The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016/10/10 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA OCTOBER 10, 2016 5:30 p.m. TOUR OF POLICE DEPARTMENT – 3015 Raleigh Avenue 6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Items 1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 17 & 24, 2016 2. 6:35 p.m. Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan 3. 7:05 p.m. Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) Update with Executive Director Brian Ryks and Commissioner Lisa Peilen 4. 7:35 p.m. PLACE Development Update 5. 8:20 p.m. Outdoor Recreation Facility Naming and Marketing 6. 8:50 p.m. Website Development Update 9:50 p.m. Communications/Updates (Verbal) 9:55 p.m. Adjourn Written Reports 7. Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West 8. Partial Plan Review Fee at Application and Electronic Plan Review Program 9. 2017 Fee Schedule 10. Made in MN Solar Project for Fire Station #2 11. Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary 12. Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 17 and October 24, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the Special Study Session on October 17 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on October 24, 2016. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed? SUMMARY: At each study session approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the proposed discussion items for the Special Study Session on October 17 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on October 24, 2016. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – October 17 & 24, 2016 Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 17 and October 24, 2016 OCTOBER 17, 2016 6:15 p.m. – Special Study Session – Council Chambers Tentative Discussion Items 1. CIP, LRFMP, Fees & Utility Rates – Administrative Services (60 minutes) Overview of CIP (2017-2026) and comments by Directors for key upcoming capital projects. Also, we will do an overview of the Long Range Financial Management plan (2017-2026) and review an interactive forecasting debt model that ties into the CIP. OCTOBER 24, 2016 6:30 p.m. – Study Session – Council Chambers Tentative Discussion Items 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. Active Senior Housing Project – Community Development (30 minutes) Discuss and receive feedback on a proposed planned unit development for an active senior living development located at 5605 W 36th Street (American Legion). The applicant is proposing a 5 story, 70-unit mixed-use building that would include a portion of affordable senior housing units. 3. Walker/Lake Street Initiative – Community Development (20 minutes) A recap of the event and committee activities of Walk and Talk at Walker/Lake, which was held on October 8, will be provided. 4. TIF Management Plan – Administrative Services (60 minutes) Annual review of development/redevelopment projects taking place in the City and overview of the TIF Districts. Stacie Kvilvang from Ehlers will be joining us for the review/overview. 5. Excelsior & Monterey (Bridgewater) Development – Community Development (60 minutes) Dominium will provide an update regarding its development plans in response to comments received from City Council and more information will be provided regarding the tax increment financing application the city received for the development. Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes) Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session agenda for the purposes of information sharing. End of Meeting: 9:30 p.m. Written Reports 6. Financial Management Policies Update 7. EDA Contract Update 8. September 2016 Monthly Financial Report 9. Third Quarter 2016 Investment Report 10. Update on Council-identified Housing Topics for Future Agendas Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan RECOMMENDED ACTION: City staff and the consultant desire to check in with the Council on the Vision project scope and community engagement process. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the proposed Vision process, including the overall approach to the project, creation of a Steering Committee, and the proposed community engagement process in keeping with the Council’s expectations? SUMMARY: At the August 15th City Council meeting, the City Council directed staff to work with Next Generation Consulting group to create a work scope and contract. Rebecca Ryan of Next Generation Consulting will be at the meeting to discuss the process and the methods for community engagement. A summary of the proposed work plan is attached. Extensive outreach efforts are central to the Vision process. A staff committee, co-led by Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner, and Jacqueline Larson, City Communication and Marketing Manager, has been established to provide input and review the outreach process, as well as to recommend steering committee members to be appointed by the City Council in November. Steering committee candidates will be selected to represent a broad cross-section of the community, both geographically and demographically. The nine-member steering committee will work with Next Generation Consulting and act as liaisons between the community and the council throughout the vision process. Community Engagement: Four core strategies are described in the Engagement section of the attached Vision Process Summary including Town Hall style meetings, training facilitators for neighbor-to-neighbor conversations, special efforts to engage the under-represented, and highly visible, creative community activities and events. NEXT STEPS: The work scope will be finalized with a contract for the City Manager’s and Mayor’s signatures to be considered at the October 17 City Council meeting. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Vision update contract amount is $120,000 and the source of funding is the Development Fund. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Vision Process Summary Proposed Scope of Work Proposed Schedule Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Principal Planner Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Jacqueline Larson, Communication and Marketing Manager Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan Vision Process Summary PROJECT GOALS: 1. Engage the broadest possible cross-section of St. Louis Park residents — especially those who are traditionally underrepresented — in a dialogue about the future of their community; 2. Develop a dynamic and ambitious vision — supported by core focus areas — that will build on St. Louis Park's character and strengths and make it an even more robust place to live, work, and play now and in the future; 3. Align the results of Vision St. Louis Park with the City's next Comprehensive Plan. GENERAL VISION PROCESS: A. Community Engagement B. Forecast C. Synthesize D. Refine and Recommend E. From Vision to Action F. Community Celebration and Sharing STEERING COMMITTEE:  9 Members from the community  Represent a cross-section of community, geographically and demographically, etc.  Recommended by the Staff Communications and Outreach Committee and approved by the City Council What is the role of the Steering Committee?  Serve as the City Council’s appointees and act as liaisons between the community and the Council for the Visioning process  Help the City reach and engage all members of the community. We want all community members to have the opportunity to participate. This is a priority of the Vision project. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan  Be visionary, entrepreneurial, and/or innovative in how they approach the future. We want people who can think outside the box, experiment, and be positive about SLP’s future.  Work collaboratively with the consultant and City staff.  Occasionally meet with the City Council to share key insights or project milestones.  Be advocates for the visioning process in their neighborhoods, communities, workplaces, etc. What’s the time commitment?  The Steering Committee will meet approximately once each month from November 2016 to May 2017.  Each meeting will be 90 minutes to two hours  Meeting times will be set based on availability after the committee has been appointed by the City Council. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: 1. Community Meetings – Town Hall style a. 1 at beginning b. 1 towards middle c. 1 towards end of process 2. Train the Trainer (Facilitator) to conduct small group conversations a. Provide a kit or “meeting in a box” with specific questions b. 40-50 Trainers to get out into n’hoods i. N’hood Leaders ii. Other community members 3. Engage the under-represented 4. Highly visible/creative input Provide at community events and gathering places a. 1-wish or 1-question chalk boards b. Live twitter feed c. Others Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan FORECAST 1. TREND SORTING GAME: - City Council and Department Directors - Steering Committee  Identify trends in four area – Resources, Technology, Demographics and Governance  Design a Trends Game to identify high impact, high certainty trends for the future of St. Louis Park  Design “an official future” for St. Louis Park based on the current trajectory and historical response to change SYNTHESIZE  Create draft Summary of community feedback  Create a draft of 4 stories of the community’s future  Work with Steering Committee to align, clarify and prioritize recommendations  Present additional questions for the City Council and Staff based on findings REFINE AND RECOMMEND:  Present recommendations to Department Directors, Steering Committee and City Council FROM VISION TO ACTION:  Use “Strategic Doing” to conduct a daylong workshop with city staff and partners to process outcomes into plans  Prepare a “Summary Booklet” COMMUNITY CELEBRATION AND SHARING  Find a highly creative way to thank everyone who worked hard for Vision St. Louis Park  Rebecca will publicly present and share the outcomes of the project  Promote project on social media platforms Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan NEXT STEPS AND SCHEDULE: The following summarizes the next steps and schedule for the Vision process: Fall to January  City Council approve contract with Next Generation Consulting - October 17th  Communications and Outreach Staff committee begin identifying and recruiting Steering Committee members  City Council approves Steering Committee members  1st Steering Committee meeting – late November  Develop a detailed schedule of events  Recruit facilitators to attend Train the Facilitator workshop in January  Develop branding and communications plan for the effort  Begin informing the community about the influence the previous Vision processes have had on the community and the progress toward the goals and priorities previously identified.  Begin promoting Vision engagement process January  Town Hall meeting #1  Begin weekly social media and online engagement  Begin Vision engagement  Hold “Train the Facilitator” training  Steering Committee meeting  Trends Game with City Council and Directors January – March  Weekly social media and online engagement  High visibility engagement, e.g. chalkboards, other rotating throughout the community  All points of contact and confirm schedule to reach special populations who might not otherwise be engaged, e.g. students, renters, etc.  Late January (26, 27, or 28) - Train-the-Facilitator  Jan. 26, 27 or 28: Second Steering Committee meeting – Play Trends Game Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 6 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan  Jan. 26 or 27: Trends Game with Directors and City Council  Feb. TBD: Town Hall meeting #2  Feb. TBD: Meetings #1-4 with special populations  Feb. TBD: Third Steering Committee Meeting  March TBD: Town Hall meeting #3  March TBD: Meetings #5-10 with special populations  March TBD: Results of all neighborhood meetings due, debrief meeting with facilitators April – June  April - All four “future” stories of St. Louis Park are completed  May - First draft of data visualizations and stories submitted to steering committee, City staff, City Council, and other stakeholders for review  May - Meet with City staff, City Council and steering committee to discuss draft and solicit feedback and responses  June - Second draft of data visualization and future stories completed and sent to City staff, City Council and steering committee  June 12/13/14: Meet with City Council for final presentation and (any necessary) approval  June 12/13/14: Strategic Doing Workshop for City staff and partners: present Vision results and develop plans of action  By June 30: Shai Roos and Brian Guenzel meet with City Staff and Comprehensive Plan consultants to share their recommendations for actualizing the Vision  June TBD: Community Celebration Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 7 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan NEXT GENERATION VISION FOR ST. LOUIS PARK –PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK NEXT Generation Consulting, Inc. (“NGC” or “we”) will complete the following in support of the Vision St. Louis Park process. The project goals are: 1. Engage the broadest possible cross-section of St. Louis Park residents — especially those who are traditionally underrepresented — in a dialogue about the future of their community; 2. Develop a dynamic and ambitious vision — supported by core focus areas — that will build on St. Louis Park's character and strengths and make it an even more robust place to live, work, and play now and in the future; 3. Align the results of Vision St. Louis Park with the City's next comprehensive plan To meet these goals we will complete the following seven-stage work plan: Stage 0: Prepare for Success ~ “Measure twice, cut once.” Before Vision St. Louis Park publicly launches, we will plan for success. In this stage, we will: 1. Assign a project manager, Stephanie Ricketts (sr@nextgenerationconsulting.com), who’ll serve as NGC’s official representative on day-to-day matters related to Vision St. Louis Park. Stephanie will be supported by Lisa Loniello (ll@nextgenerationconsulting.com) and Rebecca Ryan (rr@nextgenerationconsulting.com); 2. Advise the City and Council on how to choose a group of community representatives to serve on the Vision St. Louis Park steering committee. Ideally, this committee would be generationally diverse, ethnically diverse, and diverse according to sector, i.e. entrepreneurs, nonprofit, business, civic, etc. They should have an entrepreneurial mindset and have reach or connections into segments of the community that aren’t normally engaged in community outreach or public processes; 3. Create a detailed work plan with the City Staff, led by Meg McMonigal for the City of St. Louis Park and Stephanie Ricketts of NGC. The work plan will include: o Dates for critical events/meetings, e.g. kick off meeting with Steering Committee; dates for all four community engagement strategies (See Stage 1); reports to City Directors, City Council and other key constituencies; Dates for Town Hall Meetings; etc. o Identifying key deliverables and their timing, e.g. signed contract; logo presentation; review periods; final plan, etc. o Identifying key constituencies and how we will communicate with them to elicit feedback and keep them apprised of progress, e.g. City of St. Louis Park Directors; Community residents; Steering Committee; City’s internal communications committee; City’s internal technical committee; City Council; City Boards and Commissions 4. Work with the City’s communication team, led by Jacqueline Larsen, to design the project’s logo/brand and communication plan. NGC’s designer, Dave Taylor, will create Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 8 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan a customized logo for Vision St. Louis Park. The communication plan will includes deadlines for the Park Perspective; an engagement plan for Facebook, Twitter, Park Alert and other online outlets, and media plans for the Sun-Sailor, Star Tribune, and Pioneer Press as appropriate. 5. Meet with the Vision St. Louis Park Steering Committee after the have been appointed by the City Council to discuss the project’s key milestones and how they can assist with two project goals: engaging a broad base of community input, and identifying the key trends the city will face in the next decade. Stage 1: Community Engagement We will use the following four strategies to reach as broad a cross-section of St. Louis Park residents as possible: Strategy 1: They come to us This strategy is effective to engage those who are already connected to the City of St. Louis Park. Our activities will include: 1. Surveying fans of the City’s Facebook page, followers on Twitter and those who’ve subscribed to the City’s email and text notification service with short surveys or provocative questions about the future of St. Louis Park. 2. Using the City’s website and Facebook page to publish updates and details about Vision St. Louis Park. 3. Hosting three public Town Hall Meetings to discuss ideas citizens have for the future of St. Louis Park. Strategy 2: Neighbor-to-neighbor This strategy is designed to leverage the City’s connections with neighborhoods and block captains and invite community leaders to host conversations about the future of St. Louis Park. Our activities will include: 1. Train the Facilitator – in this public meeting, we will teach neighborhood leaders and block captains how to host and facilitate a neighborhood meeting about the future of St. Louis Park. Our emphasis will be on hosting productive, future- focused conversations in a consistent way, and reporting all insights back to the consultants and project teams. 2. Design and provide “meeting in a box” materials to all facilitator trainees. These kits will include all materials needed to host and facilitate a neighborhood meeting, e.g. scripts for facilitators, meeting guidelines, agendas for participants, a sign for the window, home or office where the meeting is taking place, markers and flipchart paper, self-addressed return instructions, and more. Strategy 3: Engage the under-represented To ensure the broadest possible cross section of representation in Vision St. Louis Park, the Steering Committee, City staff and consultants will work hard to determine: Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 9 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan 1. Which communities are we at risk of missing in a public processes like Vision St. Louis Park? Examples from past clients include:  Children, e.g. middle and/or high school students  Members of specific faith communities, e.g. Jewish, Muslim, etc.  Members of the specific ethnic communities, e.g. Russian, Latino, Somali, etc.  Residents who live in affordable housing and aren’t “single family resident” homeowners  Young professionals who live or work in St. Louis Park but are unlikely to attend meetings  Parents of school-aged children who are too busy to attend meetings, e.g. hockey moms  Senior citizens who no longer drive or do limited driving 2. How can we reach these residents on their terms, e.g. through their churches, grocery stores, community centers, festivals, etc? Strategy 4: Highly visible/creative input This is a passive strategy (no facilitator/no script) to elicit community members’ ideas about the future of St. Louis Park. The City staff and steering committee will make a final determination of where and what to use, but we would like to see some public, highly visual displays of people sharing their ideas for the future. Options are limited to our imagination, but some ideas include: o Install mobile chalkboards and chalk at public, citywide events. The chalkboards will have a single question or statement stenciled on them, e.g. “My future St. Louis Park is…” Citizens will naturally take chalk and record their answers. When the boards are filled, someone on the City staff will snap a photo and email it to the consultants, and wipe the chalkboard clean to collect more feedback. The chalkboards can rotate around the City or around neighborhoods. o In the evenings, project a live twitter feed onto an outdoor wall of highly visible building. The feed can be citizen responses to a question with a single hashtag, e.g. #VisionSLP; o Before demolition of city property, one wall could be made into a chalkboard or graffiti wall and residents could be encouraged to share their creative ideas for the city in that temporary space. Stage 2: Forecast In this stage, Rebecca Ryan and a team of futurists from NGC will facilitate and/or execute the following foresight activities: 1. Identify trends in four areas (Resources, Technology, Demographics, and Governance) likely to impact the future of St. Louis Park. 2. Design a deck of trend cards and facilitate a “Trends Game” with the City Council, department directors, and steering committee. The purpose of the Trends Game is to identify high impact, high certainty trends for the future of St. Louis Park. 3. Design “an official future” (sometimes called a “baseline future”) for the City of St. Louis Park, based on the City’s current trajectory and historical response to change. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 10 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan 4. Design three additional futures for St. Louis Park based on community input from the previous stage and the most important trends identified in the Trends Game above. Stage 3: Synthesize In this phase, we’re bringing all the previous stages together and elicit feedback on our first draft of findings. We will: 1. Create a draft 8-page PDF summary of charts, tables, infographics, visualizations and pull-quotes that will summarize the community’s feedback, and bring it to life; 2. Create a draft of four stories about St. Louis Park’s possible futures, based on the trends identified during the forecasting stage, plus community input. Possible questions for the Steering Committee: o How do these insights align with what you heard during the community engagement process? o Where is further clarification needed? o What’s missing? o Which ideas or recommendations have the most potential to transform St. Louis Park? o Which ideas or recommendations do you want to prioritize for presentation to the City Council and Staff? Possible additional questions for the City Council and Staff: o Which ideas have unanimous support from Council and Staff? o Which ideas or recommendations require Council support? Staff support? Community support? o What is the natural timeline for implementing ideas and recommendations, e.g. next 12 months, next 36 months, etc.? o In light of these results, how should St. Louis Park’s current Vision and Priorities be updated, if at all? Stage 4: Refine and Recommend Using the “two meetings” and “no surprises” rules, we will incorporate the feedback from the previous stage, refine our recommendations, and make another presentation to stakeholders, i.e. Steering Committee, City Council, and department directors. Stage 5: From Vision to Action In this stage, we will move the vision and recommendations into deliverables that will help with the comprehensive plan, department plans, and vision for the broader community: 1. Janice Fadden and NGC staff will facilitate a daylong workshop with the City of St. Louis Park staff and partners to process the outcomes from Stage 4 into departmental plans using the Strategic Doing process. (https://www.pcrd.purdue.edu/signature- programs/strategic-doing.php) 2. Shai Roos and Brian Guenzel of the NGC team will make recommendations for the City’s next comprehensive plan, culminating in a presentation and meeting with City staff and comprehensive plan consultants. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 11 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan 3. We will design materials (a summary PDF, a small booklet, and a PowerPoint presentation) to share the key insights, stories, and next actions with the public at large. Stage 6: Community Celebration and Sharing This is a critical step to thank everyone who worked hard for Vision St. Louis Park, and to publicly share the outcomes of the project. We will: o Work with the steering committee and City staff to find a highly creative way to thank the community volunteers who hosted neighborhood meetings or went out of their way to ensure we reached a broad cross-section of people o Offer Rebecca Ryan to give a public presentation on the results and recommendations o Promote the project on our Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and social media platforms Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 12 Title: Update on Community Visioning Process with Consultant Rebecca Ryan NEXT GENERATION - PROPOSED SCHEDULE We estimate that the project will begin in mid-September 2016 and run through mid-April 2017. The following table lists a tentative schedule for each stage and key meetings in the work scope. This schedule will be changed and updated throughout the project. Stage Key dates/deliverables – Prepare for Success  Sept. (ongoing) – Meetings between NGC and City staff to plan for all aspects of the project  Sept. 30: City’s communication team identifies potential slate of steering committee candidates  Oct. 10: Rebecca Ryan meets with City department heads to share project overview and elicit their hopes for the project and other feedback  Oct. 11: Rebecca Ryan presents at City Council Study Session  Oct. 17: City Council votes on Vision St. Louis Park contract  Nov. 7: Council appoints Vision St. Louis Park steering committee members  Nov. 30: Steering Committee Kickoff meeting  Dec. 5: Public announcements and communications re: Vision St. Louis Park project, dates for Town Halls, Train-the-Facilitators, and how to be involved.  Dec. 5 (ongoing): Recruit Facilitators to attend Train the Facilitator, and facilitate neighborhood meetings 1 – Community Engagement  Jan., 2017 TBD: Town Hall meeting #1  Jan.-March, 2017: Weekly social media and online engagement  Jan.-March: High visibility engagement, e.g. chalkboards, other rotating throughout the community  Jan. 20: Identify all points of contact and confirm schedule to reach special populations who might not otherwise be engaged, e.g. students, renters, etc.  Jan. 26, 27, or 28: Train-the-Facilitator  Jan. 26, 27 or 28: Second Steering Committee meeting – Play Trends Game  Jan. 26 or 27: Trends Game with City Council  Feb. TBD: Town Hall meeting #2  Feb. TBD: Meetings #1-4 with special populations  Feb. TBD: Third Steering Committee Meeting  Feb. TBD: Trends Game with City staff and directors  March TBD: Town Hall meeting #3  March TBD: Meetings #5-10 with special populations  March TBD: Results of all neighborhood meetings due, debrief meeting with facilitators 2 – Forecast  By Jan. 26: Trends identified and Trends Deck designed  Feb. 10: “The Official Future” completed  April 14: All four “future” stories of St. Louis Park are completed 3 – Synthesize  May 5: First draft of data visualizations and stories submitted to steering committee, City staff, City Council, and other stakeholders for review  May 8/9/10: Meet with City staff, City Council and steering committee to discuss draft and solicit feedback and responses 4 – Refine and Recommend  June 2: Second draft of data visualization and future stories completed and sent to City staff, City Council and steering committee  June 12/13/14: Meet with City Council for final presentation and (any necessary) approval 5 – Ideas to Action  June 12/13/14: Strategic Doing Workshop for City staff and partners: present Vision results and develop plans of action  By June 30: Shai Roos and Brian Guenzel meet with City Staff and comprehensive plan consultants to share their recommendations for actualizing the Vision 6 – Report Back to Community  June TBD: Community Celebration Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) Update with Executive Director Brian Ryks and Commissioner Lisa Peilen RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion only. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: This discussion provides an opportunity to meet Brian Ryks, Executive Director/CEO of the Metropolitan Airports Commission who was appointed in May 2016. Mr. Ryks and MAC Commissioner Lisa Peilen will provide a brief verbal update on recent activities and the direction of MAC, including ongoing support of surrounding communities, working with the FAA, and the Noise Oversight Commission. There will be time for Council questions and discussion of items. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: PLACE Development Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff wishes to update and receive feedback on PLACE’s development plans, requests to purchase property, city private activity bonds and Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support PLACE’s proposed mixed-use redevelopment north and south of the Wooddale SWLRT Station? Is the Council willing to consider selling property to the Developer, issuing private activity bonds, and providing tax increment financing for the development? SUMMARY: PLACE (“Developer”) proposes to develop property north and south of the Wooddale SWLRT Station with a mixed-use mixed-income, transit-oriented, and sustainable development. Proposed is a total of 300 residential units (200 affordable and 100 market rate), a 110-room hotel, a 15,000 SF e-generation/co-generation/greenhouse facility, approximately 25,000 SF of ground floor commercial/retail space, and a one acre “urban forest.” In June 2016, the Council discussed this development occurring on both sides of the rail/trail corridor because of traffic limitations on the north side. The plans have been reworked and the concept plan is attached. At the meeting PLACE Developer Chris Velasco will present the site plan and describe the development components. PLACE envisions beginning construction of the project next spring and completing it during 2018. Approvals Required: Several city approvals are required and will be considered over the next several months, including: the sale of city property, a Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment to MX for the north side, a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development, Preliminary and Final Plats for each side of the development, issuance of private activity bonds, and Tax Increment Financing (TIF). Staff has been working closely with PLACE on a number of site development issues, including access and circulation, building placement, right-of-way needed, parking, stormwater, utilities, etc. Those items will be specifically addressed when the applications come forward for approvals. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The development will require the City and Economic Development Authority to complete the sale of land to the developer. In order to offset a portion of the extraordinary redevelopment costs to make the project financially feasible, PLACE has requested the city issue private activity bonds for the project and has applied for TIF assistance. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Site Plans Development Summary Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Title: PLACE Development Update DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The proposed PLACE redevelopment site is located at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave and the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. The two sites surround both sides of the rail/trail corridor and the future Wooddale SWLRT Station. This area is close to Central Community Center, Park Spanish Immersion School and St. Louis Park High School. Nearby parks include Lilac Park to the east, Center Park to the south, and Jorvig Park to the west. The development plans encompass approximately 5.3 acres in total - 3.5 AC on the north side and 1.8 AC on the south side. The Developer will have to acquire four properties at the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave, and five properties at the northeast corner of W 36th Street and Wooddale Ave. from the City and EDA for the development. Also, two structurally substandard buildings will be razed and replaced. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: The proposed PLACE development consists of the following components (please see attached site plan): North Side:  Residential/Commercial building 5-6 stories; E-Generation building - 1 story plus greenhouse o 198 total dwellings • 142 apartments affordable to rent for families with incomes up to 60%AMI • 56 market rate apartments  Bike Shop • Reta il sho p an d rep a ir, op en t o t he p ub lic: 1,500-2,000 sf  Maker Space • Shared workshop space for creatives: 3,000-3,300 sf • Anticipated monthly membership of 40 Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Title: PLACE Development Update  E-Generation with a Growing PLACE for urban agriculture • Anaerobic digester and energy balancing equipment: 7,500 sf • Growing PLACE greenhouse: 10,000 sf  Urban Forest  Parking: 182 spaces including 5 car-share vehicles; underground, surface and on-street South Side  Residential/Commercial 5-6 stories; Hotel 8-12 stories o 102 dwellings • 58 Live/work spaces affordable to rent for families with incomes up to 60%AMI • 44 Market rate live/work spaces • Of the 44 market rate live/work spaces, 8 are “Type II” having 250 square foot ground-level storefronts (total of 2,000 square feet of commercial- permitted micro retail)  Hotel: 110 Room Select Service 62,000 sf  Cafe: 5,500-6,000 sf  Coffee House: 1,800-2,000 sf  Co-working Space (South portion of Work Hub): 3,000-3,300 sf • Shared office space for creatives and startups • Anticipated monthly membership of 60 plus walk-ins from hotel and LRT • Includes mobility concierge available to the public  Parking: 261 underground parking spaces including 5 car-share vehicles Housing Unit Mix The overall dwelling unit mix includes (subject to market study confirmation):  62 studios  96 one-bedrooms  70 two-bedrooms  60 three-bedrooms  12 four-bedrooms 300 total units Both apartment buildings are mixed income with a total of 100 market rate units and 200 units affordable to households at 60% AMI ($51,500 per year in 2016 for a family of four). Of these 300 units, 102 are designated as live/work spaces for creatives (58 affordable and 44 market rate). Affordable Housing Affordable housing units will be for families with incomes up to 60% Area Median Income (AMI). (Median household income is the level at which half the households have lower incomes and half the households have higher incomes; it is not an average.) In 2015 the AMI for the metro area for a family of four was $86,600. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 4 Title: PLACE Development Update 2016 Income limits by household size are: Household size 1 2 3 4 5 6 60% AMI $36,050 $41,200 $46,400 $51,500 $55,600 $59,750 SITE PLAN COMPONENTS Circulation and Traffic – The traffic review was completed last spring and presented to the City Council in June. It showed that the PLACE development program can work, with certain stipulations; these items have been incorporated into the site plan. On the north side, access from Wooddale Avenue to the frontage road will include the ability to turn right-in, right out and left-in; no left-out turns will be allowed. On the south side, driveway access over the property to the east to Yosemite Avenue is needed. For the driveway access to 36th Street, turning right-in/right-out will be the only access allowed; left turns from this intersection will not be allowed. Left turns will be accommodated at Xenwood Avenue, and a left- turn lane from 36th Street to Xenwood going north will be needed. PLACE is working on how best to connect to Yosemite including reaching out to the adjacent property owners to coordinate development plans and establish improved vehicle access. A design for the driveway is not finalized. Bus routes - The site is currently served by Metro Transit Bus Route 17 to downtown along 36th St and Route 615 to Ridgedale. These are not frequent routes at this time; Staff will be discussing future bus routes with Metro Transit. Parking – PLACE is working on a “Mobility Plan” that includes car-free living, car sharing, bike sharing, transit passes, and a shuttle that will operate for their community members. A reduction in required parking will be proposed with the project applications. Staff is working with PLACE on the appropriate amount of reductions and a traffic consultant will be consulted to provide advice on parking reductions next to a LRT line. Site Plan Items – Staff is working with PLACE on a number of site plan items, including the appropriate right-of-way widths, sidewalk placement and widths, setbacks for buildings, landscaping, building materials, etc. The entire project is being designed to achieve LEED certification and will exceed the City’s Green Building policy. Also included in the redevelopment will be a public art piece near the Wooddale and 36th Street corner. Land Use, Zoning, and Platting - The Comprehensive Plan designates the south side of the site for Mixed-Use and the north side as a combination of Office and Business Park. The zoning on the south side is C-2 Commercial and General Industrial on the north side. The proposed PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses and dimensional standards that are unique to this site and the proposed site, uses and building plans. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 5 Title: PLACE Development Update Planning Applications/Approvals for proposed development: North side South side Comprehensive Plan amendment land use map From Office and Business Park to Mixed Use Not needed – site is designated for Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (PUD) Yes Yes Preliminary and Final Plats Yes Yes The Mixed Use land use designation and the City’s Livable Communities design principles are intended to create compact, pedestrian-scale, mixed-use buildings, typically with retail, service or other commercial uses on the ground floor and residential or office uses on upper floors. Mixed- use is intended to accommodate mixed-income housing, a mix of housing types on the same block, and higher density development. The Comprehensive Plan calls for an increase in the availability of neighborhood housing choices and a broader range of housing types. The proposed redevelopment provides higher density apartment housing and affordable units in buildings that complement the adjacent Cityscape, Tower Light, Village in the Park, and Hoigaard Village developments. PLACE’s development plan is suitable for the site and also addresses many of the Elmwood Neighborhood Improvement Opportunities listed in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and meets many of the objectives for the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit & Transportation Study. Also, the project will exceed the requirements specified within the City’s Green Building Policy and Inclusionary Housing Policy. GRANTS PLACE has received a Livable Communities Act (LCA) Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Predevelopment grant in the amount of $100,000 for design activities, market analysis and a pro- forma to analyze the development mix. This work has been completed. PLACE also received a $2 million Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant for site acquisition, storm water and renewable energy. Hennepin County TOD– Hennepin County has awarded a $750,000 grant to the City for the PLACE development. The grant is for acquisition, demolition, area infrastructure improvements and other site improvements. This grant will run through the city, and the city will forward the funds to PLACE as the eligible items are completed. COMMUNITY MEETINGS PLACE has held six community meetings and the City held one meeting to present the results of the traffic study for PLACE. The meetings have been well attended and have reached a broad audience. Addition meetings will be held prior to a public hearing on the development plans. REDEVELOPER’S REQUEST FOR PUBLIC FINANCING ASSISTANCE The City anticipates receiving an application from PLACE for conduit financing in the form of private activity revenue bonds. In the past the City has issued private activity revenue bonds for numerous projects, most recently in 2016 for Mount Olivet. The City has also issued Housing Revenue Bonds for the Shoreham development. The City has no liability regarding the repayment of these bonds, and the administrative fee that it charges goes to the housing rehabilitation fund. Provided that the applicant meets all the criteria in the application process, the question is if the Council is generally supportive of issuing these bonds. If so, PLACE would like the City to prepare a letter of support to PLACE in order to obtain additional financing. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 6 Title: PLACE Development Update The cost to construct the proposed PLACE project exceeds $152 million. However due to nearly $14 million of extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site (primarily structured parking) PLACE maintains the project is not financially feasible. In order to offset a portion of these costs so as to allow the project to proceed, PLACE has applied for $8 million in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the project. The amount of assistance along with PLACE’s preliminary sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, investor rate of return (ROR) related to the proposed redevelopment are currently being reviewed by staff and Ehlers, the city’s financial consultant. Such assistance would represent approximately 5.26% of total project costs which is at the lower end of the range of TIF as a percentage of total project cost for other redevelopments the EDA has previously facilitated. According to a projection from Ehlers, it would require approximately 21 years for the proposed project to generate the requested amount of assistance. This would be at the upper end of years of assistance the EDA has previously provided. The proposed project is expected to score highly according to the criteria for the provision of tax increment as outline in the City’s TIF policy PROPERTY: Pre-Development Agreement On May18, 2015 the EDA and City entered into a Pre-Development Agreement with PLACE. The agreement includes an outline for applying for land use and zoning changes as well as tax increment financing, and provides PLACE with exclusive rights to negotiate acquisition of the subject properties with the EDA and the City. The agreement was recently extended until February 28, 2017, and now includes the City/County properties on the south side of the Wooddale LRT station. Topographically both sides of the development property are relatively flat. The proposed redevelopment site requires the assemblage of nine parcels. The north side of the proposed redevelopment includes the following four properties.  5925 Highway 7 is a vacant, 1.16 AC remnant site. The EDA purchased the property in 2004 as part of the land assemblage for the future Highway 7 & Wooddale interchange. The EDA retained ownership of the property with the expectation that an acceptable redevelopment encompassing the parcels to the east would eventually emerge.  5815 Highway 7 is a vacant .18 AC remnant site. It was acquired by the City for purposes of constructing the Highway 7 Service Drive.  5725 Highway 7 is the former McGarvey Coffee manufacturing property. The EDA acquired the 1.76 AC property in 2015 for redevelopment purposes. The property is occupied by a vacant 29,218 SF industrial building. The building is in rough condition and was determined structurally substandard according to an analysis by LHB. Originally constructed in 1947, the structure is dated from an aesthetic perspective. Additionally, it is functionally obsolete in terms of design  3520 Yosemite is a vacant, .4 AC remnant, rail siding acquired by the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCCRA) from the railroad. The EDA is working with the County to acquire the property as part of the land assemblage for the proposed project or future redevelopment. The south side of the proposed redevelopment includes the following five properties:  3565 Wooddale is a .065 AC parcel owned by HCCRA. It is occupied by a 16,739 SF commercial building that was leased to Nash Frame. The structure was also originally Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 7 Title: PLACE Development Update constructed in 1947 and is dated from an aesthetic perspective as well as functionally obsolete in terms of design. The building was also determined structurally substandard according to an analysis by LHB. The EDA is working with the County to acquire the property as part of the land assemblage for the proposed project or future redevelopment.  3548 Xenwood Ave is a vacant .8 AC remnant, former rail siding acquired by HCCRA from the railroad. The EDA is working with the County to acquire the property as part of the land assemblage for the proposed project or future redevelopment.  3575 Wooddale is an approximately .37 AC parcel owned by the City. It is part of a municipal parking lot constructed in 1976 for commercial parking purposes.  5816 36th Street is approximately an approximately .36 AC parcel owned by the City. It is part of a municipal parking lot constructed in 1976 for commercial parking purposes.  5814 36th Street is approximately an approximately .25 AC parcel owned by the City. It is part of a municipal parking lot constructed in 1976 for commercial parking purposes. Overall, the current site exhibits low density and is underutilized from a market value perspective given its proximity to the Highway 7 & Wooddale interchange and the multi-story buildings to the south and east. The site has been of keen interest to redevelopers which has become more intense now that plans for SWLRT have become clear. It is proposed that the three properties owned by HCRRA would be acquired by the EDA and then subsequently sold to PLACE. Staff is currently in discussion with Hennepin County staff over potential business terms of that acquisition. Such terms will likely be brought to the EDA for discussion before the end of the year. A formal purchase agreement would likely be presented to the EDA for consideration in the first quarter of 2017. Regardless of whether the proposed PLACE project proceeds, the EDA would likely have a strong interest in acquiring these properties so as to assemble a larger site to better facilitate future redevelopment. The south side of the site is currently served by Metro Transit Bus Route 17 to downtown along 36th St and Route 615 to Ridgedale. These are not frequent routes at this time. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 8 Title: PLACE Development Update PLACE proposes to acquire the subject properties from the City and EDA via a Purchase & Redevelopment Contract, raze the former McGarvey Coffee manufacturing facility and Nash Frame building, and replace them with a transit-oriented, mixed-use, mixed income, sustainable development. Current plans (attached) depict four buildings on either side of the Wooddale SWLRT station. NEXT STEPS: Site Plan Staff is continuing to work with PLACE on the site plan, access requirements, and other planning and development items over the next several months. When applications are complete (expected before the end of the year), Planning Staff will schedule a neighborhood meeting on the proposal. Private Activity Bonds If the Council is generally supportive of issuing these bonds, PLACE would proceed with an application. Provided that the applicant meets all the criteria in the application process, a formal public hearing and approval of a resolution by the City Council will be required to issue the bonds. Tax Increment Financing As with all such TIF applications, it is at the EDA’s discretion as to whether it wishes to provide the project financial assistance at the proposed level. If the EDA supports the idea of providing tax increment to the PLACE project, staff would continue its review of the application and begin negotiating business terms for the provision of the assistance. Such terms would be brought back to the EDA for its review at a subsequent study session. PLACE ST. LOUIS PARK, MN September 19, 2016 Project # 193803195 0FT 120FT60FT RESIDE N TI AL URBAN F O R E S T E-GEN GREEN H O U S E COGEN MN HW Y 7 WO O D D A L E A V E S MIXED-USE HOTEL LRT DROP OFF W 36TH ST W 35TH ST YOSEMITE AVE SXENWOOD AVE SWOOD D AL E A V E N UE S T A TI O N MN 7 S E R VI C E R D Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development Update Page 9 10/04/16 Scheme 06 RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 5-7 STORIES OVER PODIUMHOTEL 8-12 STORIES OVER PODIUM Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development Update Page 10 412 SFTrash Rm448 SFFlex ProgramSpace1344 SFCoffee House255 SFL/W II251 SFL/W II3679 SFCafe379 SFWC257 SFL/W II250 SFL/W II284 SFL/W II257 SFL/W II257 SFL/W II258 SFL/W II379 SFWC343 SFMail Rm449 SFSecured Lobby690 SFLobby810 SFGallery/ DisplaySpace415 SFKitchen/BoH1333 SFWork Hub97 SFFlex Office241 SFConf 3101 SFConf 1130 SFConf 254 SFTel54 SFTel1014 SFKitchen/BoH181 SFVestibule74 SFVestibule57 SFVestibule75 SFVestibule106 SFOffices67 SFVestibule161 SFVestibule8762465214083 SFHotel308 SFLobby913 SFBonus SpaceDrawing 2015 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rocastle, Ltd.I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly LicensedArchitect under the Laws of the State of Minnesota.ARCHITECT SEALtelDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.PROJECT PHASEDrawing 2015 Copyright Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd.ISSUESignature:Print Names:Date:License No:DATEMARKDESCRIPTIONtel9/1/2016 11:13:31 AMC:\Projects\MD1101500PLACE_SD-Schemes 05_natalya@msrdesign.com(Recovery).rvt160901_sk3South Site GroundPlan Option CPLACE ST. LOUIS PARKST. LOUIS PARK, MN100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100Minneapolis, MN 55401612 309 38892016-09-01CheckerAuthorSchematic DesignMD11015002335 Highway 36 West StreetSt. Paul, MN 55113-3819651 604 486101040201" = 20'-0"NStudy Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development UpdatePage 11 North Residential/Commercial 5-6 stories over podium; E-Generation 1 story plus greenhouse 198 dwellings •142 apartments affordable to rent for families with incomes up to 60%AMI •56 market rate apartments •342 bedrooms anticipated, subject to design finalization Bike Shop •retail shop and repair, open to the public: 1,500-2,000 sf Maker Space •shared workshop space for creatives (North portion of Work Hub): 3,000-3,300 sf •anticipated monthly membership of 40 E-Generation with a Growing PLACE for urban agriculture •anaerobic digester and energy balancing equipment: 7,500 sf •Growing PLACE greenhouse: 10,000 sf Urban Forest Parking: 182 spaces including 5 car-share vehicles UPDATED PLACE ST. LOUIS PARK PROJECT BASIC PROGRAM SUMMARY Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development Update Page 12 South Residential/Commercial 5-6 stories over podium; Hotel 8-12 stories 102 dwellings •58 live/work spaces affordable to rent for families with incomes up to 60%AMI •44 market rate live/work spaces •of the 44 market rate live/work spaces, 8 are “Type II” having 250 square foot ground-level storefronts (total of 2,000 square feet of commercial-permitted micro retail) •184 bedrooms anticipated, subject to design ﬁnalization 110 Room Select Service Hotel: 62,000 sf Cafe: 5,500-6,000 sf Coffee House: 1,800-2,000 sf Co-working Space (South portion of Work Hub): 3,000-3,300 sf •shared office space for creatives and startups •anticipated monthly membership of 60 plus walk-ins from hotel and LRT •includes mobility concierge available to the public Parking: 261 parking spaces including 5 car-share vehicles Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development Update Page 13 Overall Features •ground-level green space of approximately one acre, including Urban Forest, open to the public •split site embraces the station, providing improved public station area experience •LEED Certiﬁed, green roofs, car-free perks, car sharing and bike sharing ﬂeet •443 parking spaces with car sharing/bike sharing hub •each residential building for the 300 apartments is mixed-income, mixed-age (no segregation by income or senior status) •anticipated overall dwelling mix: 62 studios, 96 one-bedrooms, 70 two-bedrooms, 60 three- bedrooms, 12 four-bedrooms for a total of 526 bedrooms (subject to design ﬁnalization) Updated by: The PLACE Team October 3, 2016 Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: PLACE Development Update Page 14 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Outdoor Recreation Facility Naming and Marketing RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Council is asked to identify its preference for the name of the outdoor recreation facility at The Rec Center campus. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Which of the two names would the Council prefer to use for the new facility? SUMMARY: In June the city hired St. Louis Park-based advertising agency Nemer Fieger to develop a name and logo for the new outdoor recreation facility. Nemer Fieger and city staff hosted two focus group sessions with 15 stakeholders and community members representing a wide variety of interests in the city. At the first session, focus group participants shared their impressions of the St. Louis Park community and their ideas for the purpose and vision for the outdoor recreation facility. Participants also were asked to provide ideas of names or words that described the facility. Nemer Fieger then used that information to develop a number of naming concepts, which were presented to the focus group at its second session August 16, 2016. The focus group provided feedback on the concept names and then voted on preferences. Staff provided a study session report to the Council at its August 22 meeting regarding the progress being made on the naming process and the preferences identified by the focus group. Nemer Fieger and city staff presented the final options to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission September 7, 2016, for their input and recommendations. The recommendation from the Commission was to name the facility either the ROC (Recreation Outdoor Center) or the ARCHES (Athletic/Recreation/Community/Health/Education/Skating). Representatives from Nemer Fieger will be in attendance at the study session to present the results of the process. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Total agency fee for account service, research, name and logo development, and file delivery is $23,400. An additional $3,000 was authorized to provide design concepts for both names to aid in making a final decision. Funding will come in part from the city’s visitor bureau administrative fee fund, as well as the communications budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Jacqueline Larson, Communications and Marketing Manager Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Title: Outdoor Recreation Facility Naming and Marketing DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Focus group participants included 15 stakeholders and community members representing a wide variety of interests in the city:  Katherine Arnold, Human Rights Commission member  Karen Atkinson, Children First  Jonathan Ayele, Children First intern and 2016 SLP High School graduate  Becky Bakken, Discover St. Louis Park  Michael Gilbert, community member and St. Louis Park Schools employee  Lisa Greene, St. Louis Park Community Education  George Hagemann, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission  Tiffany Hoffman, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission  Luis Ocampo, Multicultural Advisory Committee member, SLP High School girls’ soccer coach  Greg Palmer, Citizen Bank  Bob Ramsey, community member  Julia Ross, community member and former city council member  Ariauna Thompson, Children First intern and 2016 SLP High School graduate  Paul Wandmacher/Chad Nicholls, St. Louis Park Hockey Association  Debbie Wells, Meadowbrook Collaborative Nemer Fieger staff and city staff were also on hand at the focus group sessions. The focus group identified the following three facility names as their preferred choices: The ARCHES, The ROC and The Canopy After receiving input from the members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, the final two name options were identified as follows. These are the names the council is asked to choose between as the final name for the outdoor recreation facility.  ROC (Recreation Outdoor Center)  Arches (Athletic/Recreation/Community/Health/Education/Skating) PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The city council is asked to review this report, listen to a presentation from Nemer Fieger that will include a possible logo to go with each name, and to choose a final name for the facility. Once the name is chosen, the corresponding logo will be refined for final use. NEXT STEPS: Once a name is selected, sign production and marketing of the new facility can begin in advance of its January 2017 grand opening. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Discussion Item: 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Website Development Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: The council is asked to provide feedback on the proposed redesign for the city website that will appear at www.stlouispark.org following completion. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the council supportive of a new type of website redesign that better reflects historical web site analytics and leans heavily on user input for future use gathered through a variety of means? SUMMARY: The city has been working with consultant Vision to provide redesign, content management service, and hosting of the city website at www.stlouispark.org, with launch scheduled for the first quarter of 2017. The following steps have been completed:  June-July: Vision gathered data from surveys, focus groups, heat maps (a way to visualize where visitors click) and analytics to drive the initial navigation development and design process.  August: Vision developed several wireframe (draft skeletal design) concepts for the site prior to design; the website group presented the final concept to department directors then provided feedback to Vision.  September: o Based on the wireframe, Vision proposed a design for the website; the website group has provided comments and feedback to fine-tune the design. o About 40 city staff members attended a half-day plain language/writing for the web workshop hosted by Vision. Plain language is communication that allows the audience to find what they need, understand what they find and use what they find to meet their needs. This training was in preparation for assisting the website redesign team with content assessment and rewrite prior to new site migration. o The website group developed categories for top-level navigation using data gathered by Vision during the discovery phase and has been sorting current pages into the new navigation structure.  October: Design concepts presented to city council for approval before continuing with the process. The website group is working on website content in preparation for content migration. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Total initial fee to redesign the website is $60,000, with an annual maintenance fee of $10,000 for a contract period of three years. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Jacqueline Larson, Communications and Marketing Manager Jason Huber, IT Manager Reviewed by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 2 Title: Website Development Update DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Selecting a website vendor In early 2016, the city issued a request for proposal for website redesign services and received proposals from three companies: CivicLive, CivicPlus and Vision (formerly VisionInternet). After exhaustive research and lengthy in-person demonstrations from each company, Vision was selected to provide website redesign services, a content management system and ongoing website hosting and maintenance. Some of the primary reasons for choosing Vision included the following:  Search Function: While findings showed users infrequently used the search function on the city website, search is still important and it will be a consistently visible and customizable feature of the new city website redesign. Vision’s search product allows website administrators to promote content, add search synonyms and key words and connect to public document systems to improve the search results received by users. Vision was the only one of the three companies that has successfully integrated with Laserfiche, an online public records management system which the city has recently purchased and will be implementing. Councilmembers have expressed great interest in a robust website search, and no other vendor illustrated a capability to integrate Laserfiche into the search function. Among other records, Laserfiche will hold all City Clerk official records, including City Council agendas, minutes, reports, ordinances, resolutions, and contracts.  Training and Data Collection: Vision had the ability and willingness to provide in-person user group testing and staff training on content review and plain language. This training will assist staff in reviewing and improving website content. It will put the city ahead of the curve on federal and state directives to use plain language in government communications, which much like ADA usability requirements are likely to trickle down to the local level in the coming years. The staff training held in August was very well- received by the employees in attendance and will be useful in writing for other applications beyond the web.  Customer Service: The service received to date from Vision has been exemplary. They are moving swiftly with project steps in order to meet the city’s launch deadline of first quarter 2017. They have been very responsive to website group questions and to requests for design tweaks, customization of user surveys and many other items. Vision staff have spent many in-person hours at the city providing training, user group testing and consultation with staff involved with the website redesign. Vision was clear about their strengths and weaknesses, and provided honest feedback about where the city would be better served by staying with software it’s currently using for various specific functions.  Proven Track Record: Current client websites hosted by Vision reviewed well with the website group both in aesthetics and in function across all platforms, from mobile to laptop to desktop and several different browsers. Vision provided a demo that allowed the website group to test drive the content management system prior to selecting Vision. Data Collection The discovery phase of the website redesign process took place throughout June and July and included surveying staff about website goals, an online community survey, focus groups, user testing and website analytics. Staff reached out directly via email to nearly 10,000 residents to complete the website survey, in addition to broadcasting the survey link on the city website, in social media, on city cable channels and via the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor. The survey was open from June 9 to July 8, with 253 responses received. Vision also conducted two in-person focus group sessions with community members who volunteered via the online survey, and held website usability testing. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 3 Title: Website Development Update Highlights that drove the proposed design concept for future web site use include the following:  Focus group participants wanted positive events and news in the “hero” area (top portion) on the home page.  User testing showed that only 1 of 25 tasks used the site search bar. None of the users returned to the home page to complete the next task. Clear, clean titles are needed for information.  Heat maps showed the search function was not clicked on in significant numbers. Video is never selected on the home page. Action buttons, like pay utility bill, are popular.  Analytics showed that 80% of visitors never see the home page; they land on an inside page via a link or search from another site, often Google. Further interesting findings:  Visitors to the city website are evenly split between mobile devices and desktops/laptops.  More than 80% of visitors are from Minnesota, with nearly 34% of those from St. Louis Park. The next largest group (26%), is from Minneapolis. NEXT STEPS: Once the new website design has been approved, Vision is prepared to begin content migration from the existing to the new web site. Content will be moved to a development site for fine-tuning prior to a “soft launch” with city staff in early January. This soft rollout will allow the website group to work out any bugs before rolling out formally to the public, and will allow city staff to become familiar with the site before it’s introduced to the public. Public launch of the website will take place later in the first quarter of 2017. The website group will develop a marketing plan for introducing the new website to city residents. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. City Council will be asked to consider a shared services agreement at upcoming regular meeting. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does City Council support entering into a shared service agreement with the City of Golden Valley for permitting, plan review, and inspections for certain buildings in the Central Park West development? Are there any concerns with the terms of this agreement? SUMMARY: The Central Park West development is located southwest of the intersection of I- 394 and Highway 100 and straddles the municipal border of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park. Three of the structures in the development will partially lie in both cities. This results in administrative complications for providing municipal services. The Golden Valley and St. Louis Park city staffs have been working to identify, prepare for, and resolve these issues. In August 2015, St. Louis Park and Golden Valley entered into a shared services agreement for the 199-unit apartment building (“Residential Building”) and the future office parking ramp(s) (“Parking Ramp”). That agreement covers permitting, plan review, and inspections and so far it is working well for both cities. In September 2016, the “10 West End” office final plan was approved by both cities. That plan includes a covered loading dock and skyway connection between the office building and Parking Ramp that also lies in both cities. A new shared services agreement was prepared to handle the office/skyway/loading dock. Under the agreement, St. Louis Park will review and issue permits and conduct inspections on these items, both cities will keep records, and St. Louis Park will share a percentage of the fees collected with Golden Valley. This agreement is designed to be ongoing, unless and until one of the cities chooses to terminate the agreement. This shared services agreement excludes emergency services in the scope, except to note that none of the provisions of the agreement conflict or alter existing mutual aid agreements. Golden Valley City Council authorized the agreement on October 5, 2016. Police and Fire Department representatives from both cities have also met in the past to discuss coordination of public safety and emergency services for the property. A third shared services agreement has been drafted and is awaiting Golden Valley’s review and comments. NEXT STEPS: City Council will be asked to authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Golden Valley for permitting, plan review, and inspections related to the “10 West End” covered loading dock and skyway connection. The agreement will be on the October 17, 2016 consent agenda. Staff will report to council regarding emergency services on a future agenda. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Shared Services Agreement Prepared by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Deputy Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager SHARED SERVICES AGREEMENT (Central Park West – Office/Skyway/Loading Dock) This Shared Services Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made this ___ day of ____________, 2016, by and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (“St. Louis Park”) and the CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (“Golden Valley”). RECITALS A. Minn. Stat. § 471.59 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into agreements to share services. B. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley each approved a planned unit development, as amended from time to time (collectively, the “PUDs”) with respect the real property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Office & Ramp Parcel”). C. The Office & Ramp Parcel is partly within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park and partly within the jurisdiction of Golden Valley. D. The owner of the Office & Ramp Parcel (the “Owner”) intends to construct an office tower (the “Office Tower”) and multi-level parking structure (the “Parking Ramp”) and related improvements on the Office & Ramp Parcel, in accordance with the PUDs. E. As approved in the PUDs, the portion of the Office & Ramp Parcel on which the Office Tower will be located is entirely within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park. F. As approved in the PUDs, the portion of the Office & Ramp Parcel on which the Parking Ramp will be located is partly within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park and partly within the jurisdiction of Golden Valley. G. The parties entered into a Share Services Agreement dated August 19, 2015 (“Existing Shared Services Agreement”), regarding, among other things, the inspection and permitting of construction, maintenance and other certain regulated activities with respect to Parking Ramp. H. Subsequent to the Existing Shared Services Agreement, the PUDs were amended to allow the Owner to construct a loading dock area and skyway facility located between and connecting the Office Tower and the Parking Ramp as shown in the amended plans for the PUDs (collectively, the “Additional Facilities”), with such Additional Facilities located in the area labelled as the “Loading Dock” on the site plan attached as Exhibit B hereto. I. As contemplated in the PUDs, a portion of the Additional Facilities will be located within the jurisdiction of St. Louis Park (the “SLP Part of the Additional Facilities”) and the remaining portion will be located within the jurisdiction of Golden Valley (the “GV Part of the Additional Facilities”). J. The final plans for the Additional Facilities remain subject to the review and approval of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, in accordance with their respective city codes. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West Page 2 2 K. The site plan attached as Exhibit B attached hereto shows the Office & Ramp Parcel, the expected location of the Office Tower, the Parking Ramp and Additional Facilities, and the jurisdictional boundary line between St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. L. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley have the common power to administer and enforce state-wide codes applicable to the construction, demolition, replacement, repair, installation, or maintenance of buildings, structures and related improvements, including without limitation the Minnesota State Building Code and the Minnesota State Fire Code (collectively, the “State Codes”). M. The fee schedules under the parties’ respective city codes impose or require substantially similar fee and charge amounts in connection with the administration and enforcement of the State Codes. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to increase the efficiency of the parties’ inspection and permitting of construction, maintenance and other certain regulated activities that Owner will engage in with respect to the Additional Facilities. 2. Additional Facilities. A. Administration and Enforcement of State Codes. (i) With respect to the SLP Part of the Additional Facilities, St. Louis Park shall exercise its powers to administer and enforce the State Codes applicable to the construction and maintenance of the Additional Facilities. (ii) With respect to the GV Part of the Additional Facilities, St. Louis Park shall exercise on behalf of Golden Valley their common powers to administer and enforce the State Codes to the same kind and extent St. Louis Park applies such codes to the SLP Part of the Additional Facilities. (iii) Pursuant to the foregoing, permit(s) and certificate(s) of occupancy that apply to or include the Additional Facilities shall be issued by St. Louis Park, and St. Louis Park shall be responsible for all inspections and enforcement activities related to the State Codes applicable to the Additional Facilities. It being the intent of the parties that the Owner need only coordinate with St. Louis Park for such permits and certificates of occupancy for the Additional Facilities. (iv) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Golden Valley shall have (a) the right to perform a final walk-through inspection of the Additional Facilities prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy therefor; and (b) full access to (and copies of, if requested) all records related to St. Louis Park’s administration and enforcement of the State Codes with respect to the Additional Facilities, including, to the extent applicable, electronic access to such records. B. Fees. Any fees, charges or surcharges (including without limitation building permit fees, building plan review fees, electrical permit fees, mechanical permit Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West Page 3 3 fees, plumbing permit fees, and fire permit fees) imposed or required under the parties’ respective city codes with respect to the administration and enforcement of the State Codes for the development and maintenance of the Additional Facilities and the Office Tower (collectively, “Fees”) shall be imposed, collected and allocated as follows: (i) To the extent the St. Louis Park City Code imposes or requires Fees, St. Louis Park shall impose or require therewith Fees for the entire Additional Facilities (i.e., both the SLP Part of the Additional Facilities and the GV Part of the Additional Facilities) in accordance with the fee schedule of the St. Louis Park City Code, and such fees shall be collected by St. Louis Park. (ii) Any Fees collected by St. Louis Park shall be allocated among the parties as follows: a. All collected Fees shall belong to St. Louis Park, except GV’s Share which shall belong to Golden Valley. b. As used herein the term “GV’s Share” shall mean the product of the following formula to the extent such product exceeds $500.00: The amount of Fees received by St. Louis Park, multiplied by 0.7%, multiplied by 25%. c. St. Louis Park shall be responsible for calculating GV’s Share and shall do so for each Business Day it receives one or more payments of Fees. St. Louis Park’s determination of GV’s Share shall be subject to Golden Valley review and approval. For purposes of applying the foregoing formula, the “amount of Fees received by St. Louis Park” shall be determined separately for each Business Day on which Fees are received by St. Louis Park. It being the intent of the parties to avoid the administrative cost of processing the payment of GV’s Share with respect to relatively small amounts of Fees received by St. Louis Park; provided that whether Golden Valley is entitled to any share of Fees shall not impair Golden Valley’s rights under Section 2.A(iv) above. As used herein the term, “Business Day” shall mean any day Monday through Friday on which the governmental offices of the parties are open for normal business. d. Pursuant to the foregoing, if GV’s Share is less than $500.00 on any Business Day, no payment of Fees collected on that Business Day shall be made to Golden Valley. e. If pursuant to the foregoing Golden Valley is to receive any Fees, St. Louis Park shall pay such amount to Golden Valley within thirty (30) days of its receipt of such Fees and shall provide to Golden Valley with such payment documentation evidencing the total amount of Fees received by St. Louis Park on the applicable Business Day and the calculation of GV’s Share with respect to such fees received. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West Page 4 4 f. The foregoing 0.7% figure represents the percentage of the Additional Facility and Office Tower Floor Area that will lie within Golden Valley’s jurisdiction, according to the plans approved in the PUDs. As used herein, the term “Additional Facility and Office Tower Floor Area” refers to the total combined gross floor area of the Additional Facilities and the Office Tower, according to the PUDs. (iii) To the extent St. Louis Park’s imposition or requirement of any Fees is based on a valuation of the Office Tower and Additional Facilities set forth in a permit application, prior to approving such application, St. Louis Park shall provide Golden Valley a copy of the application and any documentation it obtains or receives in connection with such valuation. Within ten (10) Business Days of its receipt of the application and such documentation, Golden Valley shall indicate to St. Louis Park whether it agrees or disagrees with the valuation, and if it disagrees the basis for such disagreement. In the event Golden Valley disagrees with the valuation, the parties shall cooperate with the property owner to agree upon an acceptable valuation prior to proceeding with the application. (iv) To the extent a party performs an inspection of the Additional Facilities pursuant to its city code or this Agreement and under that party’s city code a separate fee is imposed for such inspection, the foregoing shall not prevent such party from charging, collecting and retaining such inspection fee in its entirety. (v) Except as provided herein, Golden Valley shall not impose or require the payment of any Fees. 3. Mutual Aid for Public Safety. This Agreement shall not modify or amend any other agreements between the parties, or to which the parties are a party, regarding fire, police and other emergency services. 4. Workers Compensation Claims. It is agreed that any and all employees of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley and all other persons engaged by each respective party in the performance of any work or services required or provided as contemplated by this Agreement shall not be considered employees of the other party, and that any and all claims that may or might arise under worker’s compensation laws or unemployment compensation laws on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided as contemplated by this Agreement shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the other party. 5. Retained Authority. Except to the extent expressly provided herein, this Agreement shall not otherwise alter the municipal powers of the parties. 6. Term. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon six (6) months advance written notice to the other party. 7. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended at any time by agreement of the parties. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West Page 5 5 8. Saving Provision. If any provision of this Agreement shall be found invalid or unenforceable with respect to any entity or in any jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and such provisions found to be unlawful or unenforceable shall not be affected as to their enforcement or lawfulness as to any other entity or in any other jurisdiction, and to such extent the terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended to be severable 9. Notices. Any written notice required hereunder shall be hand delivered or by certified mail at the following addresses unless the other party is given notice of a change of address by certified mail: City of St. Louis Park Attention: City Clerk 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 City of Golden Valley Attention: City Clerk 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 (The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.) Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Shared Services Agreements with City of Golden Valley for Central Park West Page 6 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Partial Plan Review Fee at Application and Electronic Plan Review Program RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time. This report is intended to inform the Council of a proposed change in our fee schedule. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council support a proposed change to the 2017 Fee Schedule establishing partial collection of the Building Permit plan review fee at the time of permit application? SUMMARY: During preparations for implementing a new electronic plan review software system called Avolve Project Dox, an opportunity to address another concern involving abandoned permit applications became apparent. For larger projects, multiple sets of paper construction plans are currently submitted along with a permit application to the city for the review process to begin. Following review by multiple departments and staff, with possible plan changes requested, the permit is approved for issuance and the applicant is notified. All permit, plan review, and other related fees are then collected and the permit issued. However, on occasion a project is abandoned by the applicant and the permit is not picked up and no fees are collected to cover the costs incurred by the city. Staff is proposing that our fee schedule be amended to require payment of 50% of the estimated plan review fee at time of permit application. This would apply for all types of new and remodeled commercial and residential projects. An exception would be for interior remodeling and small single family residential projects that do not require a Construction Management Plan in order keep it simple for homeowner projects. This approach is consistent with the fee-for-service approach used by the city. Avolve Project Dox is a new application being supported by LOGIS which offers the potential for improved customer service delivery, lowered printing costs for applicants, and environmental benefit. Most architects and engineers develop building and site designs in electronic format. This application will allow construction plans and specifications to be submitted and reviewed by staff without printing, in some cases saving several hundred sheets of paper. A component of the Avolve software requires an application fee when applying for a permit and loading plans. The proposed 50% of the plan review fee will be used to fulfill this application fee. No overall change in the permit cost when issued will occur. This program is planned to go live January 2017. However, staff is working with selected applicants over the next few months to test the operation. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: No annual budget change is projected. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: David Skallet, Chief Building Official Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: 2017 Fee Schedule RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. This report is provided to Council for information on recommended changes to 2017 fees for services that the City provides. Some of the fee changes proposed will need to come back to the Council for formal approval. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council agree with the proposed revisions to the fee schedule to reflect adjustments to fees charged for programs and services set by ordinance? SUMMARY: Each year City fees are reviewed by departments prior to renewal and as part of the annual budget process. Some fees must be set and adjusted in accordance with City ordinance; other fees are allowed to be set administratively. All fees are reviewed each year based on comparison to other cities in the metro area, changes in regulations, and to make sure City business costs are covered for services. Sec. 1-19 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code states that fees called for within individual provisions of the Code are to be set by ordinance and listed as Appendix A of the Code. Fees must also be reviewed and reestablished annually. The Administrative Services Department has worked with individual departments to complete this review and its recommendations are included in the attached proposed fee schedule. A public hearing notice was published October 6, 2016 informing interested persons of the City’s intent to consider fees on October 17, 2016. Fees, rates and charges called for by resolution or set by a department are not required by law to be included in the Appendix A City Code fee schedule. Next Steps  First reading of this ordinance is scheduled for October 17, 2016.  Second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for November 7, 2016. If approved, the fee changes will be effective January 1, 2017.  Utility fees for 2017 water, sewer, storm water, and solid waste rates are scheduled for approval October 17, 2016. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed fee changes have been incorporated into the proposed 2017 budget. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proposed 2017 Fee Schedule Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer, Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES ACCOUNTING Bassett Creek Watershed Management District (property pass-through charge) Residential monthly $0.64 per residential equivalent unit $0.64 per residential equivalent unit Residential quarterly $1.93 per residential equivalent unit $1.93 per residential equivalent unit Land uses other than residential (Acreage * REF * 1.93 * 5) = quarterly rate (Acreage * REF * 1.93 * 5) = quarterly rate MN Dept of Health state testing fee Residential and multi-family $1.59 per quarter $1.59 per quarter Commercial $0.53 per month $0.53 per month Returned Check Fee $30 $30 Sanitary Sewer Base Charge Residential and multi-family $15.68 per quarter $16.78 per quarter Commercial $5.23 per month $5.60 per month Sewer and Service Charges Sanitary Sewer Usage Rate $3.07 per unit $3.28 per unit Solid Waste Service - Collection Cost per Quarter (Includes tax when applicable)(Includes tax when applicable) Organics $10.00 N/A Included in solid waste fee 20 gallon service $30.00 $28.00 30 gallon service $49.50 $46.50 60 gallon service $67.50 $69.00 90 gallon service $99.00 $105.75 120 gallon service $144.00 $168.00 150 gallon service $180.00 $210.00 180 gallon service $216.00 $252.00 270 gallon service $324.00 $378.00 360 gallon service $432.00 $504.00 450 gallon service $540.00 $630.00 540 gallon service $648.00 $756.00 Solid Waste Service (Residential) Additional 30 gallon cart $60 $60 Additional 60 gallon cart $60 $60 Additional 90 gallon cart $60 $60 Cart Changes - over 1 per cart type per 12 month period $20 $20 Extra Garbage Stickers $2/sticker $2/sticker Recycling Bin No Charge No Charge Yard Waste Opt-Out $3 credit/quarter $3 credit/quarter Solid Waste Service (Commercial) - Collection Cost 30 gallon service $16.50 N/A Size no longer available for commercial 60 gallon service Garbage (monthly)$22.50 $21.00 Garbage (quarterly)$67.50 $63.00 90 gallon service Garbage (monthly)$33.00 $29.00 Garbage (quarterly)$99.00 $86.00 Recycling (monthly)$10.00 $12.00 Recycling (quarterly)$30.00 $35.00 Organics (monthly)$11.67 $15.00 Organics (quarterly)$35.00 $45.00 150 gallon service $60.00 N/A Size no longer available for commercial 180 gallon service Garbage (monthly)$72.00 $59.00 Garbage (quarterly)$216.00 $177.00 Recycling (monthly)$10.00 $21.00 Recycling (quarterly)$30.00 $63.00 Organics (monthly)$11.67 $29.00 Organics (quarterly)$35.00 $87.00 270 gallon service $108.00 N/A Size no longer available for commercial 360 gallon service $144.00 N/A Size no longer available for commercial Business Recycling Collection $30 per quarter N/A Fee now specific to size. Business Organics Collection $35 per quarter N/A Fee now specific to size. Storm Sewer Rate Residential quarterly $21.30 per residential equivalent unit $21.83 per residential equivalent unit Commercial monthly $35.50 per residential equivalent unit $36.38 per residential equivalent unit Commercial quarterly $106.50 per residential equivalent unit $109.15 per residential equivalent unit Land uses other than residential (Acreage * REF * 21.30 * 5) = quarterly rate (Acreage * REF * 21.83 * 5) = quarterly rate Water Meter Charges Commercial Monthly Fee 5/8" meter $7.45 $8.26 3/4"$7.45 $8.26 1"$10.43 $11.57 1.5"$13.41 $14.87 2"$21.61 $23.96 3"$81.95 $90.90 4"$104.30 $115.69 6"$156.45 $173.53 City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Page 1 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 2 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule ACCOUNTING - CONTINUED Water Meter Charges - Continued Residential/Multi-family Quarterly Fee 5/8" meter $22.35 $24.79 3/4"$22.35 $24.79 1"$31.29 $34.71 1.5"$40.23 $44.62 2"$64.82 $71.89 3"$245.85 $272.69 4"$312.90 $347.06 6"$469.35 $520.59 2" compound $64.82 $71.89 3" compound $245.85 $272.69 Water Rates per unit (1 unit = 100 cu ft or 750 gallons) Tier 1 0-40 units* (0-30,000 gallons)$1.66 $1.78 Tier 2 41-80 units* (30,001-60,000 gallons)$2.07 $2.21 Tier 3 >80 units (>60,000 gallons)$3.09 $3.31 Commercial All units $1.66 $1.78 Irrigation All units $3.09 $3.31 ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES Chapter 4 – Animal Regulations $50 $50 Chapter 6 – Buildings & Building Regulations Chapter 6, Article V – Property Maintenance Code $100 $100 Chapter 8 – Business and Business Licenses $100 $100 Chapter 12 – Environment $50 $50 Chapter 12, Section 1 – Environment & Public Health Regulations Adopted by Reference $100 $100 Chapter 12, Section 157 – Illicit Discharge and Connection $100 $100 Chapter 12, Section 159 – Wetland Protection $100 $100 Chapter 14 – Fire and Fire Prevention $50 $50 Chapter 14, Section 75 – Open burning without permit $100 $100 Chapter 20 – Parks and Recreation $50 $50 Chapter 22 – Solid Waste Management $50 $50 Chapter 22, Section 35b – Contagious Disease Refuse $200 $200 Chapter 24 – Streets, Sidewalks & Public Places $50 $50 Chapter 24, Section 24-43 – Household Trash & Recycling Containers blocking public way $25 $50 Chapter 24, Section 50 – Public Property: Defacing or injuring $150 $150 Chapter 24, Section 51 – Sweeping leaves or snow into street/alley prohibited $100 $100 Chapter 24, Section 151 – Work in public right-of-way without a permit $100 $100 Chapter 24, Section 24-342 - Snow, ice and rubbish a public nuisance on sidewalks; removal by owner. Residential $25 first time, plus $10 each subsequent offense $25 first time, plus $10 each subsequent offense Commercial $25 first time, plus $10 each subsequent offense $25 first time. Fee shall double for each subsequent violation, with a maximum fee of $200 for SFR and $400 for all others. Doesn't reset annually. Does reset for new owners.Increased subsequent fines related to commercial Chapter 26 – Subdivision $100 $100 Violation of a condition associated with a Subdivision approval.$750 $750 Chapter 32 – Utilities $50 $50 Violation of sprinkling ban $25 $50 first time. Fee shall double for each subsequent violation, with a maximum fee of $200 for SFR and $400 for all others. Doesn't reset annually. Does reset for new owners. Clarified fee and subsequent violations Chapter 36 – Zoning $50 $50 Chapter 36, Section 37 – Conducting a Land Use not permitted in the zoning district $100 $100 Violation of a condition associated with a Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development, or Special Permit approval $750 $750 Repeat Violations within 24 Months Previous fine doubled up to a maximum of $2,000 Previous fine doubled up to a maximum of $2,000 Double the amount of the fine imposed for the previous violation, up to a maximum of $2,000. For example, if there were four occurrences of a violation that carried a $50 fine, the fine for the fourth occurrence would be $400 (first: $50; second: $100; third: $200; fourth: $400). *Fines in addition to abatement and licensing inspections Fines listed above may be in addition to fees associated with abatement and licensing inspections. Page 2 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 3 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Copies No Charge 0-9 pages; 10 pages $2.50; $0.25/page thereafter up to 100 pages No Charge 0-9 pages; 10 pages $2.50; $0.25/page thereafter up to 100 pages Domestic Partnership Registration Application Fee $50 $50 Amendment to Application Fee $25 $25 Termination of Registration Fee $25 $25 Liquor Licenses Brewpub Off-sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 Brewer's Off-sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 Microdistillery Cocktail Room $600 $600 Microdistillery Off-Sale $200 $200 Brewer's On-sale Taproom $600 $600 Club (per # members) 1 - 200 $300 $300 201 - 500 $500 $500 501 - 1000 $650 $650 1001 - 2000 $800 $800 2001 - 4000 $1,000 $1,000 4001 - 6000 $2,000 $2,000 6000+$3,000 $3,000 Off-sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $200 $200 Off-sale Intoxicating Liquor $380 $380 Off-sale Intoxicating Liquor fee, per M.S. 340A.480-3(c ) $280 $280 On-sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $750 $750 On-sale Culinary Class Limited $100 $100 On-sale Intoxicating Liquor $8,750 $8,750 On-sale Sunday Liquor $200 $200 On-sale Wine $2,000 $2,000 New License Background Investigation (non-refundable) $500 in-state applicant; actual costs for out-of- state applicant may be billed up to a maximum of $10,000 $500 in-state applicant; actual costs for out-of- state applicant may be billed up to a maximum of $10,000 New Store Manager Background Investigation $500 $500 On-sale license renewal per 340A.412, Subd. 2 $500 $500 Temporary On-sale License Fee $100/day $100/day Proclamations Framed Proclamation $15 $15 Comprehensive Plan Amendments $2,050 $2,100 Conditional Use Permit $2,050 $2,100 Major Amendment $2,050 $2,100 Minor Amendment $1,050 $1,100 Fill or excavation only $525 $550 Fence Permit Installation $15 $15 Numbering of Buildings (New Addresses)$50 $50 Official Map Amendment $525 $550 Parking Lot Permit Installation/Reconstruction $75 $75 Driveway Permit $25 $25 Planned Unit Development Preliminary PUD $2,050 $2,100 Final PUD $2,050 $2,100 Prelim/Final PUD Combined $2,400 $3,000 PUD - Major Amendment $2,050 $2,100 PUD - Minor Amendment $1,050 $1,100 Recording Filing Fee Single Family $50 $50 Other Uses $120 $120 Registration of Land Use $50 $50 Sign Permit Erection of Temporary Sign $30 $30 Erection of Real Estate, Construction Sign 40+ ft $75 $75 Installation of Permanent Sign without footings $75 $75 Installation of Permanent Sign with footings $100 $100 Special Permits Major Amendment $2,050 $2,100 Minor Amendment $1,050 $1,100 Street, Alley, Utility Vacations $800 $850 Subdivision Dedication Fee Park Dedication Fee (in lieu of land) Commercial/Industrial Properties 5% of current market value of unimproved land as determined by City Assessor 5% of current market value of unimproved land as determined by City Assessor Multi-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit $1,500 per dwelling unit Single-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit $1,500 per dwelling unit Trails $225 per residential dwelling unit $225 per residential dwelling unit Subdivisions/Replats Preliminary Plat $850 plus $90 per lot $900 plus $100 per lot Final Plat $525 $550 Combined Process and Replats $950 plus $90 per lot $1,100 plus $100 per lot Exempt & Administrative Subdivisions $300 $350 Tax Increment Financing Application Fee $3,000 $3,000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Page 3 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 4 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Temporary Use Carnival & Festival over 14 days $1,500 $1,500 Mobile Use Vehicle Zoning Permit (Food or Medical) $50 $50 Time Extension $150 $150 Traffic Management Plan Administrative Fee $0.10 per sq ft gross floor $0.10 per sq ft gross floor Tree Replacement Cash in lieu of replacement trees $135 per caliper inch $135 per caliper inch Variances Commercial $500 $500 Residential $300 $300 Zoning Appeal $300 $300 Zoning Letter $50 $50 Zoning Map Amendments $2,050 $2,100 Zoning Permit Accessory Structures, 120 ft or less $25 $25 Zoning Text Amendments $2,050 $2,100 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Installation/repair of Sidewalk, Curb Cut or Curb and Gutter Permit $12 per 10 linear feet $12 per 10 linear feet Administrative Fee (all permits)$60 $60 Permit Parking- High School & Medical need No Charge No Charge Work in Public Right-of-Way Permit Administrative Fee (all permits)$60 $60 Hole in Roadway/Blvd (larger than 10" diameter)$60 per hole $60 per hole Trenching in Roadway $400 per 100 linear feet (minimum $400) $400 per 100 linear feet (minimum $400) Trenching in Boulevard $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200) $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200) Temporary No Parking signs (for right-of-way permit work)$60 per hour per project (minimum $60) Deposit of $25/ sign ($100 minimum per permit) Temporary Private Use of Public Property $150 $350 Dewatering Permit Administrative Fee (all permits)N/A $250 Discharge to Sanitary Sewer N/A Charge based on duration/volume of discharge Erosion Control Permit Application and Review - single family $200 $200 Application and Review - other applicants N/A $450 Deposit - single family N/A $1,500 Deposit - other applicants N/A $3,000 per acre (min. $1,500) FIRE DEPARTMENT Car Seat Inspections $40 for the first car seat or base inspection and a $20 fee for each additional car seat or base inspection $40 for the first car seat or base inspection and a $20 fee for each additional car seat or base inspection Fire Alarms (False) Residential/Commercial Residential/Commercial 1st offense w/in year $0/$0 $0/$0 2nd offense w/in year $100/$100 $100/$100 3rd offense w/in year $150/$200 $150/$200 4th offense w/in year $200/$300 $200/$300 5th offense w/in year $200/$400 $200/$400 Each subsequent in same year $200/$100 increase $200/$100 increase Fire Protection Permits (sprinkler systems, etc.)See Inspections Dept - Construction Permits See Inspections Dept - Construction Permits Fireworks Display Permit Actual costs incurred Actual costs incurred Recreational Fire Lifetime Permit $25 $25 Service Fees Service Fee for fully-equipped and staffed vehicles $500 per hour for a ladder truck $500 per hour for a ladder truck $325 per hour for a full-size fire truck $325 per hour for a full-size fire truck $255 per hour for a rescue unit $255 per hour for a rescue unit Service Fee of a Chief Officer $100 per hour $100 per hour Inspections After Hours $65 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.)$65 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.) Tent Permit Tent over 200 sq. ft.$75 $75 Canopy over 400 sq. ft.$75 $75 Fire Sprinkler System Assessment Application fee one-half of one percent (0.5% ) of the petitioned amount, with a minimum fee of $150 and a maximum fee of $750 one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the petitioned amount, with a minimum fee of $150 and a maximum fee of $750 New to fee schedule. Fee previously included in related policy. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - CONTINUED Page 4 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 5 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule INFORMATION RESOURCES Cable TV Duplicate DVD, 1 to 4 copies $15/each $15/each Duplicate DVD, 5+ copies $10/each $10/each Digital GIS Data Requests 2ft Contours - per sq. mile $10 N/A Aerial Photography - per section $25 N/A Base Map Data - citywide data (Parks, Lakes, Trails, Roads, Zoning, City Limits, Neighborhoods, Benchmarks) $60 N/A GIS Services Custom Mapping Fee - per hour minimum $50 $50 Custom GIS Analysis Fee - per hour minimum $50 $50 Printing 8.5 x 11 (per copy)$0.25 $0.25 17 x 22 $5 $5 24 x 36 $10 $10 36 x 36 $15 $15 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Building Demolition Deposit 1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $2,500 $2,500 All Other Buildings $5,000 $5,000 Building Demolition Permit 1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $160 $170 All Other Buildings $250 $280 Building Moving Permit $500 $500 Business Licenses Billboards $155 per billboard $160 per billboard Commercial Entertainment $285 $285 Courtesy Bench $55 $57 Dog Kennel $155 $160 Environmental Emissions $320 $320 Massage Therapy Massage Therapy Establishment $350 $360 Massage Therapy License $115 $115 Therapists holding a Massage Therapy Establishment License $35 $35 Pawnbroker License Fee $2,000 $2,000 Per Transaction Fee $2.00 $2 Investigation Fee $1,000 $1,000 Penalty $50 per day $50 per day Sexually Oriented Business Investigation Fee (High Impact)$500 $500 High Impact $4,500 $4,500 Limited Impact $125 $125 Tobacco Products & Related Device Sales $565 $575 Vehicle Parking Facilities Enclosed Parking $230 $235 Parking Ramp $180 $185 Tanning Bed Facility $290 $290 Certificate of Occupancy For each condominium unit completed after building occupancy $100 $100 Change of Use (does not apply to 1 & 2 family dwellings) Up to 5,000 sq ft $450 $450 5,001 to 25,000 sq ft $750 $750 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $950 $1,000 75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $1,250 $1,400 100,000 to 200,000 sq ft $1,550 $1,700 above 200,000 sq ft $1,950 $2,200 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy $80 $85 Certificate of Property Maintenance Certificate of Property Maintenance Extension $60 $60 Change in Ownership Condominium Unit $150 $150 Duplex (2 Family dwellings)$320 $325 Multi-Family (apartment) Buildings $255 per building + $13 per unit $255 per building + $15 per unit Single Family Dwellings $230 $235 All Other Buildings: Up to 5,000 sq ft $450 $450 5,001 – 25,000 sq ft $750 $750 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $950 $1,000 75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $1,250 $1,400 100,000 to 200,000 sq. ft $1,550 $1,700 above 200,000 sq. ft $1,950 $2,200 Temporary Certificate of Property Maintenance - Residential $80 $85 Temporary Certificate of Property Maintenance - All others $200 $200 Page 5 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 6 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Construction Permits (building, electrical, fire protection, mechanical, plumbing, pools, utilities) Building and Fire Protection Permits Valuation Up to $500 Base Fee $55 Base Fee $55 $500.01 to $2,000.00 Base Fee $55 plus $2 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $100 over $500.01 Base Fee $55 plus $2 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $100 over $500.01 $2,000.01 to $25,000.00 Base Fee $85 plus $15 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $2,000.01 Base Fee $85 plus $15 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $2,000.01 $25,000.01 to $50,000.00 Base Fee $430 plus $10 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $25,000.01 Base Fee $430 plus $10 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $25,000.01 $50,000.01 to $100,000.00 Base Fee $680 plus $7 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $50,000.01 Base Fee $680 plus $7 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $50,000.01 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 Base Fee $1,030 plus $6.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $100.000.01 Base Fee $1,030 plus $6.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $100.000.01 $500,000.01 to $1,000,000.00 Base Fee $3,430 plus $5.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $500,000.01 Base Fee $3,430 plus $5.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $500,000.01 $1,000,000.01 and up Base Fee $5,930 plus $4.50 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $1,000,000.01 Base Fee $5,930 plus $4.50 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $1,000,000.01 Single Family Residential Exceptions: Reroofing – asphalt shingled, sloped roofs only House or House and Garage $140 $140 Garage Only $70 $70 Residing House or House and Garage $140 $140 Garage Only $70 $70 Building Mounted Photovoltaic Panels N/A $250 Electrical Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $50 + 1.75% of job valuation $55 + 1.75% of job valuation Installation of traffic signals per location $150 $150 Single family, one applicance $50 $50 ISTS Permit Sewage treatment system install or repair $125 $125 Mechanical Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $50 + 1.75% of job valuation $55 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Replace furnance, boiler or furnance/AC $65 $65 Install single fuel burning applicance with piping $65 $65 Install, replace or repair single mechanical appliance $50 $55 Plumbing Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $50 + 1.75% of job valuation $55 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Repair/replace single plumbing fixture $50 $55 Private Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply Building permit fees apply Public Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply Building permit fees apply Sewer and Water Permit (all underground private utilities) Installation, Replacement, Repair $45 + 1.75% of job valuation $55 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Replace/repair sewer or water service $80 $90 Water Access Charge $750 $750 Competency Exams Fees Mechanical per test $30 $30 Renewal - 3 year Mechanical $30 $30 Contractor Licenses Mechanical $100 $100 Solid Waste $200 $200 Tree Maintenance $95 $95 Dog Licenses 1 year $25 $25 2 year $40 $40 3 year $50 $50 Potentially Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $100 $100 Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $250 $250 Interim License $15 $15 Off-Leash Dog Area Permit (non-resident)$55 $55 Penalty for no license $40 $40 Inspections After Hours Inspections $75 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.)$75 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.) Installation of permenant sign w/footing inspection Based on valuation using building permit table Based on valuation using building permit table Re-Inspection Fee (after correction notice issued has not been corrected within 2 subsequent inspections) $130 $130 Insurance Requirements A minimum of:A minimum of: Circus $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Commercial Entertainment $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Mechanical Contractors $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Solid Waste $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Tree Maintenance & Removal $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Vehicle Parking Facility $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT - CONTINUED Page 6 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 7 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule ISTS Permit Sewage treatment system install or repair $125 $125 License Fees - Other Investigation Fee $300 per establishment requiring a business license $300 per establishment requiring a business license Late Fee 25% of license fee (minimum $50)25% of license fee (minimum $50) License Reinstatement Fee $250 $250 Transfer of License (new ownership)$75 $75 Plan Review - 50% of amount due at time of application. Exception: Permits for Single Family Residential that does not require a construction management plan. Building Permits 65% of Permit Fee 65% of Permit Fee Repetitive Building 25% of Permit Fee for Duplicate Structure 25% of Permit Fee for Duplicate Structure Electrical Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Mechanical Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Plumbing Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Sewer & Water Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Single Family Interior Remodel Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Rental Housing License Condominium/Townhouse/ Cooperative $90 per unit $90 per unit Duplex both sides non-owner occupied $170 per duplex $175 per duplex Housing Authority owned single family dwelling units $15 per unit $15 per unit Multiple Family Per Building $220 $230 Per Unit $15 $15 Single Family Unit $120 per dwelling unit $125 per dwelling unit Temporary Noise Permit $65 $70 Temporary Use Permits Amusement Rides, Carnivals & Circuses $260 $260 Commercial Film Production Application $100 $100 Petting Zoos $60 $60 Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales $110 $110 Vehicle Decals Solid Waste $25 $25 Tree Maintenance & Removal $10 $10 OPERATIONS & RECREATION Operations Block Party Application (MSC at 7305 Oxford St)No Charge No Charge Cone deposit (refundable)$10/cone $10/cone Bulk Water Filling Station ( Pre-purchase at MSC)$4/1,000 gallons $4/1,000 gallons Fire Hydrant Use Permit (MSC - approval only by PW/Utilities) $100 connection fee per hydrant, $4/1,000 gallon$100 connection fee per hydrant, $4/1,000 gallons Permit to Exceed Vehicle Weight Limitations (MSC)$30 each $50 each Service Fees (Stop Box Repairs, Water Shut-off Service) - MSC Shop Public Service Worker Regular Business Hours $50 $50 After Hours $150 $150 Utility Fee RPZ (Reduced Pressure Zone) Registration Fee $50 for 5 years N/A Fee discontinued - RPZ's now monitored by inspections. Winter Parking Permit Caregiver parking $25 $25 No off-street parking available No Charge No Charge Off-street parking available $125 $125 Recreation Facility Rental Amphitheater, Wolfe Park (per hour, 2 hour minimum) Resident $70/hr $70/hr Non-Resident $80/hr $80/hr Amphitheater & Park Building, Wolfe Park (per hour, 2 hour minimum) Resident $95/hr $95/hr Non-Resident $115/hr $115/hr Court Rental (Tennis, Basketball, Sand Volleyball & Pickle Ball) Resident $20/hr $20/hr Non-resident $25/hr $25/hr Field Lights $20/hr $20/hr Field Maintenance Resident $65/hr, one maintenance person $65/hr, one maintenance person Non-resident $85/hr, one maintenance person $85/hr, one maintenance person Field Rental (Baseball & Softball) Resident $60/hr $65/hr Non-resident $70/hr $75/hr Field Rental (Soccer) Resident $70/hr $75/hr Non-resident $80/hr $85/hr INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT - CONTINUED Page 7 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 8 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Mobile Stage Rental (per hour) Basic Unit - 4 hr. minimum (resident)$210/hr $215/hr Basic Unit - 4 hr. minimum (non-resident)$240/hr $245/hr Large Mixing Board w/Additional Speakers (resident)$110/hr $115/hr Large Mixing Board w/Additional Speakers (non-resident) $130/hr $135/hr Oak Hill Park Splash Pad, 3201 Rhode Island Ave Resident Free Free Non-Resident $1 per person $1 per person Groups of 10-30 must pre-register $2 per person $2 per person Park Building Rental (per hour, 2 hour minimum) Damage Deposit $300 $300 Birchwood Resident $55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident $65/hr $65/hr Browndale Resident $55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident $65/hr $65/hr Louisiana Oaks Resident $55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident $65/hr $65/hr Nelson Park Resident $55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident $65/hr $65/hr Oak Hill Park Resident $55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident $65/hr $65/hr Wolfe Park Resident $60/hr $60/hr Non-Resident $70/hr $70/hr Park Rental - Large Event Half Day fee N/A $800 Full Day fee N/A $1,600 Picnic Shelter Rental (per block: 11 a.m. - 4 p.m. or 4:30 - 9 p.m.) Damage Deposit $100 $100 Additional Hours (before 11 a.m.) Resident $20/hr $20/hr Non-resident $25/hr $25/hr Fern Hill Park Resident $70/hr $75/hr Non-resident $90/hr $95/hr Oak Hill Park Central (resident)$70/hr $75/hr Central (non-resident)$90/hr $95/hr Main (resident)$100/hr $100/hr Main (non-resident)$130/hr $130/hr Rustic (resident)$40/hr $40/hr Rustic (non-resident)$50/hr $50/hr Wolfe Park East (resident)$75/hr $75/hr East (non-resident)$95/hr $95/hr West (resident)$75/hr $75/hr West (non-resident $95/hr $95/hr Rec Center Banquet Room Rental (per hour; 2 hour minimum) Damage Deposit $700/hr $725/hr Resident Sunday - Friday $60/hr $65/hr Resident Saturday (8 a.m. to midnight)$600 $625 Non-resident Sunday - Friday $70/hr $75/hr Non-resident Saturday (8 a.m. to midnight)$700 $725 Police Officer (after 9 p.m. events where alcohol is served) $280 $295 Gallery Room Rental (per hour; 2 hour minimum) Damage Deposit $100 $100 Maintenance Fee $30 $30 Residents & Non Profit Groups $45/hr $50/hr Non-resident $55/hr $60/hr Ice Rink Rental $195/hr plus tax $200/hr plus tax Ice Skating Party (2 hr use of Gallery, 15 pp adm open skate) Resident $55 $85 Non-resident $65 $100 Ice Skating Party (2 hr use of Banquet Room, 15 pp adm open skate) Resident N/A $100 Non-resident N/A $125 Skate rental $0 - Contracted with Park Pro Shop $3 Skate sharpening $0 - Contracted with Park Pro Shop $5 Skating Admission - adult $4 $4 Skating Admission - youth & senior $3.50 $3.50 Ten Punch Pass - adult $35 $35 Ten Punch Pass - youth & senior $30 $30 Open Hockey Admission $5 $5 Open Hockey Ten Punch Pass $45 $45 OPERATIONS & RECREATION - CONTINUED Page 8 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 9 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Aquatic Park Daily Entrance Rates: Under 1 year old Free Free 1 to 5 years old $5 N/A Fee discontinued 1 to 54 years old $9.50 $9.50 Revised Fee description 55+ years old $5 $5.50 Twilight (after 4:30 p.m.)$5 $5.50 Season Pass (Resident* & purchased on or before June 2)* Residents of Golden Valley, Hopkins and Minnetonka are eligible for resident rates. Under 1 year old Free Free 1 to 5 years old $47 N/A Fee discontinued 1 to 54 years old $52 $52 Revised Fee description Caretaker/Nanny $52 $52 55+ years old $37 $37 Twilight (after 4:30 p.m.)$37 $37 Season Pass (Resident* & purchased after June 2)* Residents of Golden Valley, Hopkins and Minnetonka are eligible for resident rates. Under 1 year old Free Free 1 to 5 years old $52 N/A Fee discontinued 1 to 54 years old $57 $57 Revised Fee description Caretaker/Nanny $57 $57 55+ years old $42 $42 Twilight (after 4:30 p.m.)$42 $42 Season Pass (Non-Resident & purchased on or before June 2) Under 1 year old Free Free 1 to 5 years old $57 N/A Fee discontinued 1 to 54 years old $62 $62 Revised Fee description Caretaker/Nanny $62 $62 55+ years old $47 $47 Twilight (after 4:30 p.m.)$47 $47 Season Pass (Non-Resident & purchased after June 2) Under 1 year old Free Free 1 to 5 years old $62 N/A Fee discontinued 1 to 54 years old $67 $67 Revised Fee description Caretaker/Nanny $67 $67 55+ years old $52 $52 Twilight (after 4:30 p.m.)$52 $52 Gazebo Rental (Daily entrance rate/season pass required) Resident $35/hr $35/hr Non-resident $45/hr $45/hr Private Aquatic Park Rental $400/hour $400/hour Aqua Obstacle Course $100 per use $100 per use Lap Lane Rental $50/hr $75/hr Outdoor Recreation Complex Dry Floor Rental Damage Deposit N/A $150 Food and Beverage Fee N/A $60 Two Hour Maximum N/A $25/hr Half-Day Rental (6 hour maximum)N/A $150 Full-Day Rental N/A $300 Ice Rink Rental *N/A $130/hr plus tax (* SLP HA rate is $125/hr per agreement) Skate Rental N/A $3 Skate Sharpening N/A $5 Skating Admission - adult N/A $4 Skating Admission - youth & senior N/A $3.50 Ten Punch Pass - adult N/A $35 Ten Punch Pass - youth & senior N/A $30 Open Hockey Admission N/A $5 Open Hockey Ten Punch Pass N/A $45 Turf Field Rental (full field - 200' x 85') Resident N/A $25/hr Non-resident N/A $40/hr Skate Park (outdoor)N/A Free admission Resident (private rental)N/A $200/hr Non-Resident (private rental)N/A $400/hr Warming House Rental Resident (after hours)$45/hr $50/hr Non-resident (after hours)$55/hr $60/hr Non-resident & Resident (during hours)$20/hr $20/hr Westwood Hills Nature Center Birthday Party (12 or fewer children) Each additional child $7.50 $8 Resident $95 $98 Non-Resident $105 $108 Westwood Hills Nature Center Brick House Rental Damage Deposit $500 N/A Fee discontinued Resident per hour $60/hr N/A Fee discontinued Non-Resident per hour $70/hr N/A Fee discontinued OPERATIONS & RECREATION - CONTINUED Page 9 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 10 Denotes change Denotes New SERVICE 2016 ADOPTED FEES 2017 PROPOSED/NEW FEES NOTES City of St. Louis Park - 2017 FEES Schedule Westwood Hills Nature Center Park Building (lower) Rental Damage Deposit $300 $300 Resident - per hour (2 hr min.)$55/hr $55/hr Non-Resident - per hour (2 hr min.)$65/hr $65/hr Westwood Hills Nature Center Waterfall Deck Rental Resident per hour (2 hr. minimum)$50/hr $50/hr Non-Resident per hour (2 hr. minimum)$75/hr $75/hr Westwood Hills Nature Center Watergarden Rental Resident per hour $100/hr $100/hr Non-Resident per hour $150/hr $150/hr Farmer's Market Application per stall (one market site)$60 $60 per stall (both market sites)$90 $90 Mobile Food Truck Vendor Permit $40/per day - 3 day maximum $50/day per truck Professional Photo & Park Video Shoot (does not include facility rental) Resident $125/hr $125/hr Non-resident $175/hr $175/hr Special Equipment Rental (delivery within City limits only) Damage Deposit $100 $100 16 Folding Tables and 40 Chairs (resident)$140 $160 16 Folding Tables and 40 Chairs (St. Louis Park Organization) $110 $110 8 Folding Tables and 20 Chairs (resident)$70 $90 8 Folding Tables and 20 Chairs (St. Louis Park Organization) $55 $55 Damage Deposit N/A $100 Portable PA System (resident)N/A $45 Portable PA System (St. Louis Park Organization)N/A $25 Trees - DED Fees Private 10%10% Public 17%17% Vegetation Maintenance Native Vegetation Permit valid for 5 yrs $0 $0 Weed Elimination Non-compliance of Weed Nuisance Notice $140 $145 Wood Chip Delivery (within City limits only) 2-2.5 cubic yards $70 $70 5 cubic yards $130 $130 POLICE DEPARTMENT Animals Animal Impound Initial impoundment $35 $35 2nd offense w/in year $60 $60 3rd offense w/in year $85 $85 4th offense w/in year $110 $110 Boarding Per Day $25 $25 Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $250 $250 Potentially Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $100 $100 Copies & Reports Accident Photo $10/disk $10/disk Arrest Synopsis Report $5 $5 Audio Recording $10 $10 Police Report $0.25 page $0.25 page Weekly Accident Report $0.50/page $0.50/page Crime Free Multi-Housing Training $35/class $35/class Criminal Background Investigation Volunteers & Employees $5 $5 False Alarm (Police)Residential/Commercial Residential/Commercial 1st offense w/in year $0/$0 $0/$0 2nd offense w/in year $100/$100 $100/$100 3rd offense w/in year $100/$125 $100/$125 4th offense w/in year $100/$150 $100/$150 5th offense w/in year $100/$175 $100/$175 Each subsequent in same year $100/$25 increase $100/$25 increase Late Payment Fee 10%10% Fingerprinting St. Louis Park residents & business needs $25 $25 Solicitor/Peddler Registration $150 $150 Lost ID replacement fee $25 $25 Vehicle Forfeiture Administrative fee in certain cases $250 $250 OPERATIONS & RECREATION - CONTINUED Page 10 2017 FEES Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 9) Title: 2017 Fee Schedule Page 11 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Made in MN Solar Project for Fire Station #2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: This report is for informational purposes. Staff and the Environment & Sustainability Commission support the use of solar to offset our electricity consumption. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is this initiative consistent with the City’s policies related to the environment and sustainability? SUMMARY: Staff have been exploring solar opportunities for city buildings and beyond. One opportunity it to utilize the Made in Minnesota (MIM) solar rebate program which offers financial incentives to install small solar systems using solar panels made locally. Participation in this program helps the state meet its solar electricity standard while also helping the City meet the goals and expectations outlined in our Energy Action Plan as well as in our climate action planning. The City applied for the MIM rebate program with the help of the solar consulting firm Apex and was waitlisted as it is a lottery system. Once we were notified that a slot opened up, efforts to get documents required for the approval were launched. A structural analysis of the roof construction was conducted and will be part of the documentation required to get the project approved. The MIM program allows for solar systems up to 40 kilowatts (kW) on commercial buildings. This is considered a relatively small system but it will work very well on the roof of Fire Station #2 based on roof size, location, and solar potential. The MIM program consists of a 10 year contract where the panels are owned by the developer, the City pays a monthly installment, and the City will receive an annual production credit that helps offset those costs. In year 11, we will own the system and will directly benefit from the solar production on monthly bills instead of the annual production credit. This program provides the quickest financial payback of any model at 10 years and allows the City to finally start generating renewable energy. The 10 year contractual language will need to be vetted by the city attorney’s office as part of required documentation to qualify. NEXT STEPS: This item is tentatively placed on the October 17, 2016 agenda pending approval of the lease and power purchase agreement from the attorney. The item will be a motion for the City to enter into a 10 year lease and Power Purchase Agreement with Apex, in compliance with the Made in MN program requirements. Expected installation of the panels would occur spring of 2017. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: A pro forma will be provided to predict the annual solar production, power costs, and incentive rebates. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Shannon Pinc, Environment & Sustainability Coordinator Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. This report is intended to provide the City Council with a summary of the Two Wheels on 28th event. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Was this event consistent with our efforts to enhance our public participation process? Will the feedback received assist Council with policy decisions regarding the implementation of the Connect the Park Capital Improvement Plan? SUMMARY: As part of the Connect the Park Capital Improvement Plan (CTP CIP), there is a proposed bikeway along the 28th Street corridor between Virginia Avenue and Highway 100. This bikeway is planned for implementation in 2017. The CTP CIP includes the construction of 32 miles of bikeways throughout the City. To date the City has installed 6 miles. Over the last couple of years, bikeway projects have generated significant community conversation both in support and opposition of the facilities. In an effort to reach a wider audience to gain feedback, engineering staff began planning in June to host a demonstration event to highlight what bikeway facilities could look like on 28th Street through a temporary installation. The goal of the event was to stage an “on-street open house” that would function similarly to a conventional public open house for engineering projects. During the event, attendees would be able to bike along 28th Street in temporary bikeway facilities and provide feedback at organized stations along the route. With help from a Hennepin County active living grant, the event was held on Sunday, September 18th, between 1-4pm. City & Hennepin County staff, as well as volunteers and team leaders from the Musicant Group, helped set up, take down, and facilitate the event. The team established a goal for the event to host 150 official attendees and to collect at least 100 surveys. In total, 179 people were counted as official attendees, and staff received 133 surveys. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The total cost of the event was $11,633.57. The City received $5,000 in grant funding from Hennepin County the remaining cost will be paid for using General Obligation Bond proceeds that were previously issued for Connect the Park projects. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Event Map Event Photos Attachment 1 – Survey Data Prepared by: Chris Iverson, Transportation Engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 2 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The engineering and communications staff have been developing new ideas and tools to enhance the public process associated with projects. In 2016, various ideas have been tested as a part of the public participation process for 2017 engineering projects, including hosting an extra project kickoff public meeting, holding meetings closer to the project location, and refining our process to notify residents and councilmembers about upcoming project meetings. In addition to these new strategies, city staff raised the idea of hosting a demonstration event that would temporarily install an improvement before the project was approved for construction. In 2017, a bikeway along 28th Street is proposed for implementation. This east-west corridor changes character as you move from Virginia Avenue to Highway 100. 28th Street carries around 3,800 vehicles on the west end near Virginia Avenue, and about 1,500 vehicles on the east end near Dakota Avenue. This street was selected as the optimal location for a demonstration event due to its consistent east-west nature, residential neighborhood character, and relatively low vehicle counts. Event Planning Engineering staff coordinated the various aspects of the event. Hennepin County provided the City with an active living grant to help with costs associated with the event, and provided staff support for planning and event day purposes. The city hired the Musicant Group to be the producers of the event and help facilitate event planning. Team meetings were held in August and September to plan the event. Operations & Recreation, Police, Fire, Community Development, and Administration staff were all consulted to help guide the planning efforts, and all departments played important roles in making this event a success. The goal of the event was to stage an “on-street open house” that would take the place of a conventional open house for engineering projects. During the event, attendees would be able to bike along 28th Street in temporary bikeway facilities and provide feedback at organized stations along the route. Event Methods The event was hosted on Sunday, September 18th, 2016, between 1–4 pm. Motor vehicles were permitted to drive along 28th Street throughout the entirety of the event, including setup and takedown. To illustrate the various potential types of bike facilities the city could install on the street, different temporary layouts were used. Between Virginia Avenue and Louisiana Avenue, the existing north side parking lane was transformed into a two-way, bollard-protected cycle track for bicyclists. Yellow duct tape and orange cones were used to delineate the bikeway. Between Louisiana Avenue and Dakota Avenue, conventional bike lanes were installed using white duct tape. Between Dakota Avenue and Birchwood Park, a “share the road” was implemented as the bike facility. Throughout the corridor, bike symbols were sprayed onto the pavement using temporary white chalk. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 3 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary Four different stations were added along 28th Street to allow attendees to stop, complete a survey about the bike facilities, play lawn games, and receive refreshments. Local businesses helped contribute to the event, including Jonny- Pops, Erik’s Bike Shop, Hoigaard’s, Pros of the Rope, and Dreamer’s Vault. Hennepin County placed bike counting equipment on the bikeways, and helped staff the Ainsworth Park station. Three Rivers Park District supplied materials and games at the TexaTonka Park station. Event Summary The team established a goal for the event to host 150 official attendees and to collect at least 100 surveys. Attendees were counted by placing stickers on their shirts, and Jonny- Pops were offered to those who completed a survey about the bike facilities. In total, 179 stickers were given out and were counted as official attendees. In addition, 133 surveys were received from respondents. Other bicyclists and passers-by that did not stop at a feedback station were observed using the facilities on 28th Street. Bike count data collected from Hennepin County showed that a total of 174 bicyclists used the facility in the 1-4pm event timeslot. The event surveys had a total of 10 multiple choice questions that asked about their interest in bikeways, facility preference, and others. Of the 133 surveys received, 36 of them had additional comments. Survey responses and comment categories are attached. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 4 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary EVENT MAP Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 5 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary EVENT PHOTOS Feedback Station at Birchwood Park Bicyclists on cycletrack near TexaTonka Park Placing bike symbols on 28th St Feedback Station at Dakota Avenue Bicyclists on cycletrack near Ainsworth Park Placing tape on 28th Street Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 6 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary ATTACHMENT 1 – Survey Feedback 1.) How did you arrive to the event? Walk Bike Bus Drive 2.) Where did you come from to participate in the event today? Home Local Business Cedar Lake Trail Other 3.) How safe did you feel using the temporary bikeways? Very Safe Safe Needs Improvement Not Safe 4.) How were the sight lines while using the temporary bikeways? Easy to see At times it was easy Not at all easy 5.) How you felt overall using the temporary bikeways? Bad Fine Okay Good Great 6.) Are you more aware of the proximity between the Cedar Lake Trail and 28th Street because of this event? Yes No Not Sure Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 11) Page 7 Title: Two Wheels on 28th – Event Summary Feedback Comment Categories Comment Category Quantity General support for bikeways on 28th & around St. Louis Park 9 Concerns about bikeway safety 6 Desire for more north-south bike routes 3 Concerns about parking impacts 3 Desire for bike safety improvements at intersections 3 Desire for bike routes on Texas Avenue 2 Comment Category Quantity Desire for addressing Wooddale & Highway 7 bridge 2 Concerns about winter safety 2 Bikeway design recommendations 2 Concerns about motor traffic impacts from bike lanes 1 Desire for more bike route signage 1 Against bikeway 1 Emphasize road rules 1 7.) Which type of bikeway did you prefer? Cycletrack Bike Lanes Sharrows Didn't Try Other 8.) What would you use this bikeway for on a regular basis? Work School Shopping Exercise Enjoyment 9.) How often do you bike in St. Louis Park? Every Day At least once a week Monthly Seasonally Never 10.) Are you in support of a bikeway on 28th Street? Yes Maybe No Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: October 10, 2016 Written Report: 12 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. The purpose of this report is inform the EDA of the need for an Assignment and Subordination related to Phase 111 of the Central Park West Redevelopment Contract. SUMMARY: The hotel required within the Central Park West Redevelopment Contract (specifically Phase III of the Third Amendment to the Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment with Central Park West, LLC and assigned to RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality) received its final zoning approvals on April 4, 2016. The developer, TPI Hospitality, has subsequently been refining the building’s interior design with the hotel franchise, AC Hotel by Marriott, and securing the project’s construction financing. TPI Hospitality has recently informed staff that it expects to close on its financing by the end of October and commence construction immediately thereafter. The project is expected to be completed by February 2018 which is approximately 6 months later than the required completion date specified in the Contract. As a requirement of its financing, TPI Hospitality’s lender, Johnson Bank, has requested that the EDA and City approve an Assignment and Subordination Agreement. The proposed Assignment and Subordination of Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment is primarily an agreement by the EDA and City to subordinate their rights under the Contract to the rights of Johnson Bank under the construction mortgage securing the hotel developer’s construction loan. The developer is also collaterally assigning its rights under the Contract to Johnson Bank. This does not mean that the lender has any of the rights or obligations under the Contract upon execution of the Assignment and Subordination, but instead that the lender will have those rights if the hotel developer commits an event of default under the Loan Agreement (see paragraph 3 of the Assignment and Subordination). There are two provisions of particular note within the proposed Agreement. Paragraph 7 makes it clear that although the City and EDA have waived the required date for commencement of construction of the hotel, they reserve the right to require a 4th Amendment to the Contract if construction is delayed past January 1, 2017. Paragraph 9 expressly provides that the rights of the Authority under the Assessment Agreement for the hotel are NOT subordinated to the Mortgage. The proposed Agreement is similar to other subordination agreements the EDA has approved previously. The proposed Agreement has been reviewed by the EDA’s legal counsel who recommends its approval. The proposed Agreement is scheduled for formal consideration by the EDA and City on October 17th. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None VISION CONSIDERATION: None SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proposed Assignment and Subordination Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 2 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract ASSIGNMENT AND SUBORDINATION OF AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT THIS ASSIGNMENT AND SUBORDINATION OF AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT (this “Agreement”), is made and entered into as of the ____ day of October, 2016, by and among the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”); ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”); ACSLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”), and JOHNSON BANK, a Wisconsin banking corporation (the “Lender”). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City, Authority and the Redeveloper (as Assignee pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract dated May 8, 2015 and recorded in the office of the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County, Minnesota as Document No. T05254079) are parties to that Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated as of May 17, 2010, as amended by a First Amendment to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated as of November 21, 2011, a Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated as of May 8, 2015, and a Third Amendment to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated as of May 2, 2016, and as the same may be further amended or modified from time to time (the “Development Contract”); WHEREAS, all capitalized terms used herein, unless otherwise defined herein, shall have the meanings given them in the Development Contract; and WHEREAS, the Development Contract contemplates certain development of the Redevelopment Property which is to include the construction of Central Park West Phase III of certain Minimum Improvements, consisting of a 120-150 room hotel (the “Hotel Phase”) on the real property located in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (the “Hotel Parcel”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of that certain Loan Agreement dated __________ ____, 2016 by and between the Lender and Redeveloper (the “Loan Agreement”), the Lender has agreed to make a $19,250,000 construction loan (the “Loan”) to the Redeveloper; and WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has executed in favor of Lender that certain Promissory Note dated ______________ ____, 2016 in the original principal amount of $19,250,000 (the “Note”), evidencing the original principal amount of the Loan; and WHEREAS, the Note is secured by that certain Construction Mortgage, Security Agreement, Assignment of Rents and Leases and Fixture Financing Statement encumbering the Mixed-Use Project dated _________ ___, 2016 (the “Mortgage”), executed by the Redeveloper in favor of the Lender and filed of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota on ______________ as Document No. _____________, and in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, on ______________ as Document No. _______________; and Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 3 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract WHEREAS, the Lender has required, as an express condition to extending the Loan to Redeveloper pursuant to the Loan Agreement, (a) that the Redeveloper assign to the Lender its rights under the Development Contract with regard to the Hotel Phase to secure the obligations of the Redeveloper to the Lender under the Loan, (b) that the Development Contract be subordinated to the Mortgage, and (c) that the Authority agree to certain other matters, all as more fully contained herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. The Redeveloper hereby assigns to the Lender all of its right, title and interest under and pursuant to the Development Contract as to the Hotel Phase only (the “Hotel Rights”) to secure the Redeveloper’s obligations under the Loan. 2. The Redeveloper hereby represents and warrants to the Lender that Redeveloper has made no prior assignments of the Development Contract, that the Development Contract is a valid enforceable agreement and that none of the Redeveloper, the City, nor the Authority is in default thereunder and that all covenants, conditions and agreements have been performed as required therein, except those not to be performed until after the date hereof. The Redeveloper hereby agrees not to sell, assign, pledge, mortgage or otherwise transfer or encumber its interest in the Hotel Phase Rights as long as this Agreement is in effect. The Redeveloper hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints the Lender as its attorney-in-fact to demand, receive and enforce the Redeveloper’s rights with respect to the Hotel Phase Rights for and on behalf of and in the name of the Redeveloper or, at the option of the Lender, in the name of the Lender, with the same force and effect as the Redeveloper could do if this Agreement had not been made. 3. This Agreement shall constitute a perfected, absolute and present assignment, provided that Lender shall have no right under this Agreement to enforce the provisions of the Development Contract with regard to the Hotel Phase Rights or exercise any rights or remedies under this Agreement until an Event of Default (as that term is defined in the Loan Agreement) shall occur and be continuing. 4. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the Lender may, without affecting any of its rights or remedies against the Redeveloper under any other instrument, document or agreement, exercise its rights under this Agreement as the Redeveloper’s attorney-in-fact in any manner permitted by law and in addition the Lender shall have the right to exercise and enforce any and all rights and remedies available after a default to a secured party under the Uniform Commercial Code as adopted in the State of Minnesota. If notice to the Redeveloper of any intended disposition of collateral or of any intended action is required by law in any particular instance, such notice shall be commercially reasonable if given in writing at least ten (10) days prior to the intended disposition or other action. 5. The City and Authority hereby consent and agree to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The City and Authority further represent to the Lender that the Development Contract is a valid agreement enforceable in accordance with its terms and that none of the City, the Authority or the Redeveloper is in default thereunder and that all covenants, conditions and agreements have been performed as required therein, except those not to be performed until after the date hereof. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 4 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract 6. The Authority hereby acknowledges and agrees that the Authority has received from the Redeveloper the Construction Plans for the Hotel Phase and has approved such Construction Plans for all purposes of the Development Contract as required by Section 4.2 of the Development Contract. 7. The City and Authority hereby acknowledge and agree that the requirement in Section 4.3(a) of the Development Contract regarding commencement of construction of the Hotel Phase has been waived by the City and Authority as of the date hereof based on continued good- faith progress by the Redeveloper toward commencement of construction of the Hotel Phase. The City and Authority further agree to work with the Redeveloper in good faith to negotiate and execute an amendment to the Development Contract, providing for extended commencement and completion dates of the Hotel Phase, in the event that commencement of construction of the Hotel Phase is delayed beyond January 1, 2017. 8. The City and Authority hereby acknowledge and agree that the Mortgage and the Loan Agreement have been approved by the City and Authority and that the defined term “Mortgage” as set forth in Section 1.1 of the Development Contract shall hereinafter include the Mortgage and any and all amendments, supplements, modifications, renewals, extensions or replacements thereto, thereof or therefor. 9. The City and Authority hereby expressly agree and acknowledge that the Development Contract, including, without limitation, all terms, conditions, provisions and obligations set forth therein, is subject to and subordinate to the lien of the Mortgage, but solely with respect to the Hotel Phase; provided, however, that pursuant to Section 7.2(a)(iii), the rights of the Authority as to the Assessment Agreement for the Hotel Phase shall not be subordinated. 10. Pursuant to Section 5.2 of the Development Contract, the Authority acknowledges that the rights of the Authority with respect to the receipt and application of any proceeds of insurance awards with respect to the Hotel Phase shall, in all respects, be subject and subordinate to the rights of the Lender under the Mortgage. 11. The Authority hereby agrees to provide the Lender with copies of any notice of default given under the Development Contract, and that the Lender shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within the time period specified in the Development Contract. 12. Pursuant to Section 7.2(a)(ii) of the Development Contract, the Lender hereby agrees to provide the Authority with copies of any notice of default given to the Redeveloper under the Loan Agreement, and that the Authority shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure periods as are available to the Redeveloper as provided in the Loan Agreement and Mortgage. 13. The parties hereto hereby agree that no change or amendment having a material adverse effect on the Hotel Phase shall be made to any terms of the Development Contract without the prior written consent of the Lender. 14. This Agreement can be waived, modified, amended, terminated or discharged only explicitly in a writing signed by all parties hereto. A waiver by the Lender shall be effective only in a specific instance and for the specific purpose given. Mere delay or failure to act shall not preclude the exercise or enforcement of any of the Lender’s rights or remedies hereunder. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 5 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract All rights and remedies of the Lender shall be cumulative and shall be exercised singularly or concurrently, at the Lender’s option, and any exercise or enforcement of any one such right or remedy shall neither be a condition to nor bar the exercise or enforcement of any other. 15. No provision of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to alter, amend or modify, in any way, the rights and obligations of the City or Authority contained in the Development Contract. 16. The City, the Authority and the Redeveloper acknowledge that the Lender is not a party to the Development Contract, and the Lender shall not, by executing this Agreement or by exercising its rights and remedies hereunder or under the Mortgage or the Loan Agreement, incur any obligations of any kind or otherwise be or become liable to the City, Authority or anyone, whether under the Development Contract or otherwise; nor shall the City or Authority, by executing this Agreement, incur any obligations of any kind or otherwise be or become liable to the Redeveloper or the Lender or anyone, whether under the Mortgage, the Loan Agreement or otherwise. 17. The City and Authority hereby represent to the Lender that the making, execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by the City and Authority have been authorized by all necessary action of the City and Authority, and that this Agreement is the valid and binding obligation of the City and Authority, enforceable against the City and Authority and their successors and assigns in accordance with its terms. 18. Any notices, communications and waivers under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be (a) delivered in person, (b) mailed, postage prepaid, either by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or (c) by overnight express carrier, addressed in each case as follows: To Lender: Johnson Bank 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1210 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Attention: Michael Fitzpatrick To Redeveloper: ACSLP, LLC 103 15th Avenue NW Suite 200 Willmar, Minnesota 56201 Attention: ______________ To City: City of St. Louis Park 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 Attention: City Manager To Authority: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 Attention: Executive Director Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 6 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract or to any other address as to any of the parties hereto, as such party shall designate in a written notice to the other party hereto. All notices sent pursuant to the terms of this Paragraph shall be deemed received (i) if personally delivered, then on the date of delivery, (ii) if sent by overnight, express carrier, then on the next federal banking day immediately following the day sent, or (iii) if sent by registered or certified mail, then on the earlier of the third federal banking day following the day sent or when actually received. 19. This Agreement shall be binding upon the City, the Authority, the Redeveloper and the Lender and their respective successors and assigns and shall inure to the benefit of and may be enforced by the Lender and its successors and assigns, including the purchaser in any foreclosure sale or the transferee in any transfer in lieu of foreclosure of the Hotel Phase. 20. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 21. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by the different parties hereto on separate counterparts and each such counterpart shall be deemed to be an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same Agreement. Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 7 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and entered into this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY: CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation By: Its: Mayor By: Its: City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of October, 2016, by Jake Spano and Thomas Harmening, the Mayor and City Manager, respectively, of the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 8 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract AUTHORITY: ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota By: Its: President By: Its: Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of October, 2016, by Anne Mavity and Thomas Harmening, the President and Executive Director, respectively, of the ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 9 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract REDEVELOPER: ACSLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company By: Name: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ___________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ____________, 2016, by __________________, the ______________________ of ACSLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, for and on behalf of such limited liability company. ______________________________ Notary Public Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 10 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract LENDER: JOHNSON BANK, a Wisconsin banking corporation By: ______________________________ Name: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ___________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________________, 2016, by ___________________________, the ________________________ of JOHNSON BANK, a Wisconsin bankingcCorporation, for and on behalf of such corporation. ______________________________ Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (MNI) 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 470 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 337-9300 Study Session Meeting of October 10, 2016 (Item No. 12) Page 11 Title: Update on Hotel Phase of Central Park West Redevelopment Contract EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Hotel Parcel The real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as follows: Lot 3, Block 1, Central Park West P.U.D. No. 121