Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/11/14 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA NOVEMBER 14, 2016 6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Items 1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – November 7 & 14, 2016 2. 6:35 p.m. Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing 3. 7:35 p.m. Advancing Racial Equity - Moving Forward Together as a City 4. 8:20 p.m. Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers 9:05 p.m. Communications/Updates (Verbal) 9:10 p.m. Adjourn Written Reports 5. West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017-1700 6. Water Treatment Plants #4 & #6 Improvements 7. Update on Proposed EDA Property Acquisition from Hennepin County 8. Residential Knox Box Key Vault Program 9. Upcoming Resolution Supporting Sela Group’s Submission of a Grant Application 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: November 14, 2016 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – November 21 and November 28, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the Special Study Session on November 21 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on November 28, 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 November 21 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on November 28, 2016. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – November 21 & 28, 2016 Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – November 21 and November 28, 2016 NOVEMBER 21, 2016 6:45 p.m. – Special Study Session – Council Chambers Tentative Discussion Items 1. Westwood Hills Nature Center Project – Operations & Recreation (45 minutes) Staff will be present to talk through the goals and purpose of a new nature center building. NOVEMBER 28, 2016 6:30 p.m. – Study Session – Council Chambers Tentative Discussion Items 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. Place TIF Application – Community Development (30 minutes) Review and discuss PLACE’s application for tax increment financing related to its proposed mixed-use project adjacent to the SWLRT Wooddale Station. 3. SWLRT Agreements – Community Development (30 minutes) The Southwest Project Office (SPO) is requesting that St. Louis Park City Council approve agreements in early January that would commit the City to paying for the construction of the Locally Requested Capital Improvements (LRCIs) and the extra base project elements. At the meeting Staff will review all of the improvements and the associated costs for them. 4. Council Chambers Remodeling Plans with KOMA Architects – Community Development (45 minutes) Staff from KOMA Architects will be in attendance to provide cost analysis for the option of re-orientating the chambers for council’s consideration. 5. Agenda for 2017 City Council Workshop – Administrative Services (30 minutes) Discuss the agenda for the City Council Workshop scheduled for January 26-27, 2016 as a means to allow further planning to occur. 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: 8:55 p.m. Written Reports 6. Financial Management Policies Update Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Discussion Item: 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. The purpose of this report is to present an overview on preserving naturally occurring affordable rental housing in St. Louis Park (SLP) and the Twin Cities metropolitan area and provide a summary of strategies and tools being explored to address the issue. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. None at this time. What is the role for SLP in preserving and expanding the affordable housing supply in SLP? What if any potential strategies or tools would the council wish to explore? SUMMARY: Across the Twin Cities, rental housing is in short supply, especially for low income families. Since 2010 the rental vacancy rate in the Twin Cities has remained below 5 percent. According to the recent Marquette Apartment Trends report, the vacancy rate declined to 2.5 percent during the third quarter of 2016 and the average market rent was $1,091, a 5.4 percent increase compared to last year. The rising cost of housing has contributed to a number of cost burdened households, particularly among those with lower incomes. The shortage of affordable housing and the likelihood of continued rent increases create a need to expand the region’s housing supply and preserve the current stock of affordable rental housing. Over the past year, preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) has become a topic of great concern region wide. Low vacancies combined with a reported increase in apartment building sales to investors has resulted in renovated units and rising rents. Most of these properties are Class B and Class C multi-family properties built prior to 1990 and offer lower rents affordable to low and moderate income households. These properties provide the majority of affordable housing in our region without subsidy. The conversion of these properties to higher rents puts the displacement of low income families and individuals at risk. The Met Council projects that the Twin Cities will need 52,000+ new affordable housing units of all types (owned and rented) between 2011 and 2020. As the region strives to find ways to create more affordable housing opportunities to meet this growing demand, the need to preserve the existing naturally affordable housing becomes of even greater concern for regional policy makers, housing industry staff and housing advocates. We’ll examine the problem and present various initiatives, tools and strategies that are being explored to address this issue. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Strategies to Preserve Affordable Housing Memo Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, Deputy CD Director and Housing Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, CD Director Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Over the past several months the council has identified a number of housing related topics as areas to further explore at future Study Sessions. A topic that is gaining concern region wide but also one that has impacted St. Louis Park directly as a result of the recent majority ownership transition of Meadowbrook Manor is the preservation of NOAH. The shortage of affordable housing and the likelihood of continued rent increases create a need to expand the region’s housing supply and preserve the current stock of affordable rental housing. Recent Trends: Across the Twin Cities, rental housing is in short supply, especially for low income families. The rising cost of housing has contributed to a number of cost burdened households, particularly among those with lower incomes. Lower income renters must compete with a growing number of renters with higher incomes for sparsely available non-luxury apartments of decent quality and in safe neighborhoods. The Twin Cities renter population grew by 9 percent between 2010 and 2014 with the number of renters with incomes over $50,000 per year by 29% while lower income households (less than $50,000) increased by only 1%. Unfortunately, those particularly disadvantaged in this competitive market are low income renters with limited choice and any renters with any blemishes on their rental record or with less than stellar credit. According to a recent study by the Minnesota Housing Partnership (MHP), in response to more renters with incomes in excess of $100,000 a year, developers began building developments to meet the demand in the luxury apartment market. But the study also found that as the luxury market boomed, other developers saw an opportunity to cater to the next economic rung down, often in the next neighborhood over. Developers began purchasing buildings that were a bit run down but in desirable areas, then added features like granite countertops and stainless steel appliances and amenities like fitness centers. Low vacancies combined with the reported increase in apartment building sales to investors has resulted in renovated units and raised rents. The MHP report states that the pace and scale of the sale of apartment buildings has accelerated since 2010 as the region began pulling out of the Great Recession. The report also states that there was a 165 percent increase in sales of apartment buildings in the metro area between 2010 and 2015 and that the number of units sold went from 3,124 in 2010 to 9,217 in 2015. The impact from apartment sales are not all bad. In fact, there are benefits from investment in the city and region’s housing stock including improving living conditions, extending the life of aging apartment properties and bringing in improved management. But vacancy rates remain low in the metro area and with rising rents many believe the loss of affordable housing outweighs any benefits. Continued concerns related to the value added apartment building sales include:  Upscaling older properties and diminishing affordability  New rental policies forcing tenants to move  Making communities less diverse PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Multi-Family Units with Potential to “Upscale”: Forty-seven percent of the overall housing stock in St Louis Park is rental (non-homesteaded) housing. Multi-family rental properties make up a significant portion of the rental housing and the majority of the city’s unsubsidized affordable housing. There are over 7,829 units in 179 multi-family rental parcels that have 4 or more units. The majority of the multi-family rental buildings in St. Louis Park were built prior to 1987 and are classified B- and C Class buildings; 6,073 units (seventy-eight percent). These units are smaller in Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing size, have few amenities and are more affordable than the recently built luxury buildings. These are the buildings most likely to be purchased as value added investments. Ninety percent of the parcels and seventy-one percent of the units are in Class B- and C buildings. Market Rate Multi-family Parcels Building Class Parcels Units Class A 12 1,583 Class B 5 669 Class B- 11 1,351 Class C 151 4,226 Total 179 7,829 Rent restricted housing parcels are not included Multi-family Average Rents: In June of 2013, Maxfield Research completed a citywide Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis. The results indicated that the majority of the multi- family rental units in St. Louis Park had rents that were affordable to households earning 50% to 60% of the Hennepin County AMI. Among the 6,000 market rate units inventoried, nearly 45% of the units were affordable to households at 50% AMI. Together with 26% of the units affordable at 60% AMI, 71% of the market rate rental housing inventory was affordable to 50% to 60% AMI. Based on the results of the Housing Authority’s 2015 rental survey, average and median rents in St Louis Park’s multi-family rental units are rising, similar to what is being experienced region wide, but many properties are still affordable. Rent levels in the 2015 HA rental survey for units in buildings built prior to 1987 were affordable to households at the 50 - 55% AMI level. The average and median rents for units built after 1987 were significantly higher. Qualified Multi-family Parcel Sales from 2011 to 2016 Year Number of Parcels Number of Units 2011 1 4 2012 8 439 2013 5 202 2014 2 168 2015 8 472 2016 (to date) 2* 349* Total 26 1,634 Qualified sales are sales used in setting valuations – excludes refinancing, sale to related parties, etc. *Includes Excelsior & Grand sale but not Meadowbrook Qualified Multi-family Parcel Sales by Building Class 2011 - 2016 Building Class Parcels Sales 2011 - 2016 # of Units in Sold Parcels Class A 1 338 (E & G) Class B 3 534* Class B- 1 186 Class C 21 576** 26 1,634 *Avana on Seven (167 units) sold twice in Class B. ** Four Class C parcels (49 units) sold twice Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing During this same period, 1,109 new market rate multi-family units were constructed in SLP and 511 are currently under construction. According to the NAI Everst Multifamily 3rd Quarter Construction Pipeline Report, 16,086 new multifamily units were constructed between 2010 and 2016 and another 6,327 are under construction. Dougherty Mortgage LLC reports in their Market Viewpoint report that a total of 76 projects offering 4,584 affordable units were built from 2010 to 2015. Strategies and Tools: The properties in question are privately owned and not subject to rent or income restrictions associated with subsidized housing, there is a limit to what can be done to retain affordability in these developments. Multiple housing industry groups, housing advocates, affordable housing developers and regional and local public and private partners are working both individually and together to explore long term and sustainable approaches to preserve NOAH within our community and region wide. A community wide approach increases the opportunity to leverage resources and support in seeking and implementing legislative initiatives and increased funding. Below is a list of policies, strategies and tools that are being explored as possible initiatives to expand the region’s housing supply and preserve the current stock of affordable rental housing. In addition, simply increasing the supply of all rental housing would tend to increase vacancy rates and reduce upward pressure on rents. Displacement Remedies Preserve & Fund New Affordable Units Stabilize Neighborhoods & Promote Diversity  Just Cause, tenant protections  Discrimination Enforcement  Exclusionary Admission Standards  Code Enforcement  Tenant Counseling  Tenant Rental Assistance  Tenant Right to Purchase Laws  Community Organizing  Project-based Section 8 Preservation  Rental Building Acquisition  Right of First Refusal  Notice of Sale Period  Foreclosure Prevention  One-for-one Replacement  Permit Streamlining/fee reduction  Tax Exemptions  Affordable Housing Tax  Bonds for Housing Construction  Housing Rehab Programs  Homeownership Programs  Leverage through Zoning  Greater Height/Density Bonuses/Inclusionary Hsg.  Reduced Parking Requirements  Housing Trust Funds  Station Area Planning  Reduced Barriers to Second Units  Public Land Disposition  Land Acquisition/Land Trusts  Transportation Investments  Incentives to Accept Rental Assistance Highlighted below are several local examples of initiatives in process implementing new programs or are in the planning stages. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing Housing Justice Center Memo: Tim Thompson of the Housing Justice Center drafted a memo outlining a number of possible strategies and policy responses to address the preservation of NOAH. The city requested that our legal counsel review the memo and provide a preliminary opinion on application of these strategies and tools on a local level. A memo from Soren Mattick outlining the proposed strategies with legal counsel’s comments is attached for your review. A brief over view of the options outlined in the memo will be provided at Monday’s meeting. NOAH Impact Fund: Greater MN Housing Fund created the NOAH Impact Fund to help preserve the state’s unsubsidized affordable rental housing. The fund utilizes investments from foundations, banks and local and regional governments to finance acquisition and preservation of rental housing to preserve affordability for the long term. Staff from the Greater MN Housing Fund will present an overview of this initiative and explain how cities can help support their effort including identifying at risk properties. GMHF has undertaken two pilot projects in 2015 to demonstrate viability and test the concept. Another local organization, the MN Housing Partnership, is also seeking to create a locally raised and controlled affordable housing fund called the Metro Home Grown Fund to finance units for extremely low-income households. ULI Regional Council of Mayors: NOAH is a topic that is being examined by ULI’s Regional Council of Mayors (RCM). The RCM Council members would like to use the power of the council to move the needle on increasing affordable housing by:  Legislative support for various initiatives  Identify at risk properties  Develop relationship with owners and tenants of rental properties  Promote use of tools – NOAH Impact Fund, Freddie mac NOAH Program  Encourage county/city Funding for preservation There was a presentation and discussion at the October RCM meeting and the Council is planning to discuss the topic again related to setting the Council’s 2017 priorities at their upcoming meeting. St. Louis Park “Partners for a Strong Park”: Pathways to Partnership, a community effort bringing together leadership committed to social and economic wellness for neighbors in the Park, came together in 2014. This effort, spearheaded by the faith community, intends to establish a community collaborative committed to holding space for regular dialogue and problem solving that addresses the challenges of poverty and impacts it has on the community. They have established a Steering Committee that began meeting recently to develop the vision for their organization. Afton Martens, Joint Community Police Partnership Community Liaison is serving as a city representative on the Steering Committee. City of St. Louis Park Initiatives: In support of the city’s housing goals to promote and facilitate a balanced and enduring housing stock that offers a continuum of diverse lifecycle housing choices for households in all income levels including affordable housing, the city administers a number of programs to create affordable housing and support the preservation of NOAH including: Rental Assistance  Housing Choice Voucher Program – 268 allocated units (40 units Project Based)  Public Housing Program – 157 units  Continuum of Care (CoC) Rental Assistance (Shelter plus Care) – 21 units  Hennepin County STABLE Home Shallow Rental Assistance Program – 23 current participants - 45 unit max  Shallow Rent Subsidy Program proposed for 2017 to assist Families with Children in the School District Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 6 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing  Funding provided to STEP for emergency rental assistance grants Promote and Support Responsible Property Management  SPARC – Landlord Coalition  Rental Licensing/Crime Free Training Affordable Homeownership  West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust – 14 single family homes  Live Where You Work - Down Payment/Closing Cost Assistance Promote the Creation of Affordable Housing Units  Adopted Inclusionary Housing Policy in June 2015  Land Banking/selling public land to affordable housing developer  Providing Financial Assistance in the form of Tax Increment Financing Preservation of NOAH  Issued $4.5 million in General Obligation Bonds, CDBG funds and deferred loan to finance Louisiana Court acquisition and rehab  Meadowbrook Collaborative Partner/engaged owner and worked to secure concessions during recent ownership transition  City CDBG funds support rehab activities for affordable housing Staff continues to represent the city on the SWLRT Corridor Housing Committee. The committee created a Corridor Housing Strategy to support a full range of housing choices along the corridor and in the station areas. One of the four objectives identified to support corridor housing goals is to preserve existing housing opportunities. The preservation target is to preserve 3,800 unsubsidized affordable rental units by 2030 within 1.2 mile of the Corridor. The Committee recently dedicate two meetings to discussing the topic the preservation of NOAH. Further discussions are planned for future meetings. NEXT STEPS: Following Monday’s meeting, staff will follow up on any potential strategies or tools related to preserving and expanding the affordable housing supply in SLP that the council wishes to explore further. There are three remaining housing related topics identified by the council for further discussion. The three remaining topics identified include: Those areas include: 1. Expanding our Inclusionary Housing Policy/creation of new affordable housing units: Should our policy require developments beyond those requesting financial assistance from the city to include affordable housing units in their development? 2. Senior Housing: How do we increase the supply of senior housing, especially affordable senior housing? 3. Market Trends: What are the new multi-family construction trends? What is the outlook for apartment development – how much and where? Who is renting? Staff has proposed to bring each topic to a future Study Session for further discussion. Staff will confirm with council on if there are other topics they would like added to this list and on which next topic they would like to discuss next. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 7 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing MEMORANDUM From: Soren M. Mattick To: Michele Schnitker Re: Strategies to Preserve Affordable Housing Date: November 8, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________________ I. STRATEGIES TO PRESERVE AFFORDABILITY A. Right of First Refusal. When owners offer their buildings for sale, they would be required to notify the tenants and a designated unit of government of any purchase agreement entered into. The tenants or the government unit would then have a defined period of time to meet the price and purchase the building themselves. The law in this area is unsettled. There is no Minnesota case law addressing statutory right of first refusal. A statutory right of first refusal was held not to be a taking in Greenfield Country Estates Tenant’s Assoc. v. Deep, 666 N.E.2d 988 (Mass. 1996). However, a statutory right of first refusal was held to be a taking in violation of the Washington State Constitution in Manufactured Housing Communities of Washington v. State of Washington, 13 P.3d 183 (Wash. 2000). A right of first refusal requirement might discourage the creation of additional affordable housing in the City. B. Notice Period. A softer approach than ROFR, this would be a local (or regional if by state law) requirement that for certain defined buildings, the tenants and local government must be given advance notice prior to the sale of any building. The tenants or local government would have the opportunity to attempt to negotiate a purchase with the seller, though they would not have a legal right to match any price negotiated by another buyer. Several cities have taken this approach, including Denver and Portland. We will be investigating to see what the experience has been with those two cities. In addition, both the City of Minneapolis and Hennepin County are concerned with the lack of advance notice when rent controls are expiring on locally assisted housing developments, such as bond deals. The City and County both want to explore imposing notice requirements in such situations in the future. (While not technically NOAH properties, they are transitioning to NOAH status as controls expire.) I found no case law addressing an ordinance requirement that notice be given to local government prior to the sale of buildings with affordable housing. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 8 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing C. Local programs offering rehab financing in return for affordability commitments. Some cities offer attractive financing to multifamily property owners in exchange for affordability covenants. How well are they working? Could they be expanded /improved? Centerpoint and Excel have a new program designed to encourage energy efficiency investments in multifamily properties, with enhanced incentives for subsidized rental properties. Perhaps those incentives could be extended to NOAH owners in exchange for affordability commitments. An HRA has authority to “develop and administer an interest reduction program to assist the financing, construction, rehabilitation, and purchase of housing units which are intended primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income and related subordinate facilities.” Minn. Stat. § 469.012 subd. 7. D. Property tax and rent subsidy incentives. Minnesota’s 4d property tax program provides a 40% tax break for subsidized rental properties. However, this benefit could be extended to any properties receiving local “financial assistance” as long as the owner agrees to rent and income restrictions. One idea is that the local government provides a modest rent subsidy for some share of the units, meeting the “financial assistance” requirement, thus making those units also eligible for the 4d tax break. In return, the owner would commit to keeping that share of the units affordable for an agreed upon period of time. I have not found any specific authority for cities to provide rent subsidies. E. Incentives to address landlord concerns about renting to certain groups of tenants. This year the Legislature funded a pilot program to provide a landlord guarantee fund which would cover certain landlord losses in return for agreeing to rent to tenants with issues in their rental history. When the Oregon legislature recently enacted anti-discrimination protections for Section 8 tenants, they also created a fund to reimburse landlords for losses. A similar program could be created at a local level or, through state law, at a regional level. I have not found any specific authority for cities to cover landlord losses. F. Increasing local government leverage through zoning. A city could perhaps structure its zoning so as to require an owner engaging in certain conversion actions from doing so before obtaining the city’s zoning related approval. Standards would have to be defined to spell out the scope of the city’s approval requirements in this situation but it could provide the city with substantial leverage to influence the outcome of the building changes. In Washington State, for example, some cities have expressly zoned manufactured parks as such, so that attempts to change use would require a zoning change and city approval. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 9 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing The City has authority to enact official controls under Minn. Stat. § 462.357. Refusing to rezone property could result in a taking in some cases. See Wensmann v. City of Eagan, 734 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. 2007) (taking asserted when city failed to amend comprehensive plan designation of property from golf course to residential.) G. Prohibiting discrimination against Section 8 voucher holders and other recipients of government programs. Although landlord participation in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program is generally considered voluntary, a number of local and state laws have prohibited excluding applicants simply because they use a rent subsidy (often referred to as source of income discrimination). Minneapolis is currently considering such an ordinance. The state Human Rights Act includes a prohibition on source of income discrimination, but the Minnesota Court of Appeals has interpreted that provision to not cover Section 8 (a ruling which the Legislature could reverse by amending the Act.) The ultimate impact of such laws is not clear, though they do seem to dramatically reduce the number of landlords advertising, “No Section 8.” To be maximally effective, these laws need to include the proposed Minneapolis provision that the prohibited discrimination is based on status with regard to public assistance or any requirement of a public assistance program. The Massachusetts state law is similar. Under federal law, landlord participation in the Section 8 program is voluntary. 24 C.F.R. § 982.302(b) (2009); Edwards v. Hopkins Plaza Ltd. Partnership, 783 N.W.2d 171 (Minn. App. 2001). Courts have upheld laws banning discrimination on the basis of housing subsidies, including rental assistance, making the acceptance of Secion 8 vouchers essentially mandatory. However, in Knapp v. Eagle Property Management Corp., 54 F.3d 1272 (7th Cir. 1995), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals observed that allowing a state to make a voluntary federal program mandatory “seems questionable.” H. Other unfairly exclusionary admission standards. Though this may be partly a function of the tight market and the ability landlords have to choose among many tenants, there does seem to be a trend toward tightening admission standards. In some cases these standards may go too far. HUD recently issued a guidance setting out situations where overly broad criminal background checks may violate the Fair Housing Act. https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=HUD_OGCGuidAppFH AStandCR.pdf. Standards around minimum income requirements and minimum credit scores could go too far as well, and could be regulated through local ordinance or state legislation if a consensus can be developed on reasonable versions of these standards. Several of the larger nonprofit housing providers are currently jointly reviewing admission standards. Could the result of that lead to a set of best practice admission standards that cities in turn could require or encourage as part of their rental licensing programs? The tension between cities encouraging crime free housing that may entail overly restrictive admission requirements and this goal would have to be addressed. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 10 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing I found no case law addressing a city ordinance regulating exclusionary admission standards for rentals. I found no specific statutory authority for cities to enact this type of regulation. I. For cause eviction. This would establish a standard incorporated into leases requiring landlords to only evict for good cause, similar to the standard in most subsidized housing leases. Minnesota law also establishes a good cause standard for evictions from manufactured home parks, and two states and 16 cities have enacted similar laws to prevent arbitrary evictions. A recent legal analysis concluded that a local government just cause requirement would not conflict with or be preempted by Minnesota law. Some states have enacted anti-eviction statutes that only permit evictions “for cause.” There is no specific statutory authority for Minnesota cities to enact ordinances that only permit evictions for cause. Minnesota has enacted a state statute that limitation on evictions from manufactured home parks. Minn. Stat. § 327C.09. II. Strategies to mitigate the harm of displacement. Where the affordability of the housing cannot be preserved, there may be ways to partially mitigate the harm caused by displacement. A. Relocation benefits. In certain situations, the law now requires that displaced tenants be paid relocation benefits (such as government sponsored redevelopment or the closure of manufactured home parks). Chicago’s SRO ordinance requires this of owners of purely private housing. The obligation to pay relocation benefits to displaced tenants could be imposed upon the owner by local ordinance or state law. In some cases, if the relocation obligation is substantial enough, it may deter the owner from the displacement actions altogether. There may be legal issues however. In Arcadia Development Corp. v. City of Bloomington, 552 N.W.2d 281 (Minn. App. 1996) review denied (Oct. 29, 1996), the Minnesota Court of Appeals held a city ordinance requiring manufactured home park owners to pay relocation benefits to manufactured home owners when they closed the park was not a taking and did not violate due process. However, the city ordinance was passed pursuant to a state enabling statute. There is no statute that authorizes cities to enact ordinances requiring property owners to pay relocation benefits to tenants of properties other than manufactured home parks. In Aspen-Tarpon Springs Ltd. Partnership v. Stuart, 635 So.2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1994), the court held an ordinance requiring property owners to pay relocation benefits resulted in an unconstitutional taking because the ordinance required the property owner to disproportionately bear the community’s burden of lack of affordable housing. In Garneau v. City of Seattle, 897 F. Supp. 1318 (W.D. Wash. 1995), the federal district court held that an ordinance requiring property owners to pay relocation benefits did not violate substantive due process or equal protection. The court also held that the ordinance did not constitute a taking. Requiring owners of affordable housing to pay relocation benefits may discourage the creation of additional affordable housing in the City. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 2) Page 11 Title: Preservation of Naturally Occurring Affordable Rental Housing III. Strategies to replace or create more affordable housing in anticipation of losing some. A. One for One replacement. This would impose on the owner an obligation to replace any affordable units removed or rendered no longer affordable. Chicago has a provision like this, and Minneapolis has one for the limited situation where an owner eliminates SRO housing with the help of city financial assistance. Typically, these types of ordinances require replacement of affordable housing or a payment by the property owner in lieu of a replacement. An ordinance requiring one for one replacement of affordable housing units would be an exaction subject to review under Nollan/Dolan. See Koontz v. St. Johns River Water District, 133 S.Ct. 2586 (2013). Under Nollan/Dolan there has to be a nexus and rough proportionality between the property the government demands and the social cost of the applicant’s proposal. An ordinance that required one for one replacement and payment in lieu of replacement was held not to be a taking in Gagne v. City of Hartford, 1994 WL 16841 (unpublished opinion). However, the Gagne court analyzed the ordinance under the Penn Central test for a regulatory taking. After Koontz, it is likely that a court would analyze the ordinance under the more stringent test for exactions under Nollan/Dolan. Requiring replacement of affordable housing may discourage development or rehabilitation of property in the City. B. Inclusionary Zoning. This is a strategy often recommended for areas experiencing gentrification because the same conditions that cause the gentrification—a robust residential real estate market—often provide the circumstances for an effective Inclusionary Policy. IZ (or Inclusionary Housing or Mixed Income Housing ) is a local government policy that either requires or incents owners building market rate apartments to include affordable units. Whether inclusionary zoning schemes violate the Constitution’s takings clause is an unresolved issue. 2 Rathkopf’s The Law of Zoning and Planning § 25:27 (4th ed. 2016). There is no Minnesota case law addressing inclusionary zoning. In California Building Industry Assoc. v. City of San Jose, 351 P.3d 974 (Cal. 2015), the California Supreme Court held an ordinance that required developers to sell 15% of their on-site for-sale units at affordable housing prices was not a taking. However, in Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirty-Four Venture, L.L.C., 3 P.3d 30 (2000) the Supreme Court of Colorado held that an a home rule city’s ordinance that gave developers the option of (1) constructing new units and deed-restricting them as affordable housing; (2) deed restricting “existing free market units” as affordable housing; (3) paying fees in lieu of deed restricting housing; or (4) conveying title to the Town with fair market value equivalent to the fee paid under option three was invalid because affordable housing was a matter of statewide as well as local concern. And, in North End Realty, LLC v. Mattos, 25 A.3d 527 (R.I. 2011) the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that state statutes did not authorize a home rule town to charge a fee-in-lieu of undertaking construction of affordable housing, and the town could not require developers to pay the fee in the absence of statutory authority because affordable housing was a critical statewide need, and home rule municipalities could not legislate on matters of statewide concern. Inclusionary zoning may discourage development in the City. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Discussion Item: 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Advancing Racial Equity: Moving Forward Together as a City RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action needed at this time. The purpose is to continue discussion and provide information on work and communication related to our year-long participation in the Advancing Racial Equity and Transforming Government program with the Center for Social Inclusion (CSI) and League of Minnesota Cities (LMC). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are we moving in the right direction with “Advancing Racial Equity: Moving Forward Together as a City,” and following the vision of the council? SUMMARY: In 2016, a team from the City of St. Louis Park started work with CSI and LMC to learn about advancing racial equity and transforming government. As part of the program, participants attended a racial equity workshop and other training sessions throughout the year. Program leaders are Glenn Harris, CSI President, and Julie Nelson, Director, Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) and Senior Vice President, CSI. What is covered in this year-long program?  Understanding and awareness of racial equity.  Exploring the role, challenges, responsibilities, and opportunities for government to advance racial equity.  Developing racial equity tools to use when deciding policies, practices, programs and budget.  Learning about national best practices to implement racial equity as a key value and to integrate racial equity via new policies and institutional practice.  Creating connections and partnerships with other institutions and the community to advance racial equity region-wide. What will we cover at our study session meeting? We will provide an overview of program participation by the St. Louis Park team and an update on activities since last checking in with the council in July 2016 (included in discussion attachment). FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: Advancing Racial Equity: Moving Forward Together as a City DISCUSSION Racial Equity – Moving Forward Together as a City St. Louis Park, MN BACKGROUND: In 2016, a team from the City of St. Louis Park started work with Center for Social Inclusion (CSI) and League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to learn about advancing racial equity and transforming government. Program leaders are Glenn Harris, CSI President, and Julie Nelson, Director, Government Alliance on Race and Equity and Senior Vice President, CSI. Part of the program was to attend a racