This connection will expand walking and biking access within the area by
eliminating the barrier currently created by the railroad.
MCWD is serving as the lead agency for this joint project. To move the project toward
construction, the MCWD is requesting that the city enter into several agreements that will
define the partnership related to construction, funding, ownership and long-term maintenance
of the trail. Construction is anticipated to occur in the summer of 2026, led and managed by
MCWD. Upon completion, the new trail segment will be owned and maintained by the City of
St. Louis Park.
Financial or budget considerations: The Minnehaha Creek Greenway–Cedar Trail Connection
project is led by the MCWD, with the city responsible for 50% of project costs. The project is
included in the city’s 2026 capital improvement plan (CIP) and will be funded through general
obligation bonds. The city’s share is estimated at $415,000, which is $115,000 above the
original CIP allocation. A more detailed breakdown of funding is provided in the discussion
section of the report.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Attachment #1 – Location map
Jan. 20, 2026 study session report
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, assistant city engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director;
Amelia Cruver, finance director
Approved by: Cindy Wash, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 6a) Page 2
Title: Public hearing for Greenway-Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank Restoration project (4025-2000) - Ward
2
Discussion
Background: The Greenway–Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank Restoration project will
build a 1,000-foot asphalt trail from Meadowbrook Road/Powell Road to the Cedar Lake
Regional Trail, running alongside Minnehaha Creek and passing under the Regional trail, freight
rail and light rail bridges. The work also includes buckthorn removal, streambank restoration in
select locations and limited tree removal, which is necessary to safely construct the trail.
Information regarding this project was shared with the city council in a written report at the
Jan. 20 study session. The study session report includes recommendations for the elements to
include in this project. A summary of the information in the report:
• History of planning and partnership between MCWD and the city
• Description of the project scope
• Overview of project agreements
Financial or budget considerations: The partner project assigns 50% of the total cost to the
city, with MCWD securing a $200,000 Hennepin County grant to help reduce the overall project
expense. The project is included in the city’s 2026 CIP and will be funded through general
obligation bonds. The city’s share is estimated at $415,000, which is $115,000 above the
original CIP budget and reflects a more complete level of design and city tree replacement
requirements.
Staff reviewed the updated cost estimates with the finance department and confirmed that
sufficient capacity exists within its 2026 CIP general obligation bonds, due to lower than
anticipated bonding needs on other projects. The following table outlines the city’s share of the
estimated project cost and funding. CIP Engineer's estimate
Construction cost $240,000 $377,000
Engineering and administration $60,000 $38,000
Total $300,000 $415,000
Funding
General obligation bonds $300,000 $415,000
Next steps: To meet the MCWD’s construction schedule, the following timeline is required. The
schedule includes the city council’s approval of the agreements – effectively approving the
project in mid-February 2026. This timing allows the watershed to hire a contractor to complete
buckthorn management and necessary tree removal prior to March 31, 2026. The three major
project agreements between the watershed, Creekwest LLC and the Metropolitan Council will
be provided in final draft form with the Feb. 17, 2026, city council report.
City council public hearing Feb. 2, 2026
City council approval of agreements Feb. 17, 2026
Early tree and buckthorn removal Complete by March 31, 2026
Construction timeline Summer/fall 2026
LEGEND
Paved Regional Trail
Aggregate Regional Trail
Greenway to Cedar
Trail Connection
Minnehaha Preserve Boardwalk & Trail
SWLRT Green Line Extension
Cedar
L
a
k
e
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
l
No
r
t
h
C
e
d
a
r
L
a
k
e
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
l
MN River
B
l
u
f
f
s
Regiona
l
T
r
a
i
l
Ni
n
e
M
i
l
e
C
r
e
e
k
Re
g
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
l
Lak
e
M
i
n
n
e
t
o
n
k
a
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
l
MINNES
O
T
A
R
I
V
E
R
HENNEPIN
COUNTY
CARVER
COUNTY
SCOTT
COUNTY
ANOKA
COUNTY
DAKOTA
COUNTY
RAMSEY
COUNTY
WRIGHT
COUNTY
LEGEND
Park District Properties
Regional Trail – Paved
Regional Trail – Aggregate
Regional Trail to be Developed
State, Federal or other Regional Trails/Parks
Park Entrance
Nature Centers/Interpretive Center
Downhill Ski and Snowboard Areas
Golf Facilities
LEGEND
Lake Rebecca
Park Reserve
Lake SarahRegional Park
Crow-Hassan
Park Reserve
Elm Creek
Park Reserve
Mississippi Gateway
Regional Park
Fish Lake
Regional
Park
Eagle
Lake
Regional
Park
North Mississippi
Regional Park
Bryant Lake
Regional Park
Glen Lake Golf
& Practice Center
The Landing –
Minnesota
River Heritage Park
Carver
Park Reserve
Lake Minnetonka
Regional Park
Noerenberg
Memorial
Gardens
Baker
Park Reserve
Sochacki
Park
Hyland Lake
Park Reserve
Murphy-
Hanrehan
Park Reserve
MINNEAPOLIS
Silverwood
Park
Gale Woods
Farm
Cleary Lake
Regional Park
Spring Lake
Regional Park
Cedar Lake
Farm Regional Park
CROW RIVER
MISSISSIPPI RIV
E
R
Kingswood
Park
Big Island
Wawatasso Island
French
Regional
Park
formerly Coon Rapids Dam
Regional Park
THREE RIVERS
PARK DISTRICT
TRAIL SYSTEM
Bl
a
k
e
R
o
a
d
Excelsior Blvd
HWY 7
HW
Y
1
6
9
A
v
e
Cr
e
e
k
Minnehaha
Green Line Extension Stations
REGIONAL TRAIL &
TRANSIT SYSTEMS
L
o
u
i
s
i
a
n
a
Blake Road
Station
Louisiana Ave Station
Downtown Hopkins Station
Shady Oak Station
Project Area
City council meeting of February 20, 2026 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing for Greenway-Cedar Trail Connection and Streambank
Restoration project (4025-2000) - Ward 2 Page 3
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Action agenda item: 7a
Executive summary
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolutions accepting the project report, establishing
the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000), approving plans and specifications and
authorizing advertisement for bids.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to pursue the pavement rehabilitation, utility
improvements and sidewalk installation recommended as a part of this project?
Summary: The annual Pavement Management project rehabilitates several miles of local
residential streets. In 2026, the streets to be rehabilitated are in Pavement Management Area 4
(Bronx Park neighborhood). Street rehabilitation work consists of replacing the existing
bituminous pavement, concrete curb and gutter replacement, utility replacement and sidewalk
repairs.
In addition to reconstructing existing infrastructure, new sidewalk segments and impervious
reductions are being recommended to be built as part of this project.
A public hearing was held at the Jan. 20, 2026, council meeting. The attached discussion
provides information addressing questions that were presented during the public hearing or
thereafter. It also includes a revised staff recommendation to maintain 30 ft street widths on
North/South running streets within the project.
Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the city's 2026 capital
improvement plan (CIP) and will be paid for using franchise fees, utility funds and general
obligation bonds (sidewalks). The total cost estimate for the project is $8,460,200, around
$500,000 less than the CIP budget. The lower cost estimate is due to both a reduction in
sidewalk construction and overall construction expenses. The breakdown of the estimate is in
the public hearing report made on Jan. 20, 2026. This report includes a revised staff
recommendation that would increase costs by an estimated $150,000 to $200,000. If approved,
staff will work to finalize the cost through the bid process.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion, Resolutions, Attachment #1: Project map - staff
recommendations (updated), Attachment #2 - Sidewalk segment matrix, Attachment
#3- Community member feedback, Jan. 12, 2026 communications report, Jan. 20, 2026
public hearing report
Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, engineering project manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director; Jack Sullivan, assistant city engineer; Amelia
Cruver, finance director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Discussion
Background: This year’s project will be performed in Area 4 of the city’s eight pavement
management areas. It includes work in the Bronx Park neighborhood.
Information regarding this project was shared with the city council in a written report at the
study session on Jan. 12, 2026. The study session report includes recommendations for the
elements to include in this project. A summary of the information in the report:
• Description of the project scope
• Sidewalk segment matrix and recommendations
• Street width recommendations
An overview of the recommended design for this project was presented at the city council
meeting on Jan. 20, 2026. The mayor opened the public hearing, inviting members of the public
to speak regarding the recommended design. Fourteen residents spoke during the public
hearing. The following is a summary and staff responses to the questions from the public
hearing and from council members:
1) What is the rationale for narrowing streets? Is there data to support the idea that
narrower streets are safer?
The city’s approach to designing our transportation projects is guided by the Living Streets
Policy, which establishes a goal of creating a complete and integrated public right of way
that enhances neighborhood livability.
The Living Streets Policy guides staff recommendations throughout all phases of
transportation projects and informs how project scopes and design options are evaluated.
The policy is intentionally not a prescriptive, one-size-fits-all standard, but rather establishes
guiding principles that are applied on a project-by-project basis based on context, function
and community input. Final decisions regarding design elements and project features are
ultimately made by the city council.
The Living Streets Policy is guided by the following six principles:
• Enhance walking and biking conditions and connections
• Traffic management
• Stormwater management
• Support the urban forest
• Create a sense of place
• Ensure cost-effective and practical solutions
Street right-sizing is one tool used to help advance these principles. Recommendations are
evaluated based on project-specific objectives and a context-sensitive design approach that
considers street type and function, emergency access, operational needs, environmental
and social factors, right of way constraints and feedback from the community. This
approach is intended to preserve and enhance neighborhood livability while considering
public safety, mobility and long-term infrastructure performance.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Street width and safety
With respect to safety, research from the National Association of City Transportation
Officials (NACTO) shows that narrower lane width can help manage vehicle speeds without
reducing safety and that wider travel lanes do not correlate with improved safety. Lower
vehicle speeds are associated with reduced crash severity, lower noise levels and improved
conditions for residential streets. In addition, wider travel lanes increase pedestrian
exposure and crossing distances at intersections and mid-block crossings.
National research is used to inform design decisions, however, local operational needs or
site-specific constraints should also be considered.
2) What is the feedback from emergency services (fire and police) and public works
regarding the street widths on this project?
Engineering met with fire, police and public works departments to review the proposed
street-width recommendations and to gather department-specific feedback based on their
operational experience and service delivery needs.
Through these discussions, departments noted that the context of the Bronx Park
neighborhood presents unique operational challenges. Most homes do not have driveways
that access the street and instead rely on alley access, where available parking is limited. As
a result, households with multiple vehicles are more likely to rely on on-street parking.
Fire and police departments shared that two cars parked directly across from each other
can create response concerns for emergency access during winter conditions. These
concerns were identified as neighborhood-specific and context-driven, rather than citywide.
Updated staff recommendations
Based on interdepartmental coordination and a context-sensitive evaluation of the project,
staff recommend revisions to the street widths recommendations presented at the public
hearing on Jan. 20, 2026.
• Staff recommend that all north/south streets (Kentucky, Jersey, Idaho, Colorado
and Brunswick avenues) remain at their existing width of 30 feet.
• Staff recommend that, if the sidewalk on the north side of 29th Street is
approved, the street width be reduced from 30 feet to 26 feet, with parking
prohibited on the north side of the street.
This recommendation minimizes impacts to existing trees, driveway
lengths and adjacent private property.
Seasonal emergency access and operational needs are addressed by
posting no parking on the street.
If the city council does not support the construction of a sidewalk on 29th
Street, staff recommends that the street remain at its current width of 30
feet.
The attached resolution has been updated based on the above staff recommendations.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
3) Concern regarding on-street parking demand
A parking inventory was conducted on all street segments proposed for reconstruction. On
the north–south streets, observed on-street parking utilization ranged from approximately
20 to 40 percent of available spaces. On 29th Street, less than 25 percent of available on-
street parking was observed to be in use.
Based on this inventory, staff do not anticipate a shortage of on-street parking resulting
from the proposed parking restrictions and street-width adjustments. However, staff
recognize that parking behavior varies by season and time of day and acknowledge the
operational challenges identified elsewhere in this report, particularly related to winter
maintenance and emergency access.
4) Will 29th Street become a snow emergency plow route like 28th Street?
During a declared snow emergency, on-street parking is prohibited on all streets, except for
those specifically designated as exempt from winter snow emergency restrictions. Neither
28th Street nor 29th Street is exempt, and both are subject to the same parking restrictions
during snow emergencies.
Public works department prioritizes snowplowing on 28th Street because it carries higher
traffic volumes and functions as a primary access route for the surrounding neighborhood.
This ensures a reliable route in and out of the area during snow events.
All remaining neighborhood streets, including 29th Street, are plowed after priority routes
are cleared. No changes to snow emergency designations, plow routes or plowing schedules
are proposed as part of this project.
5) Alternative parking options during snow emergencies
The city does not have designated public parking areas available for community members to
relocate vehicles during snow emergency events. During declared snow emergencies,
residents are responsible for complying with on-street parking restrictions, consistent with
city policy and current operations.
6) How wide are the existing sidewalks and how do they compare to the proposed new
sidewalks?
Any new sidewalk installed in St. Louis Park is constructed at five (5) feet or wider.
According to MnDOT ADA standards and national guidelines, a minimum five-foot sidewalk
width is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This ensures
accessibility for wheelchair users, improves pedestrian safety and allows comfortable, side-
by-side walking. The majority of existing sidewalks in the Bronx Park neighborhood are
approximately five feet wide, although some blocks have sidewalks around four feet wide.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
7) How many trees are being removed as part of the project and what are the sizes are the
trees?
As part of the proposed sidewalk construction on the north side of 29th Street, four trees
are recommended for removal. The diameters of these trees are three inches, 12 inches,
nine inches and three inches. Additionally, three trees are recommended for removal due to
poor health, with diameters of eight inches, eight inches and 27 inches. In total, the project,
as recommended, includes approximately 70 inches of tree diameter being removed. This
does not change with the revised recommendation. Tree replacement will be conducted in
accordance with the city’s tree ordinance. New street trees will be planted in the
neighborhood the year following construction, ensuring the overall urban canopy is
maintained and that neighborhood tree coverage is preserved over time.
8) Is Ottawa Avenue (north of Minnetonka Boulevard) the same design as what is being
proposed on 29th Street?
Ottawa Avenue, north of Minnetonka Boulevard, is a 26-foot-wide street with parking
restricted to one side. Sidewalks on Ottawa Avenue are present on either one or both sides
of the street, depending on the block. This configuration is comparable to the proposed
design for 29th Street, which also includes a 26-foot-wide street and parking prohibited on
one side.
9) The proposed sidewalk on 29th Street does not show up on the Connect the Park plan or
the Comprehensive 2040 plan. Why is the city proposing sidewalk on 29th Street?
As part of each year’s pavement management project development, staff review the
existing sidewalk system and evaluate potential locations for new sidewalks to close gaps
and create a well-connected, equitably distributed sidewalk network. The process used to
identify these locations is consistent with the city’s Sidewalk Planning Framework.
All streets included in the project are low-volume (less than 2,000 vehicles per day), so the
goal was to evaluate sidewalk gaps at the block level, ensuring continuous sidewalks on at
least one side of each street segment. Since 29th Street currently has no existing sidewalks
on either side, staff evaluated both sides to compare impacts, costs and feasibility.
In accordance with policy, staff recommend constructing a sidewalk on the north side of
29th Street, between Louisiana and Brunswick avenues. This new sidewalk would:
• Provide a continuous east–west connection through the Bronx Park neighborhood.
• Enhance pedestrian accessibility within the immediate area.
• Integrate with the existing sidewalk network.
• Minimize impacts on existing trees and private property, particularly with the
proposed street width reduction from 30 feet to 26 feet.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
10) Garbage trucks currently back down the alleys from 29th Street. Concern that reducing
the width will make it impossible for garbage trucks to access the alley.
For alleys south of 29th Street, solid waste trucks currently back down the alley for
collection. This is necessary because the alley terminates at a T-intersection on the south
end, preventing trucks from turning without impacting private property, trees, fences or
other obstructions.
While staff do not expect the proposed street width to impede solid waste collection or
alley access, staff will coordinate with solid waste staff during construction to address any
concerns.
11) What will the pavement markings and bike facility look like on 28th Street after
construction?
Currently, 28th Street between Louisiana and Dakota avenues has dedicated bike lanes with
a buffer (two white pavement marking lines) to delineate the bike lane from the vehicle
travel lane. The vehicle travel lanes are 10.5 feet wide. Vehicle traffic on 28th Street is
approximately 1,350 vehicles per day.
According to guidance from the National Association of City Transportation Officials
(NACTO) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), buffered bike lanes are
considered all ages and abilities facilities on a street with this volume and a 20mph speed
limit.
Once the pavement is replaced, the travel lanes will be reduced to ten feet wide, and the
bike lane will be increased from five and one half feet to six feet on each side.
12) How will the proposed sidewalk and street width changes affect private utilities such as
power poles and utility boxes?
The proposed sidewalk and street width changes are expected to have minimal impact on
private utilities, both above and below ground.
Staff will coordinate directly with the affected utility companies to address any necessary
relocations, ensuring service interruptions are avoided or minimized.
13) Concern that the 29th Street sidewalk would shorten the driveway lengths and parking
would be restricted in their driveways?
Driveway lengths were carefully considered during the sidewalk design process. The design
ensures that driveways remain functional and can continue to accommodate parked
vehicles after construction.
To minimize impacts, the project includes narrowing both the street and the boulevard,
which reduces the amount of right of way required and preserves driveway lengths as much
as possible.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 7
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
14) Will construction impact fences, retaining walls, landscaping, etc., and who would be
responsible for removing and reinstalling?
A summary of how construction will affect private improvements within the city right of
way.
• The city will be responsible for the removal and reinstallation of fences, retaining
walls, concrete walkways/driveways and trees that are impacted by construction
activities.
• Property owners will be responsible for the removal, repair or reinstallation of
landscaping, underground sprinkler systems and dog-containment fences.
Financial or budget considerations: The total project cost was presented at the Jan. 20 public
hearing as $8,460,200. For the detailed funding breakdown, refer to the report from the public
hearing held on Jan. 20, 2026.
If the updated staff recommendations in this report are approved, additional design work will
be required to update project plans and the cost of the project will increase. This includes
construction costs as well as the cost to redesign the project. Staff’s preliminary estimate for
this increase is $150,000-200,000; the actual construction cost will not be known until bids are
opened. This change will also delay the bidding schedule for this project by about a month.
If the low bid exceeds the capital improvement plan (CIP) budget for franchise fees, staff will
coordinate with the finance department and the design team to evaluate options to reduce
costs, which could include adjustments to the project scope. Any recommended changes will be
presented to city council when the project is brought forward for bid award.
Operations and maintenance costs: This project creates new city infrastructure, including 0.54
miles of sidewalks. Since the new sidewalk is designated as a neighborhood walk (property
owner snow removal), there is no anticipated increase in snow removal costs.
There will be long-term costs associated with future sidewalk repair. However, funding for
sidewalk maintenance and repairs is included in the capital improvement plan (CIP) and is
reviewed and adjusted annually to account for inflation and identified needs.
Next steps: If the updated staff recommendations in this report are approved, the project
schedule will be adjusted to accommodate updates to the plans and specifications. Staff
anticipate that construction will begin no later than June 2026.
The proposed updated schedule is designed to ensure construction completion within 2026 and
is summarized as follows:
Council project approval Feb. 2, 2026
Council awards construction bids Late April 2026
Construction June to November 2026
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 8
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Resolution No. 26-___
Accepting the project report,
establishing Improvement Project No. 4026-1000,
approving plans and specifications and authorizing
advertisement for bids for improvement
Project No. 4026-1000
Whereas, the city council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Project Engineer related to the 2026 Pavement Management Program,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that:
1. The Project Report regarding Project No. 4026-1000 is hereby accepted.
2. Such improvements as proposed are necessary, cost-effective and feasible as detailed in
the Project Report.
3. The proposed project, designated as Project No. 4026-1000, is hereby established and
ordered.
4. The following new sidewalk segments are hereby established and ordered for
construction
Segment
number Description
Sidewalk Classification
1
29th Street – north side
(Louisiana Avenue to Brunswick Avenue)
Neighborhood Sidewalk
(Property Owner)
5. The following street widths are hereby established and ordered for construction
The following are the recommended street width changes:
Street segment Existing
(ft)
Proposed
(ft)
29th Street (Louisiana Avenue to Brunswick Avenue) 30 26
The following streets are recommended to stay at their current width:
Street segment Existing
(ft)
Proposed
(ft)
Kentucky Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard to 27th Street) 30 30
Jersey Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard to 27th Street) 30 30
Idaho Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard to 29th Street) 30 30
Idaho Avenue (28th Street to 27th Street) 30 30
Colorado Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard to 27th Street) 30 30
Brunswick Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard to 27th Street) 30 30
28th Street (Louisiana Avenue to Dakota Avenue) 34 34
28th Street (Dakota Avenue to Brunswick Avenue) 30 30
28th Street (Brunswick Avenue to Blackstone Avenue) 26 26
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 9
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
6. The plans and specifications for the making of these improvements, as prepared under
the direction of the engineering director, or designee, are approved. The engineering
director is allowed to make adjustments to these plans and specifications, such as
narrowing the width of boulevards or sidewalks, in cases where special circumstances
exist in the field, such as the location of trees, provided that these adjustments will
make a material difference in addressing any special circumstances that may exist.
7. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official
city newspaper and in relevant industry publications an advertisement for bids for the
making of said improvements under said-approved plans and specifications. The
advertisement shall appear not less than 10 days prior to the date and time bids will be
received electronically by the project manager and accompanied by a bid bond payable
to the city for five (5) percent of the amount of the bid. The electronic bids will only be
available to view after the bids are closed and the city receives the passcode from the
bidding host site.
8. The project manager, or designee, shall report the receipt of bids to the city council
shortly after the opening date. The report shall include a tabulation of the bid results
and a recommendation to the city council.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager
Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Page 10
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1
Resolution No. 26-___
Authorize no parking on the north side of 29th Street between
Louisiana Avenue and Brunswick Avenue
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park staff initiated the public engagement, preliminary
and final design for the 2026 Pavement Management Project in the Bronx Park neighborhood;
and,
Whereas, staff recommend constructing a sidewalk on the north side of 29th Street,
between Louisiana Avenue and Brunswick Avenue; and,
Whereas, to minimize impacts on existing trees and private property, the width of 29th
Street is proposed to be reduced from 30 feet to 26 feet; and,
Whereas, seasonal emergency access and operational needs are addressed by posting
no parking on the north side of 29th street between Louisiana Avenue and Brunswick Avenue;
and,
Whereas, staff conducted a parking review and found that current on‑street parking use
remains within the available supply, even with parking prohibited on the north side of 29th
Street,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that the engineering director is authorized to:
1. Install “No Parking” signage on the north side of 29th Street between Louisiana
Avenue and Brunswick Avenue.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager
Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
2026 Pavement Management Project
Staff Recommendations (Updated)
DA
K
O
T
A
AV
E
S
MINNETONKA BLVD
GE
O
R
G
I
A
A
V
E
S
29TH ST W
27TH ST W
28TH ST W
26TH ST W
31ST ST W
LO
U
I
S
I
A
N
A
A
V
E
S
KE
N
T
U
C
K
Y
A
V
E
S
JE
R
S
E
Y
A
V
E
S
ID
A
H
O
A
V
E
S
HA
M
P
S
H
I
R
E
A
V
E
S
FL
O
R
I
D
A
A
V
E
S
ED
G
E
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
S
BR
U
N
S
W
I
C
K
A
V
E
S
CO
L
O
R
A
D
O
A
V
E
S
BL
A
C
K
S
T
O
N
E
A
V
E
S
AL
A
B
A
M
A
A
V
E
S
Dakota ParkDakota Park
Nelson ParkNelson Park
Roxbury
Park
Roxbury
Park
Cedar
Knoll
Park
Cedar
Knoll
Park
Bronx ParkBronx Park
Date: 1/26/2026
Pavement reconstruction
Pavement reconstruction and watermain replacement
Existing sidewalk
Existing trail
Sidewalks - staff recommended
p 0 500 1,000250
Feet
30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30' to 26'30'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
30
'
27
'
34'34'34'34'34'34'34'34'30'30'26'
XX' to XX' : Recommended street width
changes on 29th Street
No parking on north side
XX' : Existing street width (No changes)
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a) Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1 Page 11
Attachment #2 – Sidewalk segment matrix
Segment #1
29th Street – north side
(Louisiana Avenue to Brunswick Avenue)
Data:
Traffic Volumes 130 to 320 vehicles/day
Design:
Right of way (ROW) width 60 feet
Street width Existing: 30 feet
Proposed 26 feet
Distance from existing back of curb
to ROW line
14 feet
Permanent easement required? None
Proposed boulevard width 0 to 4 feet
Proposed concrete sidewalk width 5 feet
Proposed sidewalk length 2,855 feet (0.54 miles)
Existing sidewalk length 0 feet
Snow removal responsibility Neighborhood sidewalk
(property owner snow removal)
Impacts:
Trees in boulevard 26 trees
Trees removed 4 trees removed
(27 caliper inches total)
Properties adjacent to proposed
sidewalk
20
Landscaping impacted 1 property at 2857 Edgewood has private landscaping
in right of way that would be impacted
Existing retaining walls impacted Short existing retaining wall at 2857 Edgewood would
be impacted and either replaced or yard could be
regraded
New proposed retaining walls New retaining wall needed at 2856 Colorado and 2856
Brunswick due to the grade of the existing yard
Miscellaneous Proposed sidewalk would be at the back of curb
between Dakota and Colorado Avenue due to grade of
yards and to protect existing trees. Boulevard width
varies to protect existing trees and ensure adequate
driveway parking lengths
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Resolutions establishing the 2026 Pavement Management project (4026-1000) - Ward 1 Page 12
Financial:
Construction cost $393,000
Cost per linear foot of new sidewalk $138 per linear foot
Staff recommendation
Build in 2026? Yes
The proposed sidewalk would create a continuous
east/west sidewalk connection through the Bronx Park
neighborhood. The sidewalk would provide
accessibility for pedestrians within the immediate area
and feed into the existing sidewalk system. Along with
the proposed street width reduction, the sidewalk
would have minimal impacts to the existing trees.
itLJ coƵncil meeting oĨ FeďrƵarLJ 2͕ 2Ϭ2ϲ ;Item Eo͘ ϳaͿ
ditle: ZesolƵtions estaďlisŚing tŚe 2Ϭ2ϲ Waǀement Danagement proũect ;ϰϬ2ϲͲ1ϬϬϬͿ Ͳ tard 1Wage 1ϯ
Segment #2
27th Street – south side
(184 feet west of Kentucky Avenue to Kentucky Avenue)
Data:
Traffic Volumes NA
Design:
Right of way (ROW) width 60 feet
Street width Existing: 28 feet
Distance from existing back of curb
to ROW line
16 feet
Permanent easement required? None
Proposed boulevard width 5 feet
Proposed concrete sidewalk width 5 feet
Proposed sidewalk length 155 feet (0.03 miles)
Existing sidewalk length 132 feet
Snow removal responsibility Neighborhood sidewalk
(property owner snow removal)
Impacts:
Trees in boulevard 1 tree
Trees removed 1 tree removed
(7 caliper inches total)
Properties adjacent to proposed
sidewalk
1
Landscaping impacted None
Existing retaining walls impacted None
New proposed retaining walls None
Miscellaneous Proposed sidewalk would reduce driveway parking
length to less than 16 feet. Vehicle parked in the
driveway would like block the sidewalk.
Financial:
Construction cost $30,000
Cost per linear foot of new sidewalk $190 per linear foot
Staff recommendation
Build in 2026? No
The proposed sidewalk is not recommended at this
time due to the impacts in the existing right of way.
Sidewalks on 27th Street would be reevaluated when
27th Streets is scheduled for reconstruction in the
future. This would allow more options in the design of
the sidewalk/street to minimize impacts.
itLJ coƵncil meeting oĨ FeďrƵarLJ 2͕ 2Ϭ2ϲ ;Item Eo͘ ϳaͿ
ditle: ZesolƵtions estaďlisŚing tŚe 2Ϭ2ϲ Waǀement Danagement proũect ;ϰϬ2ϲͲ1ϬϬϬͿ Ͳ tard 1Wage 1ϰ
1
Aaron Wiesen
From:
Sent:Sunday, January 25, 2026 5:01 PM
To:Daniel Bashore
Cc:Aaron Wiesen
Subject:Letter to City Council re: Bronx Park, 29th St. construction plans
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Sunday, Jan. 25, 2026
Dear Members;
I am opposed to the new plans to narrow 29th St. and possibly add a sidewalk on the north side, with no
parking allowed on that side. I am wondering why you are choosing 29 th St? Is St. Louis Park actually going to
pave sidewalks on Every East/West street in the entire city?
I have been a resident at 2857 Hampshsire Ave S since 1981. I believe all of the residents on the northside of
29th St. live on a corner property. Regarding you wanting to make the street safer. I don't see how narrowing
the street makes it safer. Conversely, I believe it makes it more dangerous. Cars will be weaving in and out of
each other to squeeze by, especially if cars, trucks, and maintenance vehicles are now parking on the South
side of 29th St. Imagine if you will, we get heavy snowfalls. Sometimes the plows leave snow piled up 1-2'
from the curb. On corners, it's even worse. On their 2 nd round, the plows often leave 2-3' high of snow,
compacted with ice boulders at the sidewalk openings and all around the street corner, which takes hours to
remove. On my corner I have a total of 3 sidewalk openings to clear, a driveway, an opening to the ally, and
the garbage cans. You are proposing a sidewalk on 29 th N. The length of my property on 29th St is, 127.89',
(according to 'Park Surveyors' document in 1946). That is including my driveway, so now you have added
approximately 112' of property I have to clear every snowfall, sometimes twice a day because of plows
returning. I understand the 28th St. residents do not have this burden of clearing that sidewalk. Please consider
the added amount of hard physical labor you are adding to me and other residents on 29 th St. I am not the
only senior resident involved here. I am on Social Security and cannot afford to pay snow removal companies
$500/season whether it snows or not. To put it into perspective; the 1st 1/2 of my property taxes alone
cost me about 1 1/3 months of my social security income!
I see numerous young people riding their bikes only on the roads (even on north/south streets), so narrowing
this road would be more dangerous for them because they elect not to use the sidewalks at all.
You may think it's necessary to add this sidewalk for people walking families and dogs etc. I have lived here for
45 years. The number of residents in this Bronx area has not increased. There are no new apartments, condos,
or townhouses to increase the population of this area. People do walk down 29 th St., but they also have the
option to walk out of their house on 29th, go through their own yard and immediately be on a N/S sidewalk.
And, if they don't live on 29th St., they have the option to walk the N/S sidewalks right from their homes.
ŝƚLJĐŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϮ͕ϮϬϮϲ;/ƚĞŵEŽ͘ϳĂͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐƚŚĞϮϬϮϲWĂǀĞŵĞŶƚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ϰϬϮϲͲϭϬϬϬͿͲtĂƌĚϭWĂŐĞϭϱ
2
This is a huge construction proposal that this area has seen so much of recently. When there is any occurrence
on Minnetonka Blvd., (say an accident, utility work, or SLP construction), the cars automatically detour to
29th St. with a huge amount of cars coming through, sometimes for weeks at a time. A narrowed road,
especially in winter would make this a busy and dangerous thorough fare.
Please consider all of the trees and gardens you will destroy. If you rip up approximately 10-15' from the curb,
I would lose my mature Blaze Maple I planted, 2 gardens, 3 large lilac trees, and a large Silver Maple. I have
been told by Rainbow Tree's Arborist that any heavy equipment; a backhoe weighted over roots, or major
roots severed, would indeed kill a tree within 5 years. (It happened to the Arbor tree on my west boulevard.
The city widened
Hampshire Ave because of the stoplights installed at 29 th and Minnetonka Blvd, they severed the roots of the
tree, and soon after, strong winds made the tree list, and the city said it had to be removed. The city was going
to charge me to remove it, then they decided to charge me ½ of the removal. I had been treating this Arbor
tree for many years to prevent emerald ash borer). The city should have given me a break, for it was their fault
the tree had to come down).
I do not use my front door except to get the mail, (there is no true entryway/landing, and mud and snow
would instantly be in my living room. I use the side door on 29 th St. because everything I access is on that side
of my house. A sidewalk on 29th would feel invasive to me as I enter and exit my side door. I sit outside and
entertain friends on that side of the house. There are at least 2 homes I can think of where their property is
situated very close to 29th St. and it would be even worse for them.
Also, many residents were very upset with the Michel construction company and the damage they did to our
yards following the installation of new gas lines. The grass seed restoration project was beyond poor. Their
'seed carpets' did not biodegrade as promised. The plastic cording would get all tangled in the lawn mower.
The carpet became one solid mass that had to be dug up, and they left a lot of sand and huge rocks. I collected
14 containers of large rocks out of my yard. I still cannot grow grass successfully where they worked. My
neighbor said the same thing and his yard/grass is perfection. You may not use the same company of course,
but imagine the time, money spent for watering, and effort involved in trying to correct the mess they left!
People on 'NextDoor' were complaining of the poor work they did.
Recently a new cement alley was put in off of 29 th St. The largest dump trucks I have ever witnessed were
using my driveway to maneuver backing into that alley. I asked them not to and they continued anyway. I had
to flag down a SLP city worker and he grabbed 6 orange cones to cover my driveway opening. Then the trucks
proceeded to use my neighbors driveway all the way to their chain link fence, I was horrified and angry.
These issues are part of the reason we are so done with these construction projects with no concern for the
people who live here.
I attended the very 1st meeting at City Hall many months ago. It mentioned both Minnetonka Blvd and 29 th St.
projects in the letter I received, so I went to it, but no one was there to represent the 29 th St. project. I could
not attend Jan 20th meeting because my car was hit and totaled on Friday Jan 16 th in that dangerous snowfall. I
was told by a neighbor; if I say I am opposed to the narrowing of 29 th and the sidewalk, I should also mention
that if city council votes to pass the project, then I want the most narrowing so you lose the least right of way.
This does not make sense to me; I don't understand what it means. I do know that I strongly oppose the
narrowing and the sidewalk projects.
ŝƚLJĐŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϮ͕ϮϬϮϲ;/ƚĞŵEŽ͘ϳĂͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐƚŚĞϮϬϮϲWĂǀĞŵĞŶƚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ϰϬϮϲͲϭϬϬϬͿͲtĂƌĚϭWĂŐĞϭϲ
3
Sincerely,
2857 Hampshire Ave S.
St. Louis Park, MN
55426
ŝƚLJĐŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞĞƚŝŶŐŽĨ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϮ͕ϮϬϮϲ;/ƚĞŵEŽ͘ϳĂͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ZĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐƚŚĞϮϬϮϲWĂǀĞŵĞŶƚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ϰϬϮϲͲϭϬϬϬͿͲtĂƌĚϭWĂŐĞϭϳ
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Action agenda item: 7b
Executive summary
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805
Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3
Recommended action: Approve a conditional use permit for 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard to
allow a religious institution and a reduction of 13 parking spaces to the parking requirement.
Summary: Park Community Church applied for a conditional use permit to renovate the interior
of the sanctuary and community spaces at Park Community Church, expand the sanctuary by
approximately 500 square feet on the south side of the building, and remove existing pavement
on the north and west sides of the building and replace those areas with green space. The
purpose of the project is to provide more space for the existing congregation in the sanctuary
and improve accessibility, comfort and functionality without altering the building’s character.
The zoning code requires a conditional use permit for religious institutions in the N-2 zoning
district. Although the church’s establishment predates this code requirement, the proposed site
work requires the church to come into compliance with city code.
The zoning code allows city council to revise parking requirements as part of a conditional use
permit application. The applicant requests the city council revise the parking requirement
downward by 13 parking spaces given excess street parking available adjacent to Lenox
Community Center that can be used to accommodate additional parking needs. Lenox
Community Center provides 115 off-street parking spaces, which is nearly double the number
of parking spaces required for the use. Staff do not anticipate adverse impacts on the adjacent
property owners resulting from the parking reduction or the use of street parking along the
east side of Hampshire Avenue South.
The planning commission held a public hearing on Jan. 7 and Jan. 21, 2026. Two people spoke in
support of the project. On Jan. 21, 2026, the planning commission closed the public hearing and
voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the motion.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: Resolution, site survey, site plan, landscape plan, building elevations,
Jan. 7, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes, Jan. 21, 2026 planning commission
draft meeting minutes
Prepared by: Katelyn Champoux, associate planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager/deputy community development director;
Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Discussion
Site information:
Park Community Church is located at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard in the Lenox neighborhood.
The church was established in 1946 as St. Louis Park Evangelical Free Church, but the church
building was not constructed until 1948. The property spans one city block bounded by
Minnetonka Boulevard to the north, Idaho Avenue South to the west, and Hampshire Avenue
South to the east. The property contains the 29,000 square foot church and a 1,600 square foot
parish house in the northwest corner. The project does not propose changes to the existing
parish house.
Site area (acres) 1.5 acres
Building area (sq ft) 28,892 square feet
Use Religious institution
2040 Future Land Use CIV – Civic
Zoning N-2
Surrounding land uses North: Single-unit dwellings
East: Community center
South: Single-unit dwellings
West: Single-unit dwellings
Background:
Park Community Church proposes to renovate the interior of the building, complete a minor
expansion to the existing sanctuary, and remove excess pavement along the north and west
sides of the building to accommodate additional green space. The purpose of the project is to
provide more space for the existing congregation in the sanctuary and improve accessibility,
comfort and functionality without altering the building’s character. The zoning code requires a
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
conditional use permit for religious institutions in the N-2 zoning district. Although the church’s
establishment predates this code requirement, the proposed site work requires the church to
come into compliance with city code.
Present considerations:
The applicant requests the city approve a conditional use permit for 6805 Minnetonka Blvd. to
allow a religious institution use and consider a reduction of required on-site parking.
Zoning analysis:
Below is a table summarizing the zoning requirements for this project. Further details on some
of the requirements are provided after the table.
Factor Required Proposed Met?
Use Religious institution Religious institution Yes
Height 40 feet (max) 37.5 feet Yes
Building
Materials
Minimum of 60% class 1; No more
than 10% class 3 materials
North: Class 1 – 90%, Class 3 – 4%
South: Class 1 – 64%, Class 3 – 1%
West: Class 1 – 92%, Class 3 – 1%
East: Class 1 – 91%, Class 3 – 1%
Yes
Off-Street
Parking
98 parking spaces See parking analysis below. Yes
EV charging
infrastructure
EV chargers: 3 parking spaces
Conduit for future chargers: 29
parking spaces
EV chargers: 4 parking spaces
Conduit for future chargers: 28
parking spaces (plus the extra EV
charging space)
Yes
Bicycle parking 6 bicycle parking spaces 12 bicycle parking spaces Yes
Setbacks Front: 25 feet
Side: 9 feet or 20 feet when
adjacent to a property zoned N-1
Rear: 25 feet
Front: 34 feet
Side: 35 feet, 91 feet
Rear: 80 feet
Yes
Landscaping Trees: 30
Shrubs: 177
Trees: 37 trees (7 existing, 30
new)
Shrubs: 180 (8 existing, 172
new)
Yes
Impervious
surface
coverage
80% (max) 57% Yes
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 4
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Off-street parking.
Parking requirement. The proposed project meets the parking requirement for Park Community
Church with the proposed proof of parking and parking reduction. The zoning code requires
religious institutions to provide one parking space per three seats. For Park Community Church,
this would apply to the capacity of its sanctuary. The floor plan shows 344 seats in the
sanctuary, which would require 115 parking spaces. The church qualifies for a 15% transit
reduction given its proximity to high-frequency bus service at the intersection of Minnetonka
Boulevard and Hampshire Avenue South. This reduces the requirement to 98 parking spaces.
The proposed site plan indicates the provision of 58 parking spaces in the parking lot, two (2)
parking spaces in the parish house driveway, and 13 parking spaces on the street adjacent to
the property. The existing church parking lot has 67 parking spaces.
Proof of parking. Park Community Church proposes using the proof of parking ordinance in the
zoning code to meet a portion of the remaining parking requirement. Proof of parking
demonstrates that a property can accommodate the required parking while deferring
construction of this additional parking until the zoning administrator or property owner
determines necessary. The applicant provided a site plan showing 12 additional proof of
parking spaces for a total of 85 parking spaces for the site.
Request for reduction. The zoning code allows city council to revise parking requirements as
part of a conditional use permit application. The applicant requests the city council revise the
parking requirement downward by 13 parking spaces given excess parking available adjacent to
Lenox Community Center that can be used to accommodate additional parking needs. Lenox
Community Center provides 115 off-street parking spaces, which is nearly double the number
of parking spaces required for the use. Given the surplus of off-street parking, staff find it
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 5
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
appropriate to assume that Lenox Community Center may not need adjacent street parking to
accommodate its parking demand.
Staff recommend reducing the parking
requirement by 13 parking spaces under
the assumption that the street parking
available along the east side of
Hampshire Avenue South adjacent to
Lenox Community Center may
accommodate this need. Park
Community Church shared that these
spaces are typically used by church
patrons and it anticipates this will
continue after completion of the
proposed project. Staff do not
anticipate adverse impacts on the
adjacent property owners resulting
from the parking reduction or the use of
street parking along the east side of
Hampshire Avenue South.
Access. The project proposes to reduce the number of access points to the site from seven to
four. The project would remove the two access points to Minnetonka Boulevard on the north
side of the site and remove one of the driveways on Hampshire Avenue South. After
completion of the project, church patrons may access the site via the driveways off Idaho
Avenue South and Hampshire Avenue South or the alley access off Idaho Avenue South.
Building materials. The zoning ordinance requires at least 60% class 1 materials, which include
materials such as glass and brick, and allows for up to 10% class 3 materials. Although the
project does not propose major external changes to the building, the existing building uses less
than 5% of class 3 materials on each façade.
Height. The height of the building is 37.5 feet. This will not change with the proposed project.
The building height meets the zoning code requirement of a maximum of 40 feet.
Yards. As noted in the table above, the project complies with all minimum yard requirements
for the building.
Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). The project proposes electric vehicle charging for four
parking spaces including one ADA parking space. It also proposes providing conduit for future
EV chargers for 28 parking spaces. This meets the zoning code requirement.
Bicycle parking. The zoning code requires six bicycle parking spaces on the site. The proposed
project will provide 12 bicycle parking spaces, which exceeds the zoning code requirement.
Landscaping. The property requires 30 trees and 177 shrubs. There are seven (7) existing trees
on site that will be preserved. The applicant will plant 30 new trees for a total of 37 trees on the
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 6
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
site. The applicant will plant 172 new shrubs on site to add to eight (8) existing shrubs for a
total of 180 shrubs. This meets the landscaping requirement for the property.
Conditional use permit analysis:
Staff finds the application meets the following general requirements for conditional use permits
listed in city code section 36-33(b):
1. Consistency with plans. It is consistent with and supportive of principles, goals,
objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood objectives and
implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan. The proposed project aligns with
the city’s strategic priority of environmental stewardship by reducing the impervious
surface coverage on the site by nearly 11% and adding 30 trees and other landscaping to
the site.
2. Nuisance. It is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of
properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on adjacent
streets and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. Staff do not
anticipate the proposed project will have adverse impacts on the existing and
anticipated traffic conditions adjacent to the site.
3. Compliance with code. It is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose of city
code and the zoning district in which the conditional use is located. The proposed use
meets the conditions required for religious institutions located in the N-2 zoning district.
4. Consistency with service capacity. It will not have undue adverse impacts on
governmental facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
The proposal is consistent with sewer and water service capacity.
5. Site design. It is consistent with the design and other requirements of site and landscape
plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect or civil
engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the conditions imposed on the
use by the city council. The site design meets these requirements.
6. Consistency with utilities. It is consistent with the city’s stormwater, sanitary sewer and
water plans. The utilities have capacity for the proposed use.
Staff find the project meets all general CUP requirements and the specific requirements for
religious institutions in the N-2 zoning district.
Public outreach: A public hearing notice was posted in the Sun Sailor newspaper and mailed to
property owners within 350 feet of the site. The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting at
Park Community Church on Dec. 3, 2025. One resident attended the neighborhood meeting. He
shared general concerns about people parking on the street in front of his house and private
sidewalk leading to the street but did not oppose the project. He also reached out to staff for
clarification of how the city determines its parking requirements.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 7
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Planning commission: Staff presented the application to the planning commission on Jan. 7,
2026. Due to an error in the mailing notice, staff recommended the planning commission table
the agenda item and continue the public hearing at the Jan. 21, 2026 planning commission
meeting. The planning commission opened the public hearing on Jan. 7, 2026 and received
testimony from one person who shared general support for the project. Staff sent a notice for
the Jan. 21, 2026 public hearing to neighboring properties on Jan. 6, 2026.
The planning commission re-opened the public hearing at its Jan. 21, 2026 meeting. One person
spoke in support of the project. The planning commission closed the public hearing and voted
7-0 to recommend approval of the motion.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 8
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Resolution No. 26 -__
Approving a conditional use permit under Section 36-163 of the St.
Louis Park zoning ordinance to allow a religious institution in the N-2
zoning district and a reduction to the parking requirement
at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard
Whereas, Park Community Church applied for approval of a conditional use permit to
allow a religious institution for the purpose of modifying the existing site at 6805 Minnetonka
Blvd.; the property is legally described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto; and
Whereas, the property is guided CIV – Civic in the comprehensive plan future land use
map; and
Whereas, the property is located in the N-2 zoning district; and
Whereas, the city council has determined that the application meets the conditions for
religious institutions in the N-2 zoning district, including:
1. All buildings shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any parcel that is zoned N and
used for a dwelling.
2. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided to maintain vehicular and
pedestrian safety.
3. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot zoned
N and used for a dwelling.
4. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or
arterial, or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without
generating significant traffic on local residential streets.
Whereas, the religious institution use is consistent with and supportive of principles, goals,
objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood objectives, and
implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan; and
Whereas, the religious institution use is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use
and enjoyment of properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on
adjacent streets, and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use; and
Whereas, the religious institution use is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose
of city code and the zoning district in which the conditional use is located; and
Whereas, the religious institution use will not have undue adverse impacts on
governmental facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed; and
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 9
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Whereas, the religious institution use is consistent with the design and other requirements
of site and landscape plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape
architect or civil engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the conditions imposed on
the use by the city council; and
Whereas, the religious institution use is consistent with the city’s stormwater, sanitary
sewer, and water plans; and
Whereas, the religious institution use complies with all conditions imposed by the city
council and listed within the conditional use permit; and
Whereas, Section 36-361(d) of the St. Louis Park zoning ordinance allows city council to
revise the parking requirements upward or downward as part of a conditional use permit based on
verifiable information pertaining to parking; and
Whereas, Park Community Church must provide 98 parking spaces; and
Whereas, Park Community Church provides 60 off-street parking spaces, 13 street parking
spaces, and 12 proof of parking spaces for a total of 85 parking spaces; and
Whereas, the neighboring property located directly east at 6715 Minnetonka Blvd. (Lenox
Community Center) has a surplus of off-street parking spaces and does not require the adjacent
street parking spaces to meet its minimum parking requirement; and
Whereas, staff find it acceptable to reduce the parking requirement for Park Community
Church by 13 parking spaces given the availability of more than 13 street parking spaces along the
eastern side of Hampshire Ave. S. adjacent to the Lenox Community Center; and
Whereas, the contents of Case No. 25-08-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of
the record of decision for this case,
Now therefore be it resolved that the conditional use permit is hereby approved and
accepted by the city council as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, city plans and
regulations of the City of St. Louis Park, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to
the opinion of the city attorney and certification by the city clerk and subject to the following
conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of
the zoning ordinance, approved official exhibits and city code.
2. Construction and staging information will be provided to staff for review and approval
before building permits are issued.
3. All new utility service structures shall be buried.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 10
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
4. Prior to installation of any new signs, the applicant shall submit the necessary sign
permits and a site sign plan that shows all existing and proposed signs. No signs will be
permitted in public right-of-way.
5. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met:
a. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility and city representatives.
b. All necessary permits shall be obtained.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met:
a. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of
credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 1.25 times
the estimated costs for landscaping.
7. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All city noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no
construction activity between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through
Friday, and between 7 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays.
b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring
properties.
c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
d. The city shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public
street.
e. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the city
engineer (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been taken to
ensure motorist and pedestrian safety.
f. The developer shall install and maintain chain link security fencing that is at
least six feet tall along the perimeter of the site. All gates and access points
shall be locked during non-working hours.
g. Temporary electric power connections shall not adversely impact surrounding
neighborhood service.
8. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy permit the private
utilities, site landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the official
exhibits.
9. Upon city approval of and acceptance of private site improvements, the developer shall
provide a one-year warranty in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit for 25% of
the final construction costs of the improvements.
10. 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.
11. The proof of parking spaces shall be constructed when determined necessary by the
zoning administrator or at such a time as the property owner determines necessary.
Any landscaping removed to construct the parking spaces shall be relocated on site to
remain compliant with city code.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 11
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
12. The conditional use permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the use, building or
structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed or abandoned.
It is further resolved that the city clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in
the office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Register of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b) Page 12
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard –
Ward 3
Exhibit A
All of Lots 3, 4, 6, 7 and 29, Block 5, “Lenox,” according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, Lot 28, Block 5, “Lenox”, except the South 2 feet thereof, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with that part of the vacated alleys
adjacent to said lots 3, 4, 6, 7, 28, and 29.
Abstract Property
AND
All of Lots 1, 2, 5, 8, and 9, and that part of Lot 10 lying North of the South 20.0 feet thereof,
“Lenox”, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in
and for said Hennepin County, together with that part of the vacated alleys adjacent to said lots
1, 2, 5, 8,9, and 10.
Torrens Property
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
9" VCP
9" VCP (Per Rec.)
9" VCP (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
ALLEY
(A Public R/W)
9"
V
C
P
N89°18'32"E 267.90
S0
1
°
0
8
'
5
7
"
E
2
3
0
.
9
8
S89°13'28"W 134.18
S01°05'32"E
22.00
S89°13'27"W 134.20
N0
1
°
0
2
'
0
6
"
W
2
5
3
.
3
7
ID
A
H
O
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
O
U
T
H
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
(A Public R/W)
HA
M
P
S
H
I
R
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
O
U
T
H
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
Existing House
Existing
Garage
Existing
Garage
2 Story Lap Sided House
Foundation Area =
1,678 +/- Sq. Ft.
Existing House
2 Story Brick Sided Church with Lookout Basement
Foundation Area = 13,411+/- Sq. Ft.
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete Sidewalk
Concrete Sidewalk
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete Walkway
Concrete Walkway
Concrete
Concrete
Concrete
Driveway
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Steps
Concrete Steps
W/ Railing
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Walkway
Concrete Step
W/ Railing
Concrete
Concrete
Access
Access
Access
Access
Access
Truncated Dome
Truncated Domes
Bike Rack
Column
Column
Column
Overhang
Overhang
Bituminous Parking Lot
Bituminous Parking Lot
Bituminous Parking Lot
Bituminous Drive
De
c
k
Wood Step
12
24
9
9
3
6
2
2
Wood Fence
[A] Wood Fence
Crosses Property Line
Wood Fence
Keystone
Retaining Wall
Monument
Sign
Wood Fence
[B] Bituminous Parking Lot
Crosses Property Line
Rock Pile
88
.
7
17.9
10
.
7
20.8
6.
1
24.5 2.
5
34.0
2.
4
24.4
35
.
8
19.2
39
.
7
1.0
9.
5
18.3
8.
7
61.8
22
.
0
20.0
11
.
6
17.8
3
1
.
2
21.2
19
.
9
7.1
13
.
6
25.8
26
.
3
40.2
1.3
5.
5
1.4
49
.
8
4.
4
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
PID: 1711721120215
Address: 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard
PID: 1711721120002
Address: 3029 Idaho Avenue South
Owner: Margaret Peltier
PID: 1711721120016
Address: 3024 Hampshire Avenue South
Owner: Poppenhagen Housing Division
Sa
n
.
M
a
i
n
EXCEPTION
AL
L
E
Y
Wat. Serv.
(Per Rec.)
Concrete Drive
Wat. Serv. (Per Rec.)
The N Line of the S 2 Feet
of Lot 28, Block 5, "Lenox"
The N Line of the S 20 Feet
of Lot 10, Block 5, "Lenox"
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED
All of Lots 3, 4, 6, 7 and 29, Block 5, "Lenox," according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Lot 28,
Block 5, "Lenox", except the South 2 feet thereof, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
together with that part of the vacated alleys adjacent to said lots 3, 4, 6, 7, 28 and 29.
Abstract Property
AND
All of Lots 1, 2, 5, 8, and 9, and that part of Lot 10 lying North of the South 20.0 feet thereof, "Lenox", according to the
plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, together with that
part of the vacated alleys adjacent to said lots 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, and 10.
Torrens Property
GENERAL SURVEY NOTES
1. Bearings are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System (1986 Adjustment).
2. Elevations are based on the NGVD 29 Datum. Site Benchmark is the top nut of the fire hydrant located in the
southeast quadrant at the intersection of Minnetonka Boulevard and Idaho Avenue South, as shown hereon.
Elevation = 929.46.
3. We have shown the location of utilities to the best of our ability based on observed evidence together with evidence
from the following sources: plans obtained from utility companies, plans provided by client, markings by utility
companies and other appropriate sources. We have used this information to develop a view of the underground
utilities for this site. However, lacking excavation, the exact location of underground features cannot be accurately,
completely and reliably depicted. Where additional or more detailed information is required, the client is advised that
excavation may be necessary. Also, please note that seasonal conditions may inhibit our ability to visibly observe all
the utilities located on the subject property.
ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY NOTES
(numbered per Table A)
1. Monuments placed and/or found at all major corners of the boundary of the surveyed property as shown hereon.
2. Site Address: 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55426.
3. This property is contained in Zone X (area determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood
Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27053C0353F, effective date of November 4, 2016.
4. The gross land area is 64,936 +/- square feet or 1.491 +/- acres.
7. (a) Exterior dimensions of buildings at ground level as shown hereon.
(b)(1) Square footage of exterior footprint of buildings at ground level as shown hereon.
8. Substantial features observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork as shown hereon. Please note that seasonal
conditions may inhibit our ability to visibly observe all site features located on the subject property.
9. The number of striped parking stalls on this site are as follows: 58 Regular + 9 Handicap = 67 Total Parking Stalls.
13. The names of the adjoining owners of the platted lands, as shown hereon, are based on information obtained from
the Hennepin County Interactive Property Map.
SURVEY REPORT
1. This map and report was prepared without the benefit of a Commitment for Title Insurance. The property description
was obtained from county tax records and may not be the description of record. There may be easements or other
matters of record we are unaware of and thus not shown hereon.
2. Conflicts such as (but not limited to): encroachments, protrusions, access, occupation, and easements and/or
servitudes:
[A]. Wood fence crosses the south line of the subject property, as shown hereon.
[B]. Bituminous parking lot crosses the south line of the subject property, as shown hereon.
ALTA CERTIFICATION
To: St Louis Park Evang Free Church:
This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2021 Minimum
Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and
includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 7(a), 7(b)(1), 8, 9, and 13 of Table A thereof.
The fieldwork was completed on 10-2-2025.
Dated this 8th day of October, 2025.
________________________________________________________
Rory L. Synstelien Minnesota License No. 44565
rory@civilsitegroup.com
VICINITY MAP
68
0
5
M
i
n
n
e
t
o
n
k
a
B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d
St
.
L
o
u
i
s
P
a
r
k
,
H
e
n
n
e
p
i
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
5
5
4
2
6
76
7
N
o
r
t
h
E
u
s
t
i
s
S
t
r
e
e
t
,
S
u
i
t
e
1
9
0
,
S
t
.
P
a
u
l
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
t
o
a
5
5
1
1
4
Po
p
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
PR
O
J
E
C
T
PROJECT NO.: 25375.00
COPYRIGHT 2025 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
V1.0
ALTA/NSPS LAND
TITLE SURVEY
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
N
44565
RORY L. SYNSTELIEN
LICENSE NO.DATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY,
PLAN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME
OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND
THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND
SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA.
10-8-2025N
CL
I
E
N
T
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture
5000 Glenwood Avenue
Golden Valley, MN 55422
civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060
QA/QC
FIELD CREW
DRAWN BY
REVIEWED BY
UPDATED BY
MG/BS/TL
DS
CJ
.
OVERHEAD UTILITIES
GASMAIN
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
FIBER/COMM. LINE
ELECTRIC LINE (RECORD)
WATERMAIN
ELECTRIC LINE
GASMAIN (RECORD)
CHAINLINK FENCE LINE
Linetype & Symbol Legend
CONCRETE SURFACE
PAVER SURFACE
BITUMINOUS SURFACE
GRAVEL/LANDSCAPE
SURFACE
IRON FENCE LINE
GUARDRAIL
WATERMAIN (RECORD)
SANITARY SEWER (RECORD)
STORM SEWER (RECORD)
FIBER/COMM. LINE (RECORD)
TELEPHONE LINE (RECORD)
TELEPHONE LINE
SIGN
SANITARY MANHOLE
STORM MANHOLE
CABLE TV BOX
TELEPHONE MANHOLE
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
TELEPHONE BOX
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
GAS METER
ELECTRICAL METER
WATER MANHOLE
WATER VALVE
AIR CONDITIONER
BOLLARD
CATCH BASIN
ELECTRIC MANHOLE
GAS VALVE
FLAG POLE
HANDICAP SYMBOL
FOUND IRON MONUMENT
HYDRANT
CAST IRON MONUMENT
SET OR TO BE SET IRON MONUMENT
FLARED END SECTION
POWER POLE
UTILITY MANHOLE
GUY WIRE
CONIFEROUS TREE
DECIDUOUS TREE
ROOF DRAIN
SEWER CLEAN OUT
FIRE CONNECTION
WELL
UTILITY VAULT
POST INDICATOR VALVE
GAS MANHOLE
HAND HOLE
FIBER/COMM. MANHOLE
MAIL BOX
FUEL TANK
ELECTRICAL OUTLET
SB SOIL BORING
LIGHT POLE
ACCESS RESTRICTION
WOODEN FENCE LINE
SATELLITE DISH
BUSH/SHRUB
40102001020
SCALE IN FEET
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϳďͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjŝŶŐ Ă ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ ƉĞƌŵŝƚ ĨŽƌ Ă ƌĞůŝŐŝŽƵƐ ŝŶƐƚŝƚƵƚŝŽŶ Ăƚ
ϲϴϬϱ aŝŶŶĞƚŽŶŬĂ .ŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ ʹ tĂƌĚ ϯ tĂŐĞ ϭϯ
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
9" VCP
9" VCP (Per Rec.)
9" VCP (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
9"
V
C
P
N89°18'32"E 267.90
S0
1
°
0
8
'
5
7
"
E
2
3
0
.
9
8
S89°13'28"W 134.18
S01°05'32"E
22.00
S89°13'27"W 134.20
N0
1
°
0
2
'
0
6
"
W
2
5
3
.
3
7
Existing House
Existing
Garage
Existing
Garage
2 Story Lap Sided House
Foundation Area =
1,678 +/- Sq. Ft.
Existing House
2 Story Brick Sided Church with Lookout Basement
Foundation Area = 13,411+/- Sq. Ft.
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete Sidewalk
Concrete Sidewalk
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete
Driveway
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Steps
Concrete Steps
W/ Railing
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Step
W/ Railing
Concrete
Access
Truncated Dome
Truncated Domes
Column
Column
Column
Overhang
Overhang
De
c
k
Wood Step
Wood Fence
[A] Wood Fence
Crosses Property Line
Keystone
Retaining Wall
Monument
Sign
[B] Bituminous Parking Lot
Crosses Property Line
Rock Pile
88
.
7
17.9
10
.
7
20.8
6.
1
24.5 2.
5
34.0
2.
4
24.4
35
.
8
19.2
39
.
7
1.0
9.
5
18.3
8.
7
61.8
22
.
0
20.0
11
.
6
17.8
3
1
.
2
21.2
19
.
9
7.1
13
.
6
25.8
26
.
3
40.2
1.3
5.
5
1.4
49
.
8
4.
4
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
PID: 1711721120215
Address: 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard
PID: 1711721120002
Address: 3029 Idaho Avenue South
Owner: Margaret Peltier
PID: 1711721120016
Address: 3024 Hampshire Avenue South
Owner: Poppenhagen Housing Division
Sa
n
.
M
a
i
n
Wat. Serv.
(Per Rec.)
Wat. Serv. (Per Rec.)
4. 14" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
5. 12" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
6. 12" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
7. 30 FT TALL
ARBORVITAE
TREE
1. 12" DIM HONEY
LOCUST TREE
2. 8FT TALL
JUNIPER TREE
12. JUNIPER
SHRUB
11. JUNIPER
SHRUBS
3. 8 FT TALL
JUNIPER TREE
9.WEIGELA
SHRUB
10. WEIGELA
SHRUB
13. JUNIPER
SHRUB
14. JUNIPER
SHRUB
15. JUNIPER
SHRUB
8. JUNIPER
SHRUB
EV
NO
PARKINGNO
PARKING
5' PARKING SETBACK
30' BLDG. SETBACK
5'
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
5' PARKING SETBACK
5'
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
B
L
D
G
.
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
B
L
D
G
.
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30' BLDG. SETBACK
30' BLDG. SETBACK
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
ARROW. DO NOT
PAINT, FOR CODE
REVIEW ONLY, TYP.
24
.
0
7.
7
5.0
26.0
7.
7
10
.
0
5.
0
24
.
0
91.2
35
.
4
34
.
0
6
.
0
6.0
30
.
0
13.0
8.
5
7.
0
18
.
0
12
.
0
12
.
0
18
.
0
3.
0
18
.
0
12
.
0
12
.
0
18
.
0
18
.
0
7.
0
2.
3
6.
0
3' CURB
TAPER
7' CURB
TAPER
5' CURB
TAPER
PED RAMP,
SEE DETAILS,
TYP.
5' CURB
TAPER
7' CURB
TAPER
3' CURB
TAPER
5' TRANSITION B612
TO SURMOUNTABLE
CURB
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
CONC. WALK
CONC. WALK
CONC. VALLEY
GUTTER
CONC. B612
CURB & GUTTER
CONC. RIBBON
CURB
CONC. B612
CURB &
GUTTER
CONC. B612
CURB & GUTTER
CONC. WALK
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
MATCH
EXISTING
(6) "HOOP STYLE" BICYCLE
RACKS, SURFACE MOUNT
PER MANUF. SPECS.
12 SPACES
ACCESSIBLE
PARKING SPACE,
INCL. SIGNAGE,
STRIPING AND
RAMPS
BIT. PVMT., TYP, SEE FINAL
GEOTECH FOR THICKNESS
CONCRETE COMM.
DRIVEWAY, PER
CITY STANDARDS
PVMT. MARKINGS, TYP
6' WALL TRASH
ENCLOSURE
AREA, SEE
ARCH.
CONCRETE COMM.
DRIVEWAY, PER
CITY STANDARDS
ADJUST SANITARY
CASTING PER PROPOSED
GRADING, SEE SHEET C3.0
TO
TOTO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
R5.0
R
2
0
.
0
R
1
0
.
0
R1
0
.
0
R2
0
.
0
R
5
.
0
R5
.
0
R5.0
R
3
.
0
R3
.
0
R
1
7
.
0
R
1
7
.
0
TO
4' DRAINAGE
SWALE
8' TAPER
CURB.
INSURE BACK
OF CURB IS
WITHIN PROP
LIMITS.
CONC. SURMOUNTABLE
CURB & GUTTER
R
3
.
0
R3
.
0
R
5
.
0
R3
.
0
7' CURB
TAPER
FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV
FEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEVFEV
FEV FEV
FEVFEV
CONCRETE
BOLLARD
TYP.
FEV
14.0
10
.
0
EVEV
FEV
FEVFEV
8' ALUMINUM
FENCE TYP.
4' ALUMINUM
FENCE TYP.
RIBBON
CURB TYP.
3' CURB
TAPER TYP.
COORDINATE WITH
NEIGHBOR ALL SITE WORK
TO BE DONE OUTSIDE OF
PROPERTY LINE
9.0
8.5
8.5
8.5
EV3.0
5
.
0
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture
5000 Glenwood Avenue
Golden Valley, MN 55422
civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060
COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c
PR
O
J
E
C
T
2025
ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
10/17/2025 CITY SUBMITTAL
12/1/2025 CITY RESUBMITTAL
12/22/2025 CITY RESUBMITTAL
DRAWN BY DK, RB, BN, ZH
REVIEWED BY DK, RB
PROJECT MANAGER DK
PROJECT NUMBER 25375
PA
R
K
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
C
H
U
R
C
H
RE
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
68
0
5
M
I
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
,
S
T
.
L
O
U
I
S
P
A
R
K
,
M
N
5
5
4
2
6
KR
A
U
S
-
A
N
D
E
R
S
O
N
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
.
50
1
S
E
I
G
H
T
S
T
,
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
5
5
4
0
4
48776
David J. Knaeble
LICENSE NO.DATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,
SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA.
12/22/2025
SITE LAYOUT NOTES:
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS
REQUIRED.
HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGN
NP = NO PARKING FIRE LANE
ST = STOP
CP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY
PROPERTY LINE
CURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUT
GUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLAN
BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
TO
1. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY
LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING
CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUE TO
LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO OWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE
ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS & ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY
THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.
6. LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE
FIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
7. CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO
BUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS,
PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO
REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
9. PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEE DETAIL.
10. CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OF
CROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL
GOVERNING BODIES.
11. SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND GUTTER TYPE. TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.
12. ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
13. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
14. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.
15. PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
16. ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.
17. BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS.
18. ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.
19. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO INSTALL ANY SIDEWALK AND CURBING PER DESIGN PLAN. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL CURBS AND SIDEWALKS WILL
DRAIN PROPERLY IN FIELD CONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT THE CIVIL ENGINEER 24-HOURS PRIOR TO ANY CURB AND/OR SIDEWALK
INSTALLATION TO REVIEW AND INSPECT CURB STAKES. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CURB OR SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT IF THIS PROCEDURE
IS NOT FOLLOWED.
CONCRETE PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) AS
SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) SEE
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE
BASE & CONCRETE DEPTHS, WITHIN ROW
SEE CITY DETAIL, WITHIN PRIVATE
PROPERTY SEE CSG DETAIL.
OPERATIONAL NOTES
SNOW REMOVAL
ALL SNOW SHALL BE STORED ON-SITE OUTSIDE
PARKING LOT. WHEN FULL, REMOVAL CO. SHALL
REMOVE EXCESS OFF-SITE.
TRASH REMOVAL
TRASH SHALL BE PLACED IN EXTERIOR TRASH
AREA AND REMOVED BY COMMERCIAL CO.
WEEKLY.
DELIVERIES
DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR AT THE FRONT DOOR
VIA STANDARD COMMERCIAL DELIVERY
VEHICLES (UPS, FED-EX, USPS).
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
4/8/2024 CODE COMMENTS
5/8/2024 REVISED LIGHT POLE
7/11/2024 CSI #1
8/1/2024 CSI #2
0
1" = 20'-0"
20'-0"10'-0"
N
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
C2.0
SITE PLAN
OWNER INFORMATION
PARK COMMUNITY CHURCH
6805 MINNETONKA BLVD
ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55426
JOHN NESS
320-260-1262
JOHN@PARKMN.COM
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:
1.A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITY WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. CONTACT KAREN WALL
AT (952.924.2548) TO OBTAIN A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT.
FEV
FUTURE EV CAPABLE CHARGING STATION
LOCATION (27 TOTAL) - SEE ELEC'L PLANS
EVR
EV READY CHARGING STATION LOCATION
(2 TOTAL) - SEE ELEC'L PLANS
FUTURE CHARGING STATION LOCATION -
SEE ELEC'L PLANS. PROVIDE CONDUITS
AND CAP IN SIDEWALK AS NECESSARY.
SET 2'-8" BEHIND FACE OF CURB.
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϳďͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjŝŶŐ Ă ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ ƉĞƌŵŝƚ ĨŽƌ Ă ƌĞůŝŐŝŽƵƐ ŝŶƐƚŝƚƵƚŝŽŶ Ăƚ
ϲϴϬϱ aŝŶŶĞƚŽŶŬĂ .ŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ ʹ tĂƌĚ ϯ tĂŐĞ ϭϰ
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
6"
W
M
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
9" VCP
9" VCP (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
12" WM (Per Rec.)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
16
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
12
"
C
I
P
(
P
e
r
R
e
c
.
)
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
ALLEY
(A Public R/W)
9"
V
C
P
N89°18'32"E 267.90
S0
1
°
0
8
'
5
7
"
E
2
3
0
.
9
8
S89°13'28"W 134.18
S01°05'32"E
22.00
S89°13'27"W 134.20
N0
1
°
0
2
'
0
6
"
W
2
5
3
.
3
7
ID
A
H
O
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
O
U
T
H
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
(A Public R/W)
HA
M
P
S
H
I
R
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
O
U
T
H
(A
P
u
b
l
i
c
R
/
W
)
Existing
Garage
2 Story Lap Sided House
Foundation Area =
1,678 +/- Sq. Ft.
Existing House
2 Story Brick Sided Church with Lookout Basement
Foundation Area = 13,411+/- Sq. Ft.
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete Sidewalk
Concrete Sidewalk
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
Concrete
Driveway
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Steps
Concrete Steps
W/ Railing
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
Concrete Step
W/ Railing
Concrete
Access
Truncated Dome
Truncated Domes
Column
Column
Column
Overhang
Overhang
De
c
k
Wood Step
Wood Fence
[A] Wood Fence
Crosses Property Line
Keystone
Retaining Wall
Monument
Sign
Wood Fence
[B] Bituminous Parking Lot
Crosses Property Line
Rock Pile
88
.
7
17.9
10
.
7
20.8
6.
1
24.5 2.
5
34.0
2.
4
24.4
35
.
8
19.2
39
.
7
1.0
9.
5
18.3
8.
7
61.8
22
.
0
20.0
11
.
6
17.8
3
1
.
2
21.2
19
.
9
7.1
13
.
6
25.8
26
.
3
40.2
1.3
5.
5
1.4
49
.
8
4.
4
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
Found 1/2 Inch
Open Iron Pipe
PID: 1711721120215
Address: 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard
PID: 1711721120016
Address: 3024 Hampshire Avenue South
Owner: Poppenhagen Housing Division
Sa
n
.
M
a
i
n
EXCEPTION
AL
L
E
Y
Wat. Serv.
(Per Rec.)
Wat. Serv. (Per Rec.)
The N Line of the S 2 Feet
of Lot 28, Block 5, "Lenox"
The N Line of the S 20 Feet
of Lot 10, Block 5, "Lenox"
4. 14" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
5. 12" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
6. 12" DIM
HONEY
LOCUST TREE
7. 30 FT TALL
ARBORVITAE
TREE
1. 12" DIM HONEY
LOCUST TREE
2. 8FT TALL
JUNIPER TREE
12. JUNIPER
SHRUB
11. JUNIPER
SHRUBS
3. 8 FT TALL
JUNIPER TREE
9.WEIGELA
SHRUB
10. WEIGELA
SHRUB
13. JUNIPER
SHRUB
14. JUNIPER
SHRUB
15. JUNIPER
SHRUB
8. JUNIPER
SHRUB
1 - AN 1 - AN
2 - UP1 - PD1 - EK1 - QB
1 - MS
1 - PS3
1 - PD
1 - PS3
1 - QB
1 - RB
1 - RB
1 - AG
8 - AA2
3 - CA2
2 - SM
4 - AA
1 - TN
1 - TN
1 - TN
1 - TN
1 - SM3
1 - SGJ
2 - CA2
2 - SGJ
2 - CA2
2 - SGJ
4 - SGJ 2 - CA2
2 - HL2
4 - AA2
2 - HL2
2 - HL2
5 - HA
1 - AA
1 - TT
1 - TT
1 - AA
7 - RG2 - JM2
3 - HA 4 - TT3 - HA 2 - TN
3 - JM2
3 - JM2
1 - SM3
1 - AA21 - SM
1 - SM
1 - SM
3 - TN
1 - RG
3 - HL2
2 - RG
3 - TT
2 - AA
3 - RG
1 - HL2
1 - TN
2 - HL2
1 - TT
1 - TN
1 - RG
2 - AA
1 - RG
4 - SM3
EVNO
PARKINGNO
PARKING
5' PARKING SETBACK
30' BLDG. SETBACK
5'
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
5' PARKING SETBACK
5'
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
B
L
D
G
.
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30
'
B
L
D
G
.
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
30' BLDG. SETBACK
30' BLDG. SETBACK
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
SYMBOL QTY COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME
GROUND COVERS
632 sf
Decorative Rock Mulch / Decorative Rock Mulch
3/4" Screened Red Limestone, Installed on Geotextile Fabric, 3" deep,
w/ landscape eging. Provide Samples. Match existing already in planting
beds.
2,646 sf
ROCK MAINTENANCE STRIP / ROCK MAINTENANCE STRIP
1.5" DECORATIVE SCREENED ROCK/STONE INSTALLED 3" DEEP
OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. PROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON
LANDSCAPE PLAN.
1,323 sf
SHREDDED CEDAR MULCH 3" DEEP / SHREDDED CEDAR MULCH
DOUBLE SHREDDED CEDAR MULCH INSTALLED 4" DEEP ON
GRADED, WEED FREE, & PREPARED SOIL. PROVIDE EDGING AS
GROUND COVER SCHEDULE
L1.0
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture
5000 Glenwood Avenue
Golden Valley, MN 55422
civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060
COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c
PR
O
J
E
C
T
2025
ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
10/17/2025 CITY SUBMITTAL
12/1/2025 CITY RESUBMITTAL
DRAWN BY DK, RB, BN
REVIEWED BY DK, RB
PROJECT MANAGER DK
PROJECT NUMBER 25375
PA
R
K
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
C
H
U
R
C
H
RE
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
68
0
5
M
I
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
,
S
T
.
L
O
U
I
S
P
A
R
K
,
M
N
5
5
4
2
6
KR
A
U
S
-
A
N
D
E
R
S
O
N
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
.
50
1
S
E
I
G
H
T
S
T
,
M
I
N
N
E
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
M
N
5
5
4
0
4
LICENSE NO.DATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,
SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
25821
Robert L. Binder
12/1/2025
LANDSCAPE NOTES:
PROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT
SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZES
PROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEE
PLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZES
PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT
SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZES
PROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT
SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZES
PROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE
PLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES
AND PLANTING SIZES
LEGEND
EDGING - SHALL BE COMMERCIAL GRADE, 4" DEPTH ALUMINUM,
BLACK OR DARK GREEN IN COLOR, INCLUDE ALL CONNECTORS,
STAKES, & ALL APPURTENANCES PER MANUF. INSTALL PER MANUF.
INSTRUC./SPECS.SEE SHEET L1.1 FOR PLANTING SCHEDULE
PLANTING SEASON SCHEDULE
SEASON CONIFEROUS DECIDUOUS REMARKS
SPRING PLANTING APRIL 15 - JUNE 15 APRIL 15 - JUNE 15
FALL PLANTING AUGUST 21 - SEPTEMBER 30 AUGUST 15 - NOVEMBER 15
NOTE: ADJUSTMENTS TO PLANTING DATES MUST BE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
4/8/2024 CODE COMMENTS
8/1/2024 CSI #2
0
1" = 20'-0"
20'-0"10'-0"
N
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
1. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.
2. REFERENCE MULCH SCHEDULE FOR MULCH MATERIALS AND LOCATIONS.
3. ALL TREES SHALL BE MULCHED WITH SHREDDED CEDAR MULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OF PLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ALL MULCH SHALL BE KEPT WITHIN A MINIMUM OF 2" FROM
TREE TRUNK.
4. IF SHOWN ON PLAN, RANDOM SIZED LIMESTONE BOULDERS COLOR AND SIZE TO COMPLIMENT NEW LANDSCAPING. OWNER TO APPROVE BOULDER SAMPLES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
5. PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN STANDARDS AND SHALL BE OF HARDY STOCK, FREE FROM DISEASE, DAMAGE AND DISFIGURATION. CONTRACTOR
IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING PLUMPNESS OF PLANT MATERIAL FOR DURATION OF ACCEPTANCE PERIOD.
6. UPON DISCOVERY OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE SCHEDULE AND THE QUANTITY SHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE PLAN SHALL GOVERN.
7. CONDITION OF VEGETATION SHALL BE MONITORED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS PART OF THE CONTRACT SHALL BE
WARRANTED FOR TWO (2) FULL GROWING SEASONS FROM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE.
8. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RECEIVE 6" LAYER TOPSOIL AND SOD AS SPECIFIED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.
9. COORDINATE LOCATION OF VEGETATION WITH UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD UTILITIES, LIGHTING FIXTURES, DOORS AND WINDOWS. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE IN THE FIELD FINAL LOCATION OF TREES
AND SHRUBS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
10. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL ACCEPTANCE.
11. REPAIR AT NO COST TO OWNER ALL DAMAGE RESULTING FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.
12. SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVED SURFACES FREE OF DEBRIS GENERATED FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.
13. PROVIDE SITE WIDE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION. SYSTEM SHALL BE FULLY PROGRAMMABLE AND CAPABLE OF ALTERNATE DATE WATERING. THE SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE HEAD TO
HEAD OR DRIP COVERAGE AND BE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ONE INCH OF PRECIPITATION PER WEEK. SYSTEM SHALL EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT/BACK OF CURB.
14. CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE APPROVAL OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM INCLUDING PRICING FROM OWNER, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
1. ENTIRE SITE SHALL BE FULLY IRRIGATED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT IRRIGATION SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL
BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
2. PROVIDE SITE WIDE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION. SYSTEM SHALL BE FULLY PROGRAMMABLE AND CAPABLE OF
ALTERNATE DATE WATERING. THE SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE HEAD TO HEAD OR DRIP COVERAGE AND BE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ONE
INCH OF PRECIPITATION PER WEEK. SYSTEM SHALL EXTEND INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT/BACK OF
CURB.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE APPROVAL OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM INLCUDING PRICING FROM OWNER, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
4. SEE MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IRRIGATION WATER, METER, AND POWER CONNECTIONS.
5. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION/INSTALLATION. ANY
DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND COSTS ASSOCIATED
WITH CORRECTING DAMAGES SHALL BE BORNE ENTIRELY BY THE CONTRACTOR.
6. SERVICE EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE PER LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY STANDARDS AND SHALL BE PER NATIONAL AND LOCAL
CODES. EXACT LOCATION OF SERVICE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUIVALENT AT THE
JOB SITE.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY FOR THE PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE AND METERING FACILITIES.
8. IRRIGATION WATER LINE CONNECTION SIZE IS 1-
12" AT BUILDING. VERIFY WITH MECHANICAL PLANS.
9. ALL MAIN LINES SHALL BE 18" BELOW FINISHED GRADE.
10. ALL LATERAL LINES SHALL BE 12" BELLOW FINISHED GRADE.
11. ALL EXPOSED PVC RISERS, IF ANY, SHALL BE GRAY IN COLOR.
12. CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT AT 2'-0" BELOW THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE TOP OF PAVEMENT. EXTEND SLEEVES
TO 2'-0" BEYOND PAVEMENT.
13. CONTRACTOR SHALL MARK THE LOCATION OF ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT WITH THE SLEEVING MATERIAL "ELLED" TO 2'-0" ABOVE
FINISHED GRADE AND CAPPED.
14. FABRICATE ALL PIPE TO MANUFACTURE'S SPECIFICATIONS WITH CLEAN AND SQUARE CUT JOINTS. USE QUALITY GRADE PRIMER AND
SOLVENT CEMENT FORMULATED FOR INTENDED TYPE OF CONNECTION.
15. BACKFILL ALL TRENCHES WITH SOIL FREE OF SHARP OBJECTS AND DEBRIS.
16. ALL VALVE BOXES AND COVERS SHALL BE BLACK IN COLOR.
17. GROUP VALVE BOXES TOGETHER FOR EASE WHEN SERVICE IS REQUIRED. LOCATE IN PLANT BED AREAS WHENEVER POSSIBLE.
18. IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LOCATION SHALL BE VERIFIED ON-SITE WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
19. CONTROL WIRES: 14 GAUGE DIRECT BURIAL, SOLID COPPER IRRIGATION WIRE. RUN UNDER MAIN LINE. USE MOISTURE-PROOF SPLICES
AND SPLICE ONLY AT VALVES OR PULL BOXES. RUN SEPARATE HOT AND COMMON WIRE TO EACH VALVE AND ONE (1) SPARE WIRE AND
GROUND TO FURTHEST VALVE FROM CONTROLLER. LABEL OR COLOR CODE ALL WIRES.
20. AVOID OVER SPRAY ON BUILDINGS, PAVEMENT, WALLS AND ROADWAYS BY INDIVIDUALLY ADJUSTING RADIUS OR ARC ON SPRINKLER
HEADS AND FLOW CONTROL ON AUTOMATIC VALVE.
21. ADJUST PRESSURE REGULATING VALVES FOR OPTIMUM PRESSURE ON SITE.
22. USE SCREENS ON ALL HEADS.
23. A SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON-SITE AT ALL TIMES IN AN UPDATED CONDITION.
24. ALL PIPE 3" AND OVER SHALL HAVE THRUST BLOCKING AT EACH TURN.
25. ALL AUTOMATIC REMOTE CONTROL VALVES WILL HAVE 3" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4" WASHED GRAVEL UNDERNEATH VALVE AND VALVE BOX.
GRAVEL SHALL EXTENT 3" BEYOND PERIMETER OF VALVE BOX.
26. THERE SHALL BE 3" MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN BOTTOM OF VALVE BOX COVER AND TOP OF VALVE STRUCTURE.
IRRIGATION NOTES:
/ŝƚLJ ĐŽƵŶĐŝů ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ŽĨ CĞďƌƵĂƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;LƚĞŵ bŽ͘ ϳďͿ
dŝƚůĞ͗ wĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶ ĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjŝŶŐ Ă ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ ƉĞƌŵŝƚ ĨŽƌ Ă ƌĞůŝŐŝŽƵƐ ŝŶƐƚŝƚƵƚŝŽŶ Ăƚ
ϲϴϬϱ aŝŶŶĞƚŽŶŬĂ .ŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ ʹ tĂƌĚ ϯ tĂŐĞ ϭϱ
MTL-1
EB-1
GL-1
STN-1
FLASH-1
MTL-3
MTL-4
CONC-1
STN-1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
37
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
NORTH ELEVATION - MATERIAL CLASS %
GL-1
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL CLASS SF
STN-1
EXISTING GLASS
EXISTING CAST STONE
EXISTING SURFACE PAINTED METAL
EB-1
MTL-2
EXISTING FACE BRICK CLASS 1 2,389 SF
CLASS 3
CLASS 1
CLASS 1 207 SF
295 SF
109 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 1 MATERIALS: 90%
TOTAL % OF CLASS 2 MATERIALS: 6%
EXISTING PREFINISHED METALMTL-1 CLASS 2 130 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 3 MATERIALS: 4%
PREFINISHED METAL PANELMTL-3 CLASS 2 51 SF
PAINTED STEELMTL-4 CLASS 3 14 SF
PREFINISHED METAL FLASHINGFLASH-1 CLASS 2 14 SF
WEST ELEVATION - MATERIAL CLASS %
GL-1
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL CLASS SF
STN-1
CONC-1
EXISTING GLASS
EXISTING CAST STONE
EXISTING PIGMENTED CONCRETE
EXISTING PREFINISHED METAL
EB-1
MTL-1
EXISTING FACE BRICK CLASS 1 1,853 SF
CLASS 2
CLASS 1
CLASS 1 353 SF
503 SF
123 SF
CLASS 2 13 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 1 MATERIALS: 92%
TOTAL % OF CLASS 2 MATERIALS: 7%
PAINTED STEEL
MTL-3
MTL-4
PREFINISHED METAL PANEL CLASS 2 53 SF
CLASS 3 13 SF
PREFINISHED METAL FLASHINGFLASH-1 CLASS 2 14 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 3 MATERIALS: 1%
FLASH-1
MTL-3
(wrap existing 6x6
tube steel cols w/
MTL-4)
MTL-1
GL-1
EB-1
STN-1
STN-1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
37
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
NEW EXTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH SCHEDULE
GL-2
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL MANUFACTURER FINISH COLOR LOCATION
ALUMINUM
WINDOWS
FLASHING
MTL-3
FLASH-1
METAL PANEL PAC-CLAD PREFINISHED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
NOTE:
THE "BASIS OF DESIGN" MATERIALS FOR THE PROJECT ARE LISTED ON THE SCHEDULE ABOVE. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL INFORMATION AND OTHER APPROVE D SUBSTITUTIONS.
PRODUCT
HIGHLINE S1
PREFINISHED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
PREFINISHED BRONZE ADDITION
MTL-4 STEEL SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINTED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
1/8" = 1'-0"AE1.7
2 WEST ELEVATION
D E S I G N
G R O U P
ISSUES & REVISIONS
COMMISSION NO:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SHEET
767 N. EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 190
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
651.642.9200
WWW.POPEDESIGN.COM
POPE DESIGN GROUP
NO
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
0"1/2"1"
TRUE SHEET SCALE
DATE
10/20/2025 4:04:27 PMC:\Users\bwicks\Documents\41100-25116_KA - PCC RENOVATION_R25_BWicks_PDG.rvt
AE1.7
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
Checker
Author
41100-25116
PARK
COMMUNITY
CHURCH
BUILDING
RENOVATION
6805 MINNETONKA BLVD
ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426
CUP Submission 10-20-25
EXISTING PHOTO: WEST ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"AE1.7
3 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
EXISTING PHOTO: NORTH ELEVATION
ZONING CODE EXCERT: TABLE 36-362A
ZONING CODE EXCERT: 36-362.g
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 16
MTL-1
MTL-3
GL-1
SN-1
EB-1
FLASH-1
GL-2
MTL-3
FLASH-1
(wrap existing 6x6 tube steel
cols w/ MTL-4)
(VERTICAL SIDING )
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
37
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
1
"
PREFINISHED ALUMINUM
LETTERS
MTL-1
MTL-2
EB-1
GL-1
STN-1
STN-1
EB-1
MTL-1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
35
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
1
"
PREFINISHED METAL SIGN
-38 SQUARE FEET
6'
-
0
"
MTL-3
FLASH-1
NEW EXTERIOR MATERIAL FINISH SCHEDULE
GL-2
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL MANUFACTURER FINISH COLOR LOCATION
ALUMINUM
WINDOWS
FLASHING
MTL-3
FLASH-1
METAL PANEL PAC-CLAD PREFINISHED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
NOTE:
THE "BASIS OF DESIGN" MATERIALS FOR THE PROJECT ARE LISTED ON THE SCHEDULE ABOVE. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL INFORMATION AND OTHER APPROVE D SUBSTITUTIONS.
PRODUCT
HIGHLINE S1
PREFINISHED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
PREFINISHED BRONZE ADDITION
MTL-4 STEEL SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINTED DARK BRONZE ADDITION
SOUTH ELEVATION - MATERIAL CLASS %
GL-1
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL CLASS SF
STN-1
CONC-1
EXISTING GLASS
EXISTING CAST STONE
EXISTING PIGMENTED CONCRETE
EXISTING SURFACE PAINTED METAL
EB-1
MTL-2
EXISTING FACE BRICK CLASS 1 1,506 SF
CLASS 3
CLASS 1
CLASS 1 15 SF
412 SF
19 SF
CLASS 2 20 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 1 MATERIALS: 64%
TOTAL % OF CLASS 2 MATERIALS: 35%
EXISTING PREFINISHED METALMTL-1 CLASS 2 96 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 3 MATERIALS: 1%
PREFINISHED METAL PANELMTL-3 CLASS 2 979 SF
PAINTED STEELMTL-4 CLASS 3 7 SF
PREFINISHED METAL FLASHINGFLASH-1 CLASS 2 23 SF
GL-2 NEW GLASS
CLASS 1 94 SF
EAST ELEVATION - MATERIAL CLASS %
GL-1
MATERIAL ID MATERIAL CLASS SF
STN-1
EXISTING GLASS
EXISTING CAST STONE
EXISTING SURFACE PAINTED METAL
EB-1
MTL-2
EXISTING FACE BRICK CLASS 1 2,982 SF
CLASS 3
CLASS 1
CLASS 1 99 SF
195 SF
24 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 1 MATERIALS: 91%
TOTAL % OF CLASS 2 MATERIALS: 8%
EXISTING PREFINISHED METALMTL-1 CLASS 2 79 SF
TOTAL % OF CLASS 3 MATERIALS: 1%
PREFINISHED METAL PANELMTL-3 CLASS 2 194 SF
PREFINISHED METAL FLASHINGFLASH-1 CLASS 2 12 SF
D E S I G N
G R O U P
ISSUES & REVISIONS
COMMISSION NO:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SHEET
767 N. EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 190
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55114
651.642.9200
WWW.POPEDESIGN.COM
POPE DESIGN GROUP
NO
T
F
O
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
0"1/2"1"
TRUE SHEET SCALE
DATE
10/20/2025 4:04:26 PMC:\Users\bwicks\Documents\41100-25116_KA - PCC RENOVATION_R25_BWicks_PDG.rvt
AE1.6
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
Checker
Author
41100-25116
PARK
COMMUNITY
CHURCH
BUILDING
RENOVATION
6805 MINNETONKA BLVD
ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426
CUP Submission 10-20-25
1/8" = 1'-0"AE1.6
2 SOUTH ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"AE1.6
4 EAST BUILDING ELEVATION
EXISTING PHOTO: SOUTH ELEVATION
EXISTING PHOTO: EAST ELEVATION EXISTING PHOTO: EAST ELEVATION EXISTING PHOTO: EAST ELEVATION
ZONING CODE EXCERT: TABLE 36-362A
ZONING CODE EXCERT: 36-362.g
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 17
Official Minutes
Planning commission
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
January 7, 2026
1. Call to order – 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Members present: Jim Beneke, Mia Divecha (arrived at 6:01 p.m.), Matt Eckholm,
John Flanagan, Sylvie Hyman, Tess Machalek, Sarah Strain
Members absent: Tom Weber
Guests: Joanna Griffith, Pope Design Group
Nate Enger, Kraus-Anderson
Pastor Andrew Peterson, Park Community Church
Edgar Durand, North Central State Regional Council of Carpenters
Staff present: Katelyn Champoux, Sean Walther
2. Approval of Minutes – Oct. 8, 2025; Oct. 15, 2025; Nov. 5, 2025 and Dec. 3, 2025.
It was moved by Commissioner Beneke, seconded by Commissioner Hyman to approve the Oct.
8, 2025, Oct. 15, 2025, Nov. 5, 2025 and Dec. 3, 2025 minutes. The motion passed 6-0.
3. Hearing
3a. Title: Park Community Church conditional use permit
Location: 6805 Minnetonka Blvd.
Applicant: Park Community Church
Case No: 25-08-CUP
Ms. Champoux presented the conditional use permit application for Park Community Church,
located at 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard. She explained that staff recommended opening the
public hearing but tabling the item until the Jan. 21, 2026 meeting because of an error in the
public hearing notice that was mailed to property owners, which listed the incorrect date. A
new notice with the correct date was mailed on Jan. 6.
Ms. Champoux provided details about the project, explaining that the church proposed to
renovate the interior of the sanctuary and community spaces, expand the sanctuary by
approximately 500 square feet on the south side of the building (on top of an existing
mechanical roof), and remove existing pavement on the north and west sides of the building to
replace it with green space. The purpose was to provide more space for the existing
congregation and improve accessibility, comfort, and functionality without altering the
building's character.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 18
Official minutes January 7, 2026
Planning commission
She noted that the zoning code requires a conditional use permit for religious institutions in the
N-2 zoning district. Although the church's establishment predated this requirement, the
proposed site work required the church to come into compliance with city code.
Ms. Champoux discussed how the project would remove a significant portion of impervious
surface, replacing it with green space and removing two access points onto Minnetonka
Boulevard. The planned landscaping would bring the site into compliance with city code, adding
30 trees and 172 shrubs while preserving all existing trees. This would reduce impervious
surface coverage from about 75% to 59%.
Regarding parking, Ms. Champoux explained that the project would increase sanctuary capacity
from approximately 215 to 344 seats, resulting in a parking requirement of 98 spaces (after
applying a 15% transit reduction). The church proposed providing 60 off-street parking spaces
with 12 potential additional spaces through "proof of parking," plus 13 street parking spaces
adjacent to the property. The church requested a reduction of 13 parking spaces to its
requirement, which would change the requirement from 98 to 85 spaces.
Ms. Champoux noted that the project would also bring the site into compliance with the city's
electric vehicle charging infrastructure ordinance and bike parking ordinance, providing 4
parking spaces with EV chargers, 28 spaces with conduit for future chargers, and 12 bike
parking spaces (double the requirement).
She reported that the project team held a neighborhood meeting on Dec. 3, 2025 with one
resident attending who shared general concerns about street parking but did not oppose the
project.
Commissioner Divecha asked for clarification about the driveway access changes. Ms.
Champoux explained that the property currently has five access points and the project would
remove two access points on Minnetonka Boulevard and one on Hampshire Avenue South.
Commissioner Hyman inquired about the existing shared parking agreement between the
church and the community center. Ms. Champoux explained that the informal agreement did
not meet city requirements because shared parking agreements need to be permanent and
recorded against the property.
Commissioner Hyman also asked about bicycle parking plans. Ms. Griffith from Pope Design
Group responded that while the specific bike rack design had not been selected, they planned
to install functional racks that would exceed the minimum requirement by providing 12 spots
instead of the required six.
Commissioner Beneke asked if removing parking spots was necessary for the new sanctuary.
Mr. Enger from Kraus-Anderson explained that reducing impervious surface helped avoid the
need for expensive underground stormwater storage, as there is no stormwater infrastructure
currently in that section of Minnetonka Boulevard, which is slated for improvements next fiscal
year. He added that the church also desired more green space.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 19
Official minutes January 7, 2026
Planning commission
Mr. Peterson, Pastor at Park Community Church and St. Louis Park resident, expressed
excitement about bringing the historic building up to current code and improving its function
for the city and community. He noted that the church, established in 1945, had nearly closed
about a decade ago but had been revitalized with a growing congregation that includes many
St. Louis Park residents who walk and bike from surrounding neighborhoods.
Mr. Durand, a business agent with the North Central State Regional Council of Carpenters,
expressed thanks to the Kraus-Anderson team for providing work opportunities for union
members.
It was moved by Commissioner Strain, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm, to table the Park
Community Church CUP and continue the public hearing at the Jan. 21, 2026 meeting.
The motion passed 6-0.
4. Other Business
4a. 2026 Work Plan
Mr. Walther presented the 2026 work plan that the commission had crafted last year and
presented to the city council in November 2025. He explained that the council had asked all
boards and commissions to formally approve their recommended plans and council would also
review and approve the plans.
Mr. Walther outlined the key components of the work plan:
• Reviewing planning applications and holding public hearings
• Continuing work on phase 2 of the zoning code update, focusing on business district
standards, the zoning map for commercial districts, and performance standards
• Implementing approved plans for light rail stations and West Excelsior Boulevard
• Beginning the 2050 comprehensive plan process, which would be a 2-3 year effort
• Broadening participation in planning processes, including the recently implemented
stipend for commissioners to reduce barriers to service
Mr. Walther explained that if commissioners wanted to propose additions to the work plan
during the year, they would need to submit a form to staff, which would then be brought to the
commission for discussion and potentially forwarded to the city council for approval.
Commissioner Divecha expressed interest in adding a study on parking to the work plan,
following up on a discussion from the previous meeting. Mr. Walther agreed to send the form
to commissioners.
It was moved by Commissioner Divecha, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm to approve the
2026 work plan as proposed by staff. The motion passed 6-0.
5. Communications
Future scheduled meeting/event dates:
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 20
Official minutes January 7, 2026
Planning commission
•January 21, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
•February 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
•February 25, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting*
•March 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
*meeting held on Feb. 12, 2026 since Ash Wednesday is Feb. 18, 2026.
6. Adjournment – 6:30 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Sean Walther, liaison John Flanagan, chair member
These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then
edited by a staff person.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 21
DR
A
F
T
Unofficial Minutes
Planning commission
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
January 21, 2026
1. Call to order – 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Members present: Jim Beneke, Mia Divecha (arrived at 6:02 p.m.), Matt Eckholm,
John Flanagan, Sylvie Hyman, Sarah Strain, Tom Weber
Members absent: Tess Machalek
Staff present: Katelyn Champoux, Laura Chamberlain
Guest: Ian Thomas, resident
Sheldon Berg, DJR Architects
2. Approval of Minutes – January 7, 2026.
It was moved by Commissioner Eckholm, seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve the
January 7, 2026 minutes. The motion passed 7-0.
3. Hearing
3a. Title: Park Community Church conditional use permit
Location: 6805 Minnetonka Blvd.
Applicant: Park Community Church
Case No: 25-08-CUP
Ms. Champoux, associate planner, presented the Park Community Church conditional use
permit application for 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard. Staff recommended reopening the public
hearing (continued from Jan. 7, 2026), taking public testimony, and then recommending
approval of the conditional use permit to allow a religious institution with a parking
requirement reduction of 13 spaces at 6805 Minnetonka Blvd.
The property contains a 29,000 square foot church building and a 1,600 square foot parish
house in the N-2 zoning district. The proposal includes interior renovation of the sanctuary and
community spaces, a 500 square foot expansion on the south side, and replacing existing
pavement on the north and west sides with green space.
The project would remove two access points on Minnetonka Boulevard and add significant
landscaping, including 30 trees and 172 shrubs while preserving existing trees. The project
would reduce impervious surface coverage from approximately 75% to 59%.
Ms. Champoux detailed the parking requirements, noting that after applying a 15% transit
reduction, 98 spaces would be required. The church proposed 60 off-street spaces with
potential for 12 additional spaces through proof of parking, plus 13 street parking spaces, for a
total of 85 spaces. She noted the zoning code allows for parking requirement revisions through
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 22
DR
A
F
T
Unofficial minutes January 21, 2026
Planning commission
a conditional use permit, and staff supported the 13-space reduction based on the adjacent
community center having ample parking and an informal shared parking arrangement with the
church.
The project would include electric vehicle charging infrastructure with 4 spaces served by
chargers and 28 spaces with conduit for future chargers, plus 12 bike parking spaces.
A neighborhood meeting was held on Dec. 3, 2025 at Park Community Church. One resident
attended and shared concerns about street parking and how the city calculates its parking
requirements but did not oppose the project.
Chair Flanagan reopened the public hearing. Mr. Ian Thomas, a resident, spoke in support of
the project, praising the conversion of impervious surface to green space and the parking
reduction. He suggested that churches know their parking needs and street parking is a public
resource. He also encouraged the commission to consider eliminating all parking mandates, as
other cities have done, noting benefits for sustainability, health, safety, and affordable housing.
Chair Flanagan closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Divecha appreciated the green space additions and improved driveway access
that prioritizes pedestrians on Minnetonka Blvd. Commissioner Weber thanked the guests for
attending and participating in the meeting. Commissioner Eckholm commended the applicant
for embracing the city's 2040 plan rather than seeking variances. Chair Flanagan noted the
safety improvements from removing access points on Minnetonka Boulevard and redirecting
traffic to side streets.
It was moved by Commissioner Beneke, seconded by Commissioner Hyman, to approve the Park
Community Church conditional use permit. The motion passed 7-0.
3b. Title: Parkway on 5 preliminary and final plat, and variance
Location: 5430 Minnetonka Blvd.
Applicant: Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP
Case No: 25-10-S, 25-11-VAR
Ms. Champoux presented the Parkway on 5 application for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard. Staff
recommended approval of rescinding previous approvals on the site, approval of the
preliminary and final plat, and approval of a variance to allow an 11-foot front yard setback
instead of the required 25 feet for the underground parking portion.
Ms. Champoux explained the property was rezoned to N-2 zoning district, which allows various
housing types. The project would include:
A mix of units: 4 alcoves, 21 one-bedroom, and 9 two-bedroom units
52 off-street parking spaces (38 underground, 14 surface). Zoning code requires 33
parking spaces. The applicant proposes more than the required spaces due to the
parking restrictions along the site on Minnetonka Blvd. and Vernon Avenue S.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 23
DR
A
F
T
Unofficial minutes January 21, 2026
Planning commission
A public trail east of the property connecting Minnetonka Boulevard to Utica Avenue
South
Landscaping exceeding code requirements with 57 trees and 365 shrubs
42 bike parking spaces
The variance request was specifically for the underground parking portion, as the above-ground
structure would meet the 25-foot setback requirement. A copy of the variance narrative from
the applicant was provided to the commissioners since it was not in the agenda packet and it is
included as “Attachment 1”. Ms. Champoux explained the practical difficulties included the
site's 10-foot elevation change and the desire to comply with the city's shadow ordinance while
minimizing impacts on neighboring properties.
The project team held a neighborhood meeting on Jan. 7, 2026 and approximately 14 people
attended. Attendees shared their comments and questions about topics such as outdoor
lighting, parking and site access. Another resident comment was received after the agenda
packet was created. A copy of the resident’s comments in opposition was provided to the
planning commissioners before the meeting and is included as “Attachment 2”.
Chair Flanagan opened the public hearing. Mr. Sheldon Berg from DJR Architecture represented
the project. He explained that site contamination from the previous gas station would be
addressed during construction, with contaminated soil being removed and clean fill brought in.
Mr. Berg noted that the owner included extra parking due to the lack of on-street parking
options nearby and wanted to be a good neighbor by ensuring residents and guests would not
need to park in the surrounding neighborhood.
In response to commissioner questions, Mr. Berg clarified that there would be a mix of secured
indoor and outdoor bike parking, and that while there was technically only one 3-bedroom unit
(labeled as a 2-bedroom plus den with a closet), the owner's experience suggested smaller units
were easier to rent.
Chair Flanagan closed the meeting. After closing the public hearing, commissioners expressed
support for the redevelopment of this vacant site, noting that an apartment building would
generate less traffic than the previous gas station or potential commercial uses and the
underground parking was an appropriate design choice for the location. Commissioners
acknowledged that while the project did not include affordable units or many family-sized
apartments, it is a good utilization of the site.
It was moved by Commissioner Hyman, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm to recommend
rescinding previous approvals on the site, recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat,
and recommend approval of a variance at 5430 Minnetonka Blvd. The motion passed 7-0.
5. Communications
Ms. Chamberlain noted that the final draft of the Vision 4.0 document was available on the city
website.
Future scheduled meeting/event dates:
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 24
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 21
DR
A
F
T
Unofficial minutes January 21, 2026
Planning commission
February 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
February 25, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting*
March 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
March 25, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting**
*meeting held on Feb. 25, 2026 since Ash Wednesday is Feb. 18, 2026.
**meeting held on March 25 since since Eid-a-Fitr potentially begins March 18.
6. Adjournment – 7:05 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Sean Walther, liaison John Flanagan, chair member
These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then
edited by a staff person.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 25
December 8, 2025
Re: Variance Narrative for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard
We are requesting a variance for the front yard setback on Minnetonka Boulevard from 25 feet standard to 16.1
feet on the east and 11 feet to the west due to the angle of Minnetonka Boulevard. The requested encroachment
is completely underground and all above-ground components meet the 25’-0” setback with setbacks ranging from
25 feet on the east side to over 50 feet back on the west side of the lot. The requested underground setback
variance is for a little over half of the overall length of the site frontage.
Findings:
1. The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare
of the community.
Response: The proposed variance will have no effect on the surrounding health, safety and welfare of the
community as the requested variance is completely underground and is topped with hardscape and
plantings such that passersby would not be aware of the existence of the structure. In addition, the
parking that constitutes the main reason for the variance request is due to no street parking being
available on either Minnetonka Boulevard or Vernon Avenue adjacent to the parking.
2. The request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
zoning ordinance.
Response: The request is keeping in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance as all above ground
setbacks are maintained for the project site. In addition, this reduces the amount of on-grade parking and
additional impervious surface.
3. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Response: The request and planned use of the site is consistent with the comprehensive plan by keeping
to the prescribed density of 30 units per acre limit on site. The project is proposing to accommodate the
required parking below grade.
4. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying
with the zoning ordinance. This means that:
a. The proposed use is permitted in the zoning district in which the
land is located. A variance can be requested for dimensional items.
Response: The proposed use is permitted in the N-2 zoning district where the site is located.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the
property and not created by the landowner.
Response: The request is necessitated by the topography of the site and the fact project parking is not
allowed on either of the projects two streets. Neither circumstance was created by the landowner. The
topography of the site descends along Minnetonka Boulevard and Vernon Avenue to drop approximately
10 feet from the southeast corner to the north and west. This drop in topography exacerbates the
challenges in relative height from a three-story building to the single-story structures to the north. In
order to maintain the shadowing requirements in the zoning code, we have shifted the apartment
building to the south to maintain this standard. In addition, as there is no street parking available on
either street at this property and to reduce the impervious paving on site, we are locating the majority of
the parking below grade resulting in a request for this variance.
Attachment 1
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 26
2
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
Response: As the requested variance is completely underground, there will be no altering of the essential
character of the street.
d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical
difficulties.
Response: Economic considerations are not related to this request, as it is more costly to provide
underground parking than relatively free parking on the neighboring streets.
e. Practical difficulties include inadequate access to direct sunlight for
solar energy systems.
Response: The project building was pushed further south as a result of limiting the shadowing effects of
the building on the neighboring buildings to the north.
5. There are circumstances unique to the shape, topography, water
conditions or other physical conditions of the property.
Response: As stated above in item 4b, the topography of the site is the main consideration that caused
the building to shift further south.
6. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
Response: The project is proposing an apartment building in keeping with the rights and limitations of the
zoning code in all other respects. The variance merely allows the inclusion of additional interior parking
for the future residents of the building.
7. The granting of the variance will not impair light and air to the
surrounding properties, unreasonably increase congestion, increase the
danger of fire, or endanger public safety.
Response: The project is in keeping in all other respects to the zoning and existing conditions around the
site and actually surpasses the setbacks of several other nearby buildings on Minnetonka Boulevard
including: 5224 Minnetonka (10 feet setback), 5551 Lake Street (16 feet setback), 5621 Minnetonka
Boulevard (15 feet setback) [See attached]. The variance will also give more breathing room to the duplex
and single-family building neighbors to the north, so does not constitute an impairment to the light and
air, or increase the risk of fire or endanger public safety. In fact, the project will be cleaning up
contaminated soils on the site during project construction.
8. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience but is
necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty.
Response: The request does alleviate a practical difficulty due to the topography of the site and the lack
of street parking available on the adjacent streets. The granting of the variance will just allow the project
to provide the off-street parking necessary to the project.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 27
5621
Mtka Blvd
3000
Hwy 100
5551
Lake St
5600
Lake St
5430
Minnetonka
Blvd
5224
Mtka Blvd
10 FT
Setback80 FT
Setback
16 FT
Setback
20 FT
Setback
15 FT
Setback
Outlook
Parkway On 5 Project Opposition
>From Rob Theisen <
Date Wed 1/21/2026 2:47 PM
To Katelyn Champoux <kchampoux@stlouisparkmn.gov>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City of St. Louis Park Officials,
I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed apartment complex planned for the
end of my street.
My primary concern is traffic safety. The location of this development would significantly obstruct
visibility at the end of the street, creating hazardous conditions for residents, pedestrians, and drivers.
Reduced sightlines in an already constrained area increase the risk of accidents and make it more
difficult to safely enter and exit the roadway.
In addition, the development will inevitably lead to increased traffic on a street that was not designedt
o accommodate higher volumes of vehicles. Additional daily traffic from residents, visitors, deliveryveh
icles, and service providers will negatively impact safety, congestion, and overall neighborhood
livability.
I am also concerned about the impact of construction itself. Extended construction activity will bringh
eavy equipment, noise, dust, and temporary street obstructions, further worsening traffic flow andcr
eating ongoing disruptions for nearby residents.
I respectfully ask the City to reconsider this project as currently proposed, or at minimum conduct atho
rough traffic and safety analysis that fully accounts for visibility issues, traffic volume increases, andcon
struction impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and for considering the concerns of residents who will be directly affected byt
his development. I appreciate the City’s commitment to responsible planning and public safety.
Sincerely,
Rob Theisen
Attachment 2
Parkway On 5 Project Opposition ‐ Katelyn Champoux ‐ Outlook
about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane2 1/1
1/21/26, 2:55 PM
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Resolution authorizing a conditional use permit for a religious institution at
6805 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 3 Page 29
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Action agenda item: 7c
Executive summary
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and
approving variance for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Recommended actions:
•Motion to rescind previous special permit, conditional use permit and variance
approvals for property located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard.
•Motion to approve the preliminary and final plat of Parkway on 5 located at 5430
Minnetonka Boulevard.
•Motion to approve a variance to allow a minimum front yard setback of 11 feet instead
of the minimum setback of 25 feet in the N-2 zoning district for 5430 Minnetonka
Boulevard.
Summary: The applicant requests the city approve a preliminary and final plat for 5430
Minnetonka Boulevard and a variance to the front yard setback to accommodate a proposed
low-rise apartment building. The variance would reduce the required setback from a minimum
of 25 feet to a minimum of 11 feet. The variance would only apply to the underground parking
portion of the development; the above ground portion of the building would meet the 25-foot
setback.
The subject property is a 1.1-acre site located at the northwest corner of Minnetonka
Boulevard and Highway 100. The property is guided RM – medium density residential in the
comprehensive plan and zoned N-2. The property is currently vacant but was previously used
for a gas station until the Minnesota Department of Transportation acquired the property to
facilitate the reconstruction of the Highway 100 off-ramp.
The proposed project is a three-story, 33-unit apartment building with a mix of underground
and surface parking. The project would also construct a public trail to the east of the property
connecting Minnetonka Boulevard to Utica Avenue South.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolutions, survey, site plan, building elevations, Jan. 21, 2026
planning commission meeting draft minutes, Resolutions to be rescinded: 4850, 5395, 5816,
7104, 84-61, 86-196, 88-50, 90-170, 04-94, 05-94, 94-48, 05-136 and 05-137
Prepared by: Katelyn Champoux, associate planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager/deputy community development director
Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 2
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Discussion
Site information:
The subject property is a 1.1-acre
site located at the northwest corner
of Minnetonka Boulevard and
Highway 100. The property is
bounded by right-of-way on three
sides: Vernon Avenue South to the
west, Minnetonka Boulevard to the
south and Highway 100 to the east.
The property is currently vacant.
Other adjacent uses include single-
unit and two-unit dwellings to the
north and west, commercial uses to
the southwest and a multi-unit
dwelling to the south.
Location 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard
Site area (acres) 1.1 acres
Use Vacant
2040 Future Land Use RM – Medium density residential
Zoning N-2
Surrounding land uses North: Single-unit and two-unit dwellings
South: Commercial uses, multi-unit dwelling
East: Right-of-way
West: Single-unit and two-unit dwellings
Background:
The property was previously used as a gas station with a car wash and retail store until it was
acquired by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to allow the reconstruction
of the southbound Highway 100 off-ramp.
After completion of the reconstruction project, the city initiated a comprehensive plan
amendment and a zoning map amendment for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard. The
comprehensive plan amendment changed the future land use from COM – Commercial and
ROW – Right of way to RM – Medium density residential and ROW – Right of way. The 2021
zoning map amendment changed the zoning of the property from C-1 neighborhood
commercial and R-2 two-family residence to R-4 multiple family residence. In 2025, the city
council updated the zoning code which changed the zoning of the property from R-4 multiple
family residence to N-2 neighborhood district.
MnDOT first offered the property to the original owner who decided not to purchase the
property. The previous owner would have used the site for the same or similar commercial use
which was not permitted under the new land use guiding and zoning district. MnDOT did not
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 3
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
offer the property to the city and the city did not participate in MnDOT’s blind bid auction to
purchase the property. The current owner of the property is Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP.
Present considerations:
The applicant requests the city approve a preliminary and final plat for 5430 Minnetonka Blvd.
and a variance to the front yard setback. The variance would reduce the required setback from
a minimum of 25 feet to a minimum of 11 feet. The variance would only apply to the
underground parking portion of the development.
Zoning analysis:
Below is a table summarizing the zoning requirements for this project. Further details on some
of the requirements are provided after the following table.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 4
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Factor Required Proposed Met?
Use Various housing types,
including low-rise
apartments
Low-rise apartment Yes
Height 40 feet 38 feet Yes
Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class 1
materials
No more than 10% Class 3
materials
North: Class I - 72%, Class II - 28%
South: Class I - 97%
East: Class I - 82%, Class II - 18%
West: Class I - 89%, Class II - 11%
No Class 3 materials proposed.
Yes
Off-Street Parking 33 parking spaces 52 total parking spaces (38
underground parking spaces, 14
surface parking spaces)
Yes
EV charging
infrastructure
Not required for surface
parking lots with 14 spaces
or fewer
EV chargers: 8 parking spaces
Conduit: 18 parking spaces
Yes
Bicycle parking 38 bicycle parking spaces 42 bicycle parking spaces Yes
Setbacks Front: 25 feet
Side: 9 feet
Rear: 25 feet
Front: 25 feet (above ground), 11
feet (below ground)
Side: > 9 feet (both sides)
Rear: > 25 feet
Yes,
with
variance
approval
Designed outdoor
recreation area
(DORA)
12% 12.4% provided by front patio
and amenity deck
Yes
Landscaping Trees: 33
Shrubs: 329
Trees: 57
Shrubs: 365
Yes
Tree replacement Required to plant 20
inches of trees to replace
significant trees removed
from the site
Landscape plan proposes
planting over 100 inches of
trees on the property
Yes
Impervious surface
coverage
80% 70% Yes
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 5
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Off-street parking. The zoning code requires 33 parking spaces for the proposed 33-unit
apartment building. This includes an additional 5% of the parking requirement for guest
parking. The site qualifies for a 15% transit reduction given its proximity to high-frequency bus
transit along Minnetonka Boulevard. The project would provide 38 underground parking spaces
and 14 surface parking spaces for a total of 52 parking spaces. There is no street parking
available adjacent to the property. The proposed development provides sufficient parking to
meet the zoning code requirement.
Access. The site would have one access point on Vernon Avenue South at the northwest corner
of the property. There would be no access to the site from Minnetonka Boulevard, Highway 100
or Utica Avenue South. The Minnesota Department of Transportation restricted direct access to
Highway 100 when it sold the property after completing reconstruction of the off-ramp.
Hennepin County also supports access to the site from Vernon with no access on Minnetonka
Boulevard. Staff requested the applicant locate the driveway as far north on Vernon as possible
to mitigate impacts to the Minnetonka Boulevard intersection.
Building materials. The zoning ordinance requires at least 60% class 1 materials, which include
materials such as glass and brick, and allows for up to 10% class 3 materials. The project
proposes a minimum of 72% class 1 materials on each façade and does not propose using class
3 materials.
Height. The height of the proposed building is approximately 38 feet. The building meets the
zoning code requirement of a maximum of 40 feet.
Yards. The proposed site plan exceeds the required nine-foot side yard setback on the east and
west sides of the property and exceeds the required 25-foot rear yard setback on the north side
of the property. The above ground portion of the building meets the required 25-foot front
yard setback. The applicant is requesting a variance of the front yard setback for the
underground portion of the building to be reduced from 25 feet to 11 feet.
Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). The zoning code does not require electric vehicle
charging infrastructure for surface parking lots with 14 spaces or less. The proposed project
includes eight (8) parking spaces served by electric vehicle (EV) chargers. Two (2) spaces in the
surface parking lot and six (6) spaces in the underground parking garage. The project would also
provide conduit for 18 parking spaces for future installation of EV chargers.
Bicycle parking. The zoning code requires 38 bicycle parking spaces for this site. The proposed
project would provide 42 bicycle parking spaces, which exceeds the zoning code requirement.
Designed outdoor recreation area (DORA). The project proposes a 5,223 square foot amenity
deck on the south side of the building with a pool and several gathering areas for residents, and
a 636 square foot patio space adjacent to the building entrance on Vernon Avenue South. This
makes up 12% of the total site area, which meets the zoning code requirement.
Landscaping. The zoning code requires a minimum of 33 trees and 329 shrubs for this project.
The applicant proposes to exceed this requirement by planting 57 trees and 365 shrubs on the
site. There are currently four significant trees on the property. This project would remove three
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 6
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
significant trees on the west side of the site and preserve one in the northeast corner. The city’s
tree preservation ordinance requires the applicant to plant 20 inches of trees to replace the
significant trees removed from the site. The landscape plan proposes planting over 100 inches
of trees on the property, which satisfies both the landscaping requirements and the tree
replacement requirements.
Preliminary and final plat analysis:
The applicant seeks approval of a preliminary and final plat for Parkway on 5 located at 5430
Minnetonka Blvd.
Park and trail dedication:
If the preliminary and final plat application is approved, the proposed project will require park
and trail dedication. Staff will present recommendations for dedication of land or cash-in-lieu of
land to the park and recreation advisory commission (PRAC) on Jan. 21, 2026. No new parks are
planned for this area in the comprehensive plan; therefore, cash-in-lieu of land is
recommended by staff. The 2025 fee schedule sets the park dedication fee at $1,500 per
dwelling unit. Staff estimate the development will owe $49,500 in park dedication fees.
The 2025 fee schedule sets the trail dedication fee at $225 per unit. Staff estimate the
development will owe $7,425 in trail dedication fees. The comprehensive plan shows a
proposed trail connecting Minnetonka Boulevard and Utica Avenue South adjacent to 5430
Minnetonka Blvd. The applicant has agreed to install a trail in the Minnesota Department of
Transportation right-of-way to the east of the property as part of the project. Staff recommend
the park and recreation advisory committee reduce the trail dedication fee by the cost to install
the proposed trail. The remaining fee will be paid by the developer.
Drainage and utility easements:
The lot requires drainage and utility easements along all property lines. Property lines adjacent
to right-of-way require ten-foot easements and interior lot lines require five-foot easements.
The applicant provided a final plat drawing showing these easements.
The proposed site plan shows retaining walls encroaching into the drainage and utility
easements, which requires an encroachment agreement. Language addressing the
encroachment agreement will be incorporated into the planning development contract for this
project.
Staff find the preliminary and final plat meet city requirements with the conditions
recommended by staff.
Sidewalk easement:
Hennepin County requested the city obtain a sidewalk easement along Minnetonka Boulevard
to accommodate the future Minnetonka Boulevard reconstruction project. The easement is not
shown on the final plat but will be recorded against the property in a separate document.
Variance analysis:
The applicant requests a variance to Section 36-166. Site dimension standards which requires a
25-foot front yard setback. The requested variance would reduce the minimum front yard
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 7
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
setback to 11 feet for the underground parking garage. The above-ground portion of the
building will meet the 25-foot setback.
Findings: As required by city code, the board of zoning appeals (BOZA) considers the following
findings prior to ruling on a variance. City staff provided an analysis of each point below. The
applicant submitted a letter explaining the need for the variance. The letter is attached to this
staff report.
1. The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
The proposed variance does not impact the health, safety and welfare of the community
given the reduced setback only applies to the underground portion of the development.
This area would be covered by hardscape and plantings concealing it from passersby.
The above ground portion of the building will meet the required 25-foot setback. Staff
believe this criterion has been met.
2. Whether or not the request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
zoning ordinance.
The request is in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance given that the project
proposes to meet all required setbacks for the above ground portions of the building.
The requested variance would also allow the project to accommodate more parking
underground rather than increase impervious surface on the site with additional surface
parking spaces. Staff believe this criterion has been met.
3. Whether or not the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The comprehensive plan encourages a variety of housing styles, sizes and affordability.
The proposed project would add a low-rise apartment building in an area with
predominantly single-unit dwellings. The comprehensive plan also aims to increase
density along high frequency transit corridors. The project site is located adjacent to a
bus stop for a route that runs every 15 minutes at the time of the application submittal.
Staff believe this criterion has been met.
4. Whether or not the applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in
complying with the zoning ordinance. Practical difficulty means:
a. The proposed use is permitted in the zoning district in which the land is located. A
variance can be requested for dimensional items required in the zoning ordinance,
including but not limited to setbacks and height limitations.
Low-rise apartment dwellings are permitted in the N-2 district.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and
not created by the landowner.
The topography of the site and the parking restrictions along Minnetonka Boulevard
and Vernon Avenue South necessitate the variance request.
The topography of the site descends along Minnetonka Boulevard and Vernon
Avenue South resulting in an elevation change of approximately 10 feet from the
southeast corner to the north and west sides of the site. This elevation change
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 8
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
makes it difficult to meet the shadow ordinance in the zoning code without locating
the building further south on the site. The applicant chose to shift the building to the
south to meet the shadow ordinance and reduce impacts on neighboring properties
to the north.
The lack of street parking adjacent to the property means the applicant must
accommodate all required parking on site. The variance request allows the applicant
to accommodate the requirement while potentially reducing impacts to the adjacent
neighborhoods from residents and guest parking on the street further north. It may
also deter illegal street parking along Vernon Avenue South which could present
significant safety concerns given its proximity to an intersection.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The variance will allow the construction of a permitted use that minimizes impacts
on the adjacent neighborhood by meeting the shadow ordinance and providing off-
street parking for residents and guests. The portion of the development impacted by
the variance is underground and will not alter the essential character of the street.
d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
Economic considerations are not considered as part of this request.
e. Practical difficulties include inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
The applicant chose to locate the building further south to limit the shadowing
effects on the neighboring buildings to the north.
5. Whether or not there are circumstances unique to the shape, topography, water
conditions or other physical conditions of the property.
The topography of the site and the parking restrictions along Minnetonka Boulevard and
Vernon Avenue South necessitate the variance request.
The topography of the site descends along Minnetonka Boulevard and Vernon Avenue
South resulting in an elevation change of approximately 10 feet from the southeast
corner to the north and west sides of the site. This elevation change makes it difficult to
meet the shadow ordinance in the zoning code without locating the building further
south on the site. The applicant chose to shift the building to the south to meet the
shadow ordinance and reduce impacts on neighboring properties to the north. Staff
believe this criterion has been met.
6. Whether or not the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
The variance would support the construction of a low-rise apartment building which is
permitted in the N-2 zoning district. The project also aligns with the RM – Medium
density residential land use guiding which allows densities of 18 to 30 units per acre.
The city council initiated the land use change to RM – Medium density residential in
2021. Staff believe this criterion has been met.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 9
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
7. Whether or not the granting of the variance will impair light and air to the
surrounding properties, unreasonably increase congestion, increase the danger of fire
or endanger public safety.
Granting the requested variance will not impair light and air to the surrounding
properties. The site plan proposes a rear setback of approximately 65 feet adjacent to
the neighboring property on Vernon Avenue South and approximately 89 feet adjacent
to the neighboring property on Utica Avenue South. This is more than double and triple
the required 25-foot setback. The intent of this setback is to mitigate light and air
impairments on adjacent properties and to reduce the danger of fire. The project will
also clean up the contaminated soils on the site during project construction. Staff
believe this criterion has been met.
8. Whether or not the granting of the variance will merely serve as a convenience or is it
necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty.
The variance is necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty created by the topography
of the site and lack of street parking. It would allow the applicant to meet the project
parking needs with underground parking compared to surface parking which would
increase impervious surface on the site. The variance would also allow the building to
locate further south on the site to mitigate impacts on adjacent properties.
Public outreach: A public hearing notice was posted in the Sun Sailor newspaper and mailed to
property owners within 500 feet of the site. The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting on
Jan. 7, 2026, at Parkway 25 (4015 County Road 25), another building developed by the property
owner of 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard. Approximately 14 people attended the neighborhood
meeting. No attendees expressed opposition to the project. Comments and questions
addressed various topics including but not limited to outdoor lighting, parking and site access.
Attendees seemed satisfied with responses from the project team and city staff and did not
request changes to the proposed site plan.
Planning commission: The planning commission held a public hearing for the project on Jan. 21,
2026. A member of the project team shared additional information about the project and
answered initial questions from the commissioners. There were no other speakers. The
planning commission closed the public hearing and voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the
motions.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 10
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Resolution No. 26-___
Rescinding previous special permit, conditional use permit and variance
approvals for property located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard
Whereas, Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP applied for a preliminary and final plat and a
variance under Chapter 26 of the St. Louis Park city code for the purpose of constructing a
three-story, 33-unit apartment building at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard; and
Whereas, the property is located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard; the property is legally
described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto; and
Whereas, the property is zoned N-2; and
Whereas, the property was previously used for a gas station with a car wash and retail
store and former highway right-of-way; and
Whereas, the Minnesota Department of Transportation acquired the property to allow
the reconstruction of the southbound Highway 100 off-ramp; and
Whereas, the Minnesota Department of Transportation sold the property for
redevelopment after completion of the reconstruction project; and
Whereas, special permit, conditional use permit, and variance approvals have been
recorded against the property for the previous use; and
Whereas, the former uses are not permitted in the N-2 zoning district; and
Whereas, the proposed development does not need nor require the previous approvals.
Now, therefore be it resolved that the city rescinds Resolution No. 4850, Resolution No.
5395, Resolution No. 5816, Resolution No. 7104, Resolution No. 84-61, Resolution No. 86-196,
Resolution No. 88-50, Resolution No. 90-170, Resolution No. 04-94, Resolution No. 05-94,
Resolution No. 94-48, Resolution No. 05-136, and Resolution No. 05-137.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 11
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
EXHIBIT A
All of Tracts A, B, and C described below:
Tract A:
Lot 15, except the north 80 feet thereof, and Lot 16, except the north 80 feet thereof, Auditor's
Subdivision
No. 351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder
in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom those parts conveyed to the
County of Hennepin in Documents No. A-3876997 and A-3876998, lying westerly, northerly and
easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in said
Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said Lot
17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet; thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09
minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44 seconds
for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Tract B:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 16, and the southerly 27.3 feet of Lot 17, Auditor's Subdivision No.
351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in
and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the following described line: Beginning
at the northeast corner of said Lot 17;thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of
said Lot 17, distance 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth
of 194 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet and there terminating;
Tract C:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 351, according to the plat thereof on
file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in
said Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said
Lot 17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet;
thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09 minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet to the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44
seconds for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Subject to the following restriction: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 100
from the lands herein conveyed.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 12
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Resolution No. 26-___
Resolution approving preliminary and final plat of Parkway on 5
located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard
Whereas, Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP applied for a preliminary and final plat in the
manner required for platting land under Chapter 26 of the St. Louis Park city code for the
purpose of constructing a three-story, 33-unit apartment building with a mix of underground
and surface parking at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard; and
Whereas, the proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects
consistent with the comprehensive plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of
the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park; and
Whereas, the proposed preliminary and final plat is situated upon lands in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, legally described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto; and
Whereas, the contents of Case No. 25-10-S are hereby entered into and made part of
the record of decision for this case.
Now, therefore be it resolved the proposed preliminary and final plat of Parkway on 5 is
hereby approved and accepted by the city as being in accord and conformity with all
ordinances, city plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park, provided, however, that this
approval is made subject to the opinion of the city attorney and certification by the city clerk
and subject to the following conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions
of the zoning ordinance, approved official exhibits and city code.
2. Construction and staging information will be provided to staff for review and
approval before building permits are issued.
3. All new utility service structures shall be buried.
4. The final plat shall be recorded within two years after approval of the final plat. If
the final plat is not recorded within the two-year period, then the preliminary and
final plat shall be considered void, unless a request for a time extension is submitted
in writing and approved by the city council.
5. Prior to the city signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with
Hennepin County:
a. A financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the
amount of $6,000 shall be submitted to the city to ensure that a signed mylar
copy of the final plat is provided to the city ($1,000) and the placement of
iron monuments ($5,000).
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 13
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
b. A planning development contract shall be executed between the city and
developer that addresses, at a minimum:
i. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited
to the trail located directly east of the property, the driveway apron
on Vernon Avenue South and adjacent sidewalks, road repair for
utility connections, and the execution of necessary easements related
to such improvements.
ii. Recording of a sidewalk easement along Minnetonka Boulevard.
iii. Maintenance agreement related to the adjacent public trail.
iv. Encroachment agreement for retaining walls within drainage and
utility easements.
v. Changes that may be approved administratively to reduce disruptions
to Minnetonka Boulevard during construction.
vi. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable
letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the
amount of 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all
public improvements, placement of iron monuments at property
corners, and landscaping.
vii. Upon city approval and acceptance of private site improvements, the
developer shall provide a one-year warranty in the form of a cash
escrow or letter of credit for 25% of the final construction costs of the
improvements.
viii. The applicant shall reimburse the city attorney’s fees in
drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat
approval.
ix. The mayor and city manager are authorized to execute the
development agreement.
c. The park and trail dedication requirements have been met through land
dedication, cash-in-lieu of land, or a combination of the two.
6. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met:
a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the city.
b. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility and city representatives.
c. All necessary permits shall be obtained.
7. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All city noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no
construction activity between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday
through Friday, and between 7 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays.
b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto
neighboring properties.
c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as
necessary.
d. The city shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a
public street.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 14
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
e. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the
city engineer (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been
taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety.
f. The developer shall install and maintain chain link security fencing that is at
least six feet tall along the perimeter of the site. All gates and access points
shall be locked during non-working hours.
g. Temporary electric power connections shall not adversely impact
surrounding neighborhood service.
8. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy permit the private
utilities, site landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the
official exhibits.
9. 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.
It is further resolved that the city clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this
resolution in the office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Register of Titles as the
case may be.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 15
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
EXHIBIT A
All of Tracts A, B, and C described below:
Tract A:
Lot 15, except the north 80 feet thereof, and Lot 16, except the north 80 feet thereof, Auditor's
Subdivision
No. 351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder
in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom those parts conveyed to the
County of Hennepin in Documents No. A-3876997 and A-3876998, lying westerly, northerly and
easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in said
Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said Lot
17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet; thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09
minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44 seconds
for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Tract B:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 16, and the southerly 27.3 feet of Lot 17, Auditor's Subdivision No.
351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in
and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the following described line: Beginning
at the northeast corner of said Lot 17;thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of
said Lot 17, distance 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth
of 194 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet and there terminating;
Tract C:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 351, according to the plat thereof on
file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in
said Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said
Lot 17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet;
thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09 minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet to the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44
seconds for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Subject to the following restriction: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 100
from the lands herein conveyed.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 16
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
Resolution No. 26-___
Approving a variance to allow a minimum front yard setback of 11 feet instead
of the minimum setback of 25 feet in the N-2 zoning district for 5430
Minnetonka Boulevard
Whereas, Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP applied for a variance from the requirements of
Section 36-166 of the St. Louis Park city code to allow a minimum front yard setback of 11 feet
instead of the minimum setback of 25 feet in the N-2 zoning district; and
Whereas, the property is located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard; the property is legally
described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto; and
Whereas, the property is zoned N-2; and
Whereas, the planning commission held a public hearing and reviewed the application
for a variance on January 21, 2026; and
Whereas, the city council considered the planning commission recommendation and
the information related to Case No. 25-11-VAR and the effect of the variance on the health,
safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, the effect on the value of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of the
use on the comprehensive plan, and compliance with the intent of the zoning ordinance; and
Whereas, based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the city
council has determined the requested variance meets the requirements of Section 36-34(a)(2)
of the zoning ordinance necessary to be met for the city council to grant variances, and makes
the following findings:
1. The request to reduce the front yard setback does not impact the health, safety, and
welfare of the community given the reduced setback only applies to the
underground portion of the development. This area would be covered by hardscape
and plantings concealing it from passersby. The above ground portion of the building
will meet the required 25-foot setback.
2. The request is in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance given that the
project proposes to meet all required setbacks for the above ground portions of the
building. The requested variance would also allow the project to accommodate
more parking underground rather than increase impervious surface on the site with
additional surface parking spaces.
3. The comprehensive plan designates the land use of this site as RM – medium density
residential, which allows a variety of housing types with net residential densities
ranging from 18 to 30 units per acre. The variance request is for a three-story
apartment building with a residential density of 30 units per acre, which is consistent
with the comprehensive plan land use guiding. The comprehensive plan encourages
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 17
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
a variety of housing styles, sizes, and affordability. The proposed project would add a
low-rise apartment building in an area with predominantly single-unit dwellings. The
comprehensive plan also aims to increase density along high frequency transit
corridors. The project site is located adjacent to a bus stop for a route that runs
every 15 minutes at the time of the application submittal.
4. The applicant has established a practical difficulty in complying with the zoning
ordinance with the following:
a. Low-rise apartment dwellings are permitted in the N-2 district.
b. The topography of the site and the parking restrictions along Minnetonka
Boulevard and Vernon Avenue South necessitate the variance request.
c. The variance will allow the construction of a permitted use that minimizes
impacts on the adjacent neighborhood by meeting the shadow ordinance
and providing off-street parking for residents and guests. The portion of the
development impacted by the variance is underground and will not alter the
essential character of the street.
d. Economic considerations are not considered as part of this request.
5. There are factors related to the shape, size or other extraordinary conditions of the
lot which impact the ability to meet the front yard setback for the underground
portion of the building. The topography of the site descends along Minnetonka
Boulevard and Vernon Avenue South resulting in an elevation change of
approximately 10 feet from the southeast corner to the north and west sides of the
site. This elevation change makes it difficult to meet the shadow ordinance in the
zoning code without locating the building further south on the site. The applicant
chose to shift the building to the south to meet the shadow ordinance and reduce
impacts on neighboring properties to the north.
6. The variance would support the construction of a low-rise apartment building which
is permitted in the N-2 zoning district. The project also aligns with the RM – medium
density residential land use guiding which allows densities of 18 to 30 units per acre.
City council initiated the land use change to RM – medium density residential in
2021.
7. Granting the requested variance will not impair light and air to the surrounding
properties. The site plan proposes a rear setback of approximately 65 feet adjacent
to the neighboring property on Vernon Avenue South and approximately 89 feet
adjacent to the neighboring property on Utica Avenue South. This is more than
double and triple the required 25-foot setback. The intent of this setback is to
mitigate light and air impairments on adjacent properties and to reduce the danger
of fire. The project will also clean up the contaminated soils on the site during
project construction. Staff believe this criterion has been met.
8. The variance is necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty created by the
topography of the site and lack of street parking. It would allow the applicant to
meet the project parking needs with underground parking compared to surface
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 18
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
parking which would increase impervious surface on the site. The variance would
also allow the building to locate further south on the site to mitigate impacts on
adjacent properties.
Whereas, the contents of Case No. 25-11-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of
the record of decision for this case,
Now therefore be it resolved that the application for a variance to reduce the front yard
setback from 25 feet to 11 feet is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the approved exhibits.
2. The front yard setback shall only apply to the underground portions of the
development. The front yard setback of the above ground portion of the building
shall remain 25 feet.
3. The variance is automatically revoked and cancelled if construction of the proposed
building is not substantially completed within two years as outlined in city code
section 36-38(a)(9).
It is further resolved that 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 February 2, 2026:
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Page 19
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance for
5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1
EXHIBIT A
All of Tracts A, B, and C described below:
Tract A:
Lot 15, except the north 80 feet thereof, and Lot 16, except the north 80 feet thereof, Auditor's
Subdivision
No. 351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder
in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; excepting therefrom those parts conveyed to the
County of Hennepin in Documents No. A-3876997 and A-3876998, lying westerly, northerly and
easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in said
Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said Lot
17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet; thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09
minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44 seconds
for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Tract B:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 16, and the southerly 27.3 feet of Lot 17, Auditor's Subdivision No.
351, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in
and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the following described line: Beginning
at the northeast corner of said Lot 17;thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of
said Lot 17, distance 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth
of 194 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet and there terminating;
Tract C:
The northerly 80 feet of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 351, according to the plat thereof on
file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 17 in
said Auditor's Subdivision No. 351; thence southerly to a point on the easterly boundary of said
Lot 17, distant 27.3 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof; thence on an azimuth of 194
degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds for 223.52 feet;
thence on an azimuth of 272 degrees 09 minutes 07 seconds for 210.49 feet to the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 00 degrees 07 minutes 44
seconds for 181.58 feet and there terminating;
Subject to the following restriction: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 100
from the lands herein conveyed.
0
oor
-
_
j
_
--
--
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
---
-
-
-
---
-
--
--
---------
---------
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 20
L
I I
I I I I
I I I I ! J,.,
�ii�.><,
I,,, r"'
RJ�N� TYf-SEE ::OR
I sr:i� / CONC. M / CHEEK / GR6.CI: / i l . . --
t-----------------------------------0
I I I I
I I I
PlO;llQ292'1ll0019 Mdrao::zgssvomanAv«>ueSouth o .. n.,DElP ... J, ....
Foundl/21nchlblborW/CopNo.<MSJO l'<>lnt27,3�!111JolthoSEComo,ef
I 'S I ,of :-:�:i�:f::::-·�-�v -�:��-��':Ir,.,. chaklUr-l<Fonco �"(( "(( -I '1Q\ L.. ,, f\\J ·=-S89°54JS"E140.3} 5
--�--�-�G.....,..
. I
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK SITE SPECIFIC NOTES: 1. SIGNAGE WILL BE APPROVED THROUGH A SEPARATE SIGN PERt.lT. PROJECT MAY HAVE l.f' TO ZOO SF OF SIG!'W>E WITH A MAXIMUM OF 100 SF FOR ONE SIGN FACE NO MAX HEIGHT OF 25 FT FOR A PYLON SIGN. 2. PROPOSED PYLON SIGNAGE ON TI-E CHIPOTLE SITE CANNOT BE USED FOR SIGNAGE FOR THE BUSINESSES ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. SIGNAGE FOR THAT PROPERTY MUST BE LOCA.TED ON Tl-E PROPERTY ITSELF. 3. OUTDOOR LIGHTING FIXTURES TO HAVE OMMING CONTROL SYSTEM OR llMMING DRIVERS TO MEET QTY CODE OF 1.0 FC
AVERAGE BETWEEN THE HOI..RS OF 1CPM NO 6AM,
DIHEAENCTIEX.VSPROP.) 33,lS7SF S7,842SF
-j-
OPERATIONAL NOTES
0 0 ,..,
TRASH SI-W.L BE PLACEO IN EXTERIOR TRASH AREA AND REMOVED BY COMMERctAL CO. v.EEKL Y. DELIVERIES SHALL OCOJR AT THE FRONT DOClR VIA STl'l'IDPRD CCf.lMERCIAL IEJVERY VEHICLES (LIP$, fEO.EX. USPS).
OVVNER INFORMATION SEI.AINVl:STIIIENTSlTD,LLf' •91SWEST35THST�EET,SUl1Y1Q> ST,LDUISPMll.fllN&!MH P-'ZSEI.A .,�11112 PAJJSOAOLCOII
SITE LAYOUT NOTES: 1. ALL EXISTING llnLITY LOCATIOOS SI-IO'M'I ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT"GOPI-ER STATE OOE CAJ..L" (651-454-0002 OR 8�252-1166) FOR llnLITY LOCATIOOS, 48 HIOURS PRIOR TO c:a,.isralJCTlON. THE c:a,.rrRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE NlY llnLITIES THAT ARE CWAAGED OORING CONSTRUCTIOO AT NO COST TO THE O'N\IER. 2 OONTRACTOR SI-W.L VERIFY LOCATIONS ANO LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINI\ING OONSTRUCTION, INO.UDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS. SETBAO(S, llnLITIES, BUILDINGSl'l'ID PAVEMENTS. c:a,.rrRACTOR IS RESPOOSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIOOS OF All ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. Nf( RE'v1SIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. OUETO LOCATIONALADJUSThlENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO O'M'IER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE
ENGINEERII...AIIIOSCAPE AAQ-IITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATIOO OF MATERIAL.5. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL. 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALi. OBTAIN AJ.L NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRIJCTIOO, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY ANJ STREET OPENING PERMIT. 4, THE CONTRACTOR SHALi. VERIFY RECOMMEN::lATIOOS NOTED IN THE GEO TEO-INICAJ.. REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATIOO OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS. 5. OONTRACTOR SI-W.L FIELD VERIFY COORDINATESl'l'ID LOCATION DIMENSIONS & ELEVATIONS OF THE BUIL.Qf'fJ Pl'ID STAAE FOR RE'v1W ANO APPROVAL BY THE a.-.t-ERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTAl.lATIOO OF FOOTING MATERIALS. 6. LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROAI:mAY PAVEMENTS, a.RBS AND GUTTERS, BOLL.ARDS, ANJ WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE
ANO SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELO. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR RE'v1Wl'l'ID APPROVAL BY THE ENGll'EERILANDSCAPE
ARa-tTECT. 7. CURB DIMENSIONS SHa.-.'N ARETO FACE OF CURB. BlJLllNG DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUN::lATION. LOCATION OF BUIL.QNG IS TO BUIL.QNG FOUNDATIOO AND SHAU. BE Af3 SI-IO'l,N ON THE DRAWINGS . 8. THE CCNTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAN PL.ES AS SPEQFIED FOR RE'v1EW ANO APPROVAL BY T1-E
ENGINEERII...AIIIOSCAPE AAQ-IITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATIOO FOR AJ.L PREFPSRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENO-IES, FLAGPOLES, LANOING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, !'ND UGHT Pl'ID POLES. T1-E O'N\IER RESERVES T1-E RIGHT TO RE.ECT INSTAUED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, 8. PEDESTRIAN a.RB RAMPS 81-W.L BE CONSTRUCTED 'MTH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE v..tTH AD.A REQI.AREMENT8-SEE DETAIL, 10. CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WICE WI-ITE PAINTED LINE, SPACE048" 00 CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFAC. WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SI-W.L BE 5' V',1CE, ALL Oll-ER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SI-W.L BE WI-ITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERV-ASE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY �OR LOCAL GOVERI\ING BODIES.
13. l�=:w-L REFER TO FINAL Pl.AT FOR LOT EIQU\IOo\RIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AN) llMENSIOOS PRIOR TO SITE 14. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE OONOOIOOS, DIMENSIONS. 1a ALL PARIQNG LOT PAINT STRIPING TOBE ....,..TE, 4"WICE TYP. 17. BIT\JMINOVS PA\/1NG TO BE i.lGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL 81-EETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS. 18. ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE 'MTH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT T1-E DRIP Ur£. SEE LANOSCN'E DCCUMENTS. 19. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO INSTALL NlY SICEWALK !'ND CURBING PER CESIGN PLAN. c:a,.rrRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL CURBSAt-oSIDEWPLJ<SWILLDRPJNPROPERLY INFIELDCONDITIONS.CONT'RAC'TORMUST CONTACT THECML ENGINEl!R 2,t-HOURS PRIOR TO AHY CURS AflJIOft SIOEWAI..K l'tSTIIU.ATIOM TO REVIEW AHO IMSf'ECT CURS STAKES. CONTRACTOR n Rl!SPONSIIILE fOR AMY CURB OR SIJEWALK Rl!PLACDll!NT IP' THIS PROCEDURE IS MOT P'OU.OWED. 2tl. Fl NI SH GRADING FOR HARDSCH'E AREAS IE. PARKING LOTS, CURBS, SICEWAI..KS SHALL BE WITHN 0.05 FEET. �AREAS MUST COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS ON PL.ANS ANOPDA REGULATIONS. Ta.ERANCE WITHIN �AREAS IS 0.00 FEET llSClJSS Nf( DE\11ATIONS WITH ENGINEER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR NlY CURB, SIDEWJ'LJ( At-OIOR PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT THAT DOES NOT MEET TOI.ERPNCE/PDA REQUIREMENTS,
SITE PLAN LEGEND (SHEETS C2.0-C2.2): LIGHT DUTY Bln..NINOUS PAVEMENT {IF ��R��s:=�Ti���� DEPTH. SEE DETAIL. HEAVY DUTY BITUt.tNOUS PAVEMENT OF APPLICABLE). SEE GEOTEa-NCAJ.. REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & \-\€AR OOURSE DEPTH, SEE CETAJL. HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT \IF APPLICABLE) AS SPEOFIED. SEE �1·-1 ����I� �����Wl��E�E SEE CITY DETAIL, WITHN PRIVATE PROPERTY, SEE CSG DETAIL
�I -1 ����I I ��;��E�J��CABLE)AS
�
·---·
GEOTECHI\ICAI.. REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & CO�E CEPTHS, WITI-tN ROW �TY�����VATE SPECIAL TY PAVEMENT \IF APPLIC>Bl.E)PROVIOE BID FOR T1-E Fa.LCM1"'3 OPTIONS, INO.LOE VARIATIONS OF BASE MATERIAi.At«) OTHER NECESs.o.RY COMPCf,IENTS. 1. STAMPED& COLORED CONCRETE 2, CONCRETE PAVERS MAKERS, COLORS, MODl:LS, & PATTERN TO BE INO.LOEDIN SHOP DRA'MNG SUBMITTAL PRIOR TO CONSTR\..CTION.
CONSTRIJCTIOO LIMITS CURB AND GUTTER-sEE NOTES (T.0.) TIP OUT GUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLAN
TRPFFlC aRECTIONAL ARRCM' PAVEMENT """'''" SIGN ANO POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED. HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGN t-P = NO PARKING FIRE LANE ST=STOP CP= COMPACT CARPARIQNGOI\I..Y ACCESSIBILITYROUTE ARROW OF APPLICPBLE) DO NOT PAINT.
!U � Knac:i,-::���:� dig. �;,'J;iaaaia;;;;;;j
IHEIIEfYCEltTIFYTHATTHISPI.NI, SPECIFICATION,011-1\EPORT�S PIIEPMEDBTIIEOIIUNDEftMYDIIIECT Sl,IPEIMSIDN.<IIDlltAT I ...... A DUlY UCl[NSEDPIIOFESSIDNALENGflEEII UNDE�THELAWSDFTHESTATEDF ... NESDTA.
SITE PLAN
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 21
15 ,.
---
FACE BRICK VENEER
BRICKSOLDIERCOURSE
FIBERCEMENTPANELSIDING(PEARL)
FIBERCEMEHTWOOO•LOOKPANELSIOING{ESPRESSO)
PREFINISHEOME'IAI.PARAPETCAP·COLORTOMATCHFIBER CEMENT
KNOXBOX
CAST STONE SILL
FIBERGLASSSUDINGDOOR
PATIOSWINGDOOR
BUILOINGSIGNAGE
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION
GAURDRAIL
CCIIMNEL-COLORTONATCHABERCEMEHTPANEL
COMPOSITWINOOW
EXTERIOR MATERIALS ����!�C<l.Oll:$UlUOltY81Ull<lE
3D11.:Ji,W=!NI"MO
.,..,,E�c.lSISTIIIPE '>'1:1'1CM.!lllENJ�IJON CtUlll:PWl.
3D1!.;Ji,a:"'f=f'([lt99P:IOOCl\l!!FI
.,..E�IIIIBOIICEIIOII
ll!E!IIF�:BEI.WllllllCKCll�P�Y NOHNNUllltll CtUlll:IUNBUWHD'llL.ll�R
=='CKCllNPNW
ctl.Oll:Sl(N!t0.11.INlll:lOOR
� lOIISlRJ(S EXIClllOlt:lWl�BAOlllE Jf[COI.Olt
��= EXIClllOlt:IWl�BIQllE lfrCOI.Olt
@�o-lll'MRIN•llllffllOI
I
---!-----";;':�$
I
MATERIAI.CALCS•WESl 1,..J I M•"ri•I I Ml1trialT:tJ!t "'" ., ..
BRICK cuss, 494SF '"
ABER CEMENT PANEL cuss, 2,146SF ,,.
GLAZING CLASSI 11143SF ,..
WOOD-LOOK PANEL cuss, lSSF ,.
3,718SF ,..
METAi.PANEL CI.ASSII 312SF ,.
PREANISHEDMETAL CI.ASSII 168SF ..
480SF "'
Gnondtolll 4,1'8SF '""'
@� ... •o-El!YAJla•llllffllm
�-,.;,,,,,,i-----�-=�� ---lil.Sf�� -, AOOFTR���=� $
-;r3........::=�=-'-'--�-----.,,.�
LI j ---1�
@ ��ll"BIWMa•WEITCGUIIIYAID
MATERIALCALCS·SOISTH 1 ... �.I I Material Na11rlalTle' cs.
FIBERCEMENTPANEL cuss, 260SF ...
GLAZING CLASSI 2,422SF '"'
BRICK CLASSI 804Sf ,,.
WOOD·LOOKPANEL cuss, 437SF "'
6,306SF '"'
IPREFINISHEDMETAL lcuss11 l2mF 1� 207SF ,.
Grandlotal 6,512SF """
L L
£Et
. -�---, .. � [__=-i
--,::: -,---,,.,�
I I
0 �BDAJIIN•WBJIE....aul'
�-DJR
333WHhlng1anA .. N,Su1e210 NinnNpolll,t,1inno0011S5401 612.616,2100www,d)r-lnc.com
�
INVESTMENTS
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
A200
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 22
---
ROWLOCkCOURSEHEMIER PREFINISHEDMETAI.PANEL FIBERCEMENTPANELSIDING(PEARL) FIBERCEMENTWOOO•LOOKPANELSIOING{ESPRESSO) PREFINISHEDME'IAI.PARAPETCAP·COLOR TOMATCHABERCEMENT
CAST STONE Sill FIBERGLASSSUOINGDOOR
12 PATIO SWINGDDDR
14 BUILDINGSIGNAGE 15 HOSEBIB 16 EXPOSEDCMUCOLORTO,...ATCHADJACENTBRICK 17 ELEVATOR OVERRUN
18 FIREDEPARH4ENTCONNECTION
GAURDRAIL
CCHANNEL-COLORTONATCHABERCEMENTPANEL
COMPOSITWINOOW
EXTERIOR MATERIALS �-=�:lH COU)ll:ffAII.Wll'BRO'llE
P-'IE�C\$l$TIIPE VEROt,ILORUlAQ(II COU)ll:PEMII.
� ,.EXICOWI.OARl(BIPl!t fflOO�
"Sll!!fl .. _1"! _ .. IJeog•,.�r•Wlnwtf"""""'''"""" !IP=�=
P_.,.'E�UllO#l(:Ull/1 EXICOWl:llARUIPl!t
�FRIROEIIOi!ICKCOIIPNfY NORl'INU�K COU)ll:'Qlll!WEEO'IELOOII
��KCONl'Nff
CUUlll:1-NNABUNO\'ll.OUII
fflOO�
MATERIAi.CAi.CS-EAST I M11eri1! M,tl!ri,lllf! "'" ...
BRICK CLASSI 561SF FIBERCEMENTPANEL CLASSI lmSF GLAZING CLASSI 1152SF 3,2SOSF
METALPANEL CIASSII 58'SF PREANISHEDMETAL CIASSII 135SF 72GSF
G�ndtotal 3,970SF
I�� .. ,. I NATERIALCAI.CS-NORTH
Mlltrill MllerielT '-• ... ... BRICK CLASSI 1,019SF ,,. ABER CEMENT PANEL CLASSI 314SSF ,,. GLAZING CLASSI 2129SF .,.. 6,293SF
15' METAi.PANEL CIASSII 1,msF ,. PREANISHEDMETAL CIASSII 515SF 18' 2,439SF ,. ... Gnodtobll B,732SF
Per<1!o
12" , .. '" ,,. ,,. " , .. 100,
----,-,-,.�
----,,-,.�
�-DJR
333WHhlng1anA .. N,Su1e210 NinnNpolll,t,1inno0011S5401 612.616,2100www,d)r-lnc.com
� INVESTMENTS
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
A201
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c) Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 23
Unofficial Minutes
Planning commission
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
January 21, 2026
1. Call to order – 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Members present: Jim Beneke, Mia Divecha (arrived at 6:02 p.m.), Matt Eckholm,
John Flanagan, Sylvie Hyman, Sarah Strain, Tom Weber
Members absent: Tess Machalek
Staff present: Katelyn Champoux, Laura Chamberlain
Guest: Ian Thomas, resident
Sheldon Berg, DJR Architects
2. Approval of Minutes – January 7, 2026.
It was moved by Commissioner Eckholm, seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve the
January 7, 2026 minutes. The motion passed 7-0.
3. Hearing
3a. Title: Park Community Church conditional use permit
Location: 6805 Minnetonka Blvd.
Applicant: Park Community Church
Case No: 25-08-CUP
Ms. Champoux, associate planner, presented the Park Community Church conditional use
permit application for 6805 Minnetonka Boulevard. Staff recommended reopening the public
hearing (continued from Jan. 7, 2026), taking public testimony, and then recommending
approval of the conditional use permit to allow a religious institution with a parking
requirement reduction of 13 spaces at 6805 Minnetonka Blvd.
The property contains a 29,000 square foot church building and a 1,600 square foot parish
house in the N-2 zoning district. The proposal includes interior renovation of the sanctuary and
community spaces, a 500 square foot expansion on the south side, and replacing existing
pavement on the north and west sides with green space.
The project would remove two access points on Minnetonka Boulevard and add significant
landscaping, including 30 trees and 172 shrubs while preserving existing trees. The project
would reduce impervious surface coverage from approximately 75% to 59%.
Ms. Champoux detailed the parking requirements, noting that after applying a 15% transit
reduction, 98 spaces would be required. The church proposed 60 off-street spaces with
potential for 12 additional spaces through proof of parking, plus 13 street parking spaces, for a
total of 85 spaces. She noted the zoning code allows for parking requirement revisions through
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 24
a conditional use permit, and staff supported the 13-space reduction based on the adjacent
community center having ample parking and an informal shared parking arrangement with the
church.
The project would include electric vehicle charging infrastructure with 4 spaces served by
chargers and 28 spaces with conduit for future chargers, plus 12 bike parking spaces.
A neighborhood meeting was held on Dec. 3, 2025 at Park Community Church. One resident
attended and shared concerns about street parking and how the city calculates its parking
requirements but did not oppose the project.
Chair Flanagan reopened the public hearing. Mr. Ian Thomas, a resident, spoke in support of
the project, praising the conversion of impervious surface to green space and the parking
reduction. He suggested that churches know their parking needs and street parking is a public
resource. He also encouraged the commission to consider eliminating all parking mandates, as
other cities have done, noting benefits for sustainability, health, safety, and affordable housing.
Chair Flanagan closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Divecha appreciated the green space additions and improved driveway access
that prioritizes pedestrians on Minnetonka Blvd. Commissioner Weber thanked the guests for
attending and participating in the meeting. Commissioner Eckholm commended the applicant
for embracing the city's 2040 plan rather than seeking variances. Chair Flanagan noted the
safety improvements from removing access points on Minnetonka Boulevard and redirecting
traffic to side streets.
It was moved by Commissioner Beneke, seconded by Commissioner Hyman, to approve the Park
Community Church conditional use permit. The motion passed 7-0.
3b. Title: Parkway on 5 preliminary and final plat, and variance
Location: 5430 Minnetonka Blvd.
Applicant: Sela Investments, Ltd., LLP
Case No: 25-10-S, 25-11-VAR
Ms. Champoux presented the Parkway on 5 application for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard. Staff
recommended approval of rescinding previous approvals on the site, approval of the
preliminary and final plat, and approval of a variance to allow an 11-foot front yard setback
instead of the required 25 feet for the underground parking portion.
Ms. Champoux explained the property was rezoned to N-2 zoning district, which allows various
housing types. The project would include:
A mix of units: 4 alcoves, 21 one-bedroom, and 9 two-bedroom units
52 off-street parking spaces (38 underground, 14 surface). Zoning code requires 33
parking spaces. The applicant proposes more than the required spaces due to the
parking restrictions along the site on Minnetonka Blvd. and Vernon Avenue S.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 25
A public trail east of the property connecting Minnetonka Boulevard to Utica Avenue
South
Landscaping exceeding code requirements with 57 trees and 365 shrubs
42 bike parking spaces
The variance request was specifically for the underground parking portion, as the above-ground
structure would meet the 25-foot setback requirement. A copy of the variance narrative from
the applicant was provided to the commissioners since it was not in the agenda packet and it is
included as “Attachment 1”. Ms. Champoux explained the practical difficulties included the
site's 10-foot elevation change and the desire to comply with the city's shadow ordinance while
minimizing impacts on neighboring properties.
The project team held a neighborhood meeting on Jan. 7, 2026 and approximately 14 people
attended. Attendees shared their comments and questions about topics such as outdoor
lighting, parking and site access. Another resident comment was received after the agenda
packet was created. A copy of the resident’s comments in opposition was provided to the
planning commissioners before the meeting and is included as “Attachment 2”.
Chair Flanagan opened the public hearing. Mr. Sheldon Berg from DJR Architecture represented
the project. He explained that site contamination from the previous gas station would be
addressed during construction, with contaminated soil being removed and clean fill brought in.
Mr. Berg noted that the owner included extra parking due to the lack of on-street parking
options nearby and wanted to be a good neighbor by ensuring residents and guests would not
need to park in the surrounding neighborhood.
In response to commissioner questions, Mr. Berg clarified that there would be a mix of secured
indoor and outdoor bike parking, and that while there was technically only one 3-bedroom unit
(labeled as a 2-bedroom plus den with a closet), the owner's experience suggested smaller units
were easier to rent.
Chair Flanagan closed the meeting. After closing the public hearing, commissioners expressed
support for the redevelopment of this vacant site, noting that an apartment building would
generate less traffic than the previous gas station or potential commercial uses and the
underground parking was an appropriate design choice for the location. Commissioners
acknowledged that while the project did not include affordable units or many family-sized
apartments, it is a good utilization of the site.
It was moved by Commissioner Hyman, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm to recommend
rescinding previous approvals on the site, recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat,
and recommend approval of a variance at 5430 Minnetonka Blvd. The motion passed 7-0.
5. Communications
Ms. Chamberlain noted that the final draft of the Vision 4.0 document was available on the city
website.
Future scheduled meeting/event dates:
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 26
February 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
February 25, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting*
March 4, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting
March 25, 2026 – planning commission regular meeting**
*meeting held on Feb. 25, 2026 since Ash Wednesday is Feb. 18, 2026.
**meeting held on March 25 since since Eid-a-Fitr potentially begins March 18.
6. Adjournment – 7:05 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Sean Walther, liaison John Flanagan, chair member
These minutes were created with the assistance of a generative AI transcript service, then
edited by a staff person.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 27
December 8, 2025
Re: Variance Narrative for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard
We are requesting a variance for the front yard setback on Minnetonka Boulevard from 25 feet standard to 16.1
feet on the east and 11 feet to the west due to the angle of Minnetonka Boulevard. The requested encroachment
is completely underground and all above-ground components meet the 25’-0” setback with setbacks ranging from
25 feet on the east side to over 50 feet back on the west side of the lot. The requested underground setback
variance is for a little over half of the overall length of the site frontage.
Findings:
1. The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare
of the community.
Response: The proposed variance will have no effect on the surrounding health, safety and welfare of the
community as the requested variance is completely underground and is topped with hardscape and
plantings such that passersby would not be aware of the existence of the structure. In addition, the
parking that constitutes the main reason for the variance request is due to no street parking being
available on either Minnetonka Boulevard or Vernon Avenue adjacent to the parking.
2. The request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
zoning ordinance.
Response: The request is keeping in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance as all above ground
setbacks are maintained for the project site. In addition, this reduces the amount of on-grade parking and
additional impervious surface.
3. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Response: The request and planned use of the site is consistent with the comprehensive plan by keeping
to the prescribed density of 30 units per acre limit on site. The project is proposing to accommodate the
required parking below grade.
4. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying
with the zoning ordinance. This means that:
a. The proposed use is permitted in the zoning district in which the
land is located. A variance can be requested for dimensional items.
Response: The proposed use is permitted in the N-2 zoning district where the site is located.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the
property and not created by the landowner.
Response: The request is necessitated by the topography of the site and the fact project parking is not
allowed on either of the projects two streets. Neither circumstance was created by the landowner. The
topography of the site descends along Minnetonka Boulevard and Vernon Avenue to drop approximately
10 feet from the southeast corner to the north and west. This drop in topography exacerbates the
challenges in relative height from a three-story building to the single-story structures to the north. In
order to maintain the shadowing requirements in the zoning code, we have shifted the apartment
building to the south to maintain this standard. In addition, as there is no street parking available on
either street at this property and to reduce the impervious paving on site, we are locating the majority of
the parking below grade resulting in a request for this variance.
Attachment 1
ŝtLJ cŽƵncŝů meetŝnŐ ŽĨ &eďƌƵaƌLJ Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;/tem EŽ͘ ϳcͿ
dŝtůe͗ ZeƐŽůƵtŝŽnƐ ƌeƐcŝnĚŝnŐ ƉƌeǀŝŽƵƐ aƉƉƌŽǀaůƐ͕ aƉƉƌŽǀŝnŐ ƉƌeůŝmŝnaƌLJ anĚ Ĩŝnaů Ɖůat anĚ aƉƉƌŽǀŝnŐ ǀaƌŝance
ĨŽƌ ϱϰϯϬ DŝnnetŽnŬa ŽƵůeǀaƌĚ ʹ taƌĚ 1 WaŐe Ϯϴ
2
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
Response: As the requested variance is completely underground, there will be no altering of the essential
character of the street.
d. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical
difficulties.
Response: Economic considerations are not related to this request, as it is more costly to provide
underground parking than relatively free parking on the neighboring streets.
e. Practical difficulties include inadequate access to direct sunlight for
solar energy systems.
Response: The project building was pushed further south as a result of limiting the shadowing effects of
the building on the neighboring buildings to the north.
5. There are circumstances unique to the shape, topography, water
conditions or other physical conditions of the property.
Response: As stated above in item 4b, the topography of the site is the main consideration that caused
the building to shift further south.
6. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
Response: The project is proposing an apartment building in keeping with the rights and limitations of the
zoning code in all other respects. The variance merely allows the inclusion of additional interior parking
for the future residents of the building.
7. The granting of the variance will not impair light and air to the
surrounding properties, unreasonably increase congestion, increase the
danger of fire, or endanger public safety.
Response: The project is in keeping in all other respects to the zoning and existing conditions around the
site and actually surpasses the setbacks of several other nearby buildings on Minnetonka Boulevard
including: 5224 Minnetonka (10 feet setback), 5551 Lake Street (16 feet setback), 5621 Minnetonka
Boulevard (15 feet setback) [See attached]. The variance will also give more breathing room to the duplex
and single-family building neighbors to the north, so does not constitute an impairment to the light and
air, or increase the risk of fire or endanger public safety. In fact, the project will be cleaning up
contaminated soils on the site during project construction.
8. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience but is
necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty.
Response: The request does alleviate a practical difficulty due to the topography of the site and the lack
of street parking available on the adjacent streets. The granting of the variance will just allow the project
to provide the off-street parking necessary to the project.
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 29
5621
Mtka Blvd
3000
Hwy 100
5551
Lake St
5600
Lake St
5430
Minnetonka
Blvd
5224
Mtka Blvd
10 FT
Setback80 FT
Setback
16 FT
Setback
20 FT
Setback
15 FT
Setback
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving
variance for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 30
Parkway On 5 Project Opposition
>From Rob Theisen <
Date Wed 1/21/2026 2:47 PM
To Katelyn Champoux <kchampoux@stlouisparkmn.gov>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognizethe sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City of St. Louis Park Officials,
I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed apartment complex planned for the
end of my street.
My primary concern is traffic safety. The location of this development would significantly obstruct
visibility at the end of the street, creating hazardous conditions for residents, pedestrians, and drivers.
Reduced sightlines in an already constrained area increase the risk of accidents and make it more
difficult to safely enter and exit the roadway.
In addition, the development will inevitably lead to increased traffic on a street that was not designedt
o accommodate higher volumes of vehicles. Additional daily traffic from residents, visitors, deliveryveh
icles, and service providers will negatively impact safety, congestion, and overall neighborhood
livability.
I am also concerned about the impact of construction itself. Extended construction activity will bringh
eavy equipment, noise, dust, and temporary street obstructions, further worsening traffic flow andcr
eating ongoing disruptions for nearby residents.
I respectfully ask the City to reconsider this project as currently proposed, or at minimum conduct atho
rough traffic and safety analysis that fully accounts for visibility issues, traffic volume increases, andcon
struction impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and for considering the concerns of residents who will be directly affected byt
his development. I appreciate the City’s commitment to responsible planning and public safety.
Sincerely,
Rob Theisen
1/21/26, 2:55 PM
Attachment 2
Parkway On 5 Project Opposition ‐ Katelyn Champoux ‐ Outlook
about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane2 1/1
ity coƵnciů meetinŐ oĨ FeďrƵary Ϯ͕ ϮϬϮϲ ;/tem Eo͘ ϳcͿ
Titůe͗ ZesoůƵtions rescinĚinŐ preǀioƵs approǀaůs͕ approǀinŐ preůiminary anĚ Ĩinaů půat anĚ approǀinŐ ǀariance
Ĩor 5ϰϯϬ Dinnetonka oƵůeǀarĚ ʹ tarĚ 1 PaŐe ϯ1
• ·· • :J., . ���, i,Jq�� �f ��P.ing .f).ppeQls AM co'1f$idere4 the et?ect; g£ .tl)� propo�d�1;e. qpg� t:Jl,�. 4,��' �•tr mill weU:w.e of the cp��ty, e�tmg •$Ad. ��p.a,ted � �on4it\o�, U�g�;Md. 4lir, d.�pger of tire, rn;� to tile. �ublie ¢aw? tbe etfect on v'111ts• of ,!'tP.Pe#! ·Pl.· ·.�� (iµn'P�dmg �ea. 1111d. �e effect of :hlte prQ poi;ed v��e 11pop. the Cpmpi�i��v� P.1111. • • • •
4. J3e�ll$e of co�ditiQll$ op. tl:ie sqbject p.roperty and up. tb.e .$�OWldingproperw, i� Uf po�ib.le to �e the 13JJl>ject Property 41 s11ch a way tba,t the proposed �ciwill· n,ot . ijl:J.p,� � ��eqW,l�e s11pply of light and ajf to adjacen,t prqpem-, un,re8$>�ly·p:ic;,e� tlie cc,�g�Q'1J. in the public streets, iucre� the dM,ger, of fire, �ger tb.ePllbJic .rew, �8MOpably di:mjnjsp. or impair health, Sllfeey, corm"ort, rne>M i>.f 41 -...y• iltber respect be contrm,-y tQ the intttnt of the Zoning Ordinance and tlie Cornprehell$ivePlan. •
5. Tb.e specw cqn,dition,13 applying to the s�cture or lpnd m qttestion ,u-epeculiar to eq�h property OJ" •emately adjoillfflg property and do not apply ge-,.e:.-ally tootheit !Md or stTt1.��es in the �tric;t in which such land is lQc:ated.
6i The Gl'�tmg of tbe applic;atiCJn is J1ecessm, for the 9re�erv�ti,g11, and eI,Ljomen.t of a sq.'b$tantjal • propeJ1Y right of the appli�t. It wUl ·11ot 111etely serve os � con.v�m,ep.ce to the applic;mt bµt � Jiecessairy to alleviate den1onst:rable hardliiluP or ..i:m ult • •• ��. ¥,
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 32
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 33
,RESOiiC.1TI0l'BiOi5�94 •• ; .... ::"'.•,::,<t.:,�::;:;,·li:· .'.oll�:�IAAiTI1'1'0 ��¢i:�.;·. ,' :. �g�E:,S ;,, ••..•• •• ·' )/ 'JJQW,:J�;fir�:i.(C)(�)\OJ\:u�,;��h·;; . �-�y� �
D,
.. : · .. •··t.. . $pg�,'$ .Je�ql��,. �., :Ii• .$Pplied. ',(qr 3 v,�9e, ,#9� ,S,c:tiQ� 14:6--·l.2· •• ···.'(.,Qt .. Ji� ... · .. )·· :o .• (ijle·· . .,,O .• �.�d.J .• n·,'.j"�".(;�.C .•. ·J.>id .... e ..••. ·.•r·e· •. ·.la.·.·tm .• • .•.. JJ·".t,o·:-.($.rµn.·.·.·.g.···.to .• P�.rnu.·./•.·.)q,·.··.·.lml .•• �.·.� .• :P ... ·�.::·s·,e·. t.pJck .• ,.A>fO··•·.'.fe .. et.•m.s.�� ,,r .,e·tf.qmJ.116<(e��·•.µi;·:the so'1�Awe1t .. �o�,r·t1f tbt �te,forJ m,;,tor niel st.atip.q.loFtted•j,g: �e �.:3:,:�11�n,l ¢9JXnDtrelal llistrit":�·�i;thtJo llowm�JoMti.O� • to!"wit:
,I .. · i9t Jlple�cept ·�b:� tJP�P. �OJtef �ereot, �d I.qt 16, eJ9�pt tlte �o� .so ffet ttiei;JP:li of Alldj.to� S3�bcij.�on N�er .3ijJ, HeJJ.P.epm • Go\JR.W, WNie$0ta'Alf tr 'ct> • • • • • • • . ·� ,.!,t�.,., 2." T}te Bo1U"� of Zoning Appeals h• reviewed the application for a wrianc�(Case No. 94-ll�VAR).
•. . :3, • . TJl,e Board, of io_ping.Appeals bas consi4ered ·t!,.e.etff!t;t Qf �e PJ'OposedvlJriq�e �P.Jl, 1:4� .b.ealf;Ji, �et)' and w�lt}u-e �f Jhe comiii�ty, e•� ,md anticip�ed�3ftic: qcuiditiou.s, light azic! �, danger of fire, r.is;.: to the p11blic ¢ety, die effect .on VQ!ues of property bi tll.e surt01JJ1dm,g area, and the effect of the propos�d v�c� upon theCc,mprehe�ve Plan. f.. :Secall$e of cQ:riditions on the subject: property and .. on tlle slU".♦o�dingpr.operty, it is po•i:ble to � the s11bject property in such a way that tbe propo�d �ce!'ill not �pair an.:,_�eq�te supply. of light e.J?-d. air to adjacent property. �eASO�ly �crease the congestion ui the !)ublic streets, mcrease the danger of fire, ;eziciagger thepublic safety, unreasonably diminish or �pair health, safety, comfort, morQ]s, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zomng Ordinance and the Com.prehell$ive Plan. 5.The special conditions applying to the structure or J.uid in question arepeculiar to such property or immediately adjoining pre>perty and do J?.ot apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which such land is located. ,. -'\ "" 6.The granting of the application is necesSfl?Y for the prei,ervatio11 and
enjoyinen.t of a substantial property,,right of the applicant. It will not merely serve '16 a convenience to the applicant b11t is necessary tc, alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. ..-,
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 34
City council meeting of February 2, 2026 (Item No. 7c)
Title: Resolutions rescinding previous approvals, approving preliminary and final plat and approving variance
for 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard – Ward 1 Page 35
Meeting: Special study session
Meeting date: February 2, 2026
Discussion item: 1
Executive summary
Title: Discuss federal actions
Recommended action: None at this time. This item is for council discussion purposes only.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: The purpose of this item is to provide the city council with time to discuss federal
activity and actions in the state and their impact on the community.
Financial or budget considerations: N/A
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: None.
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager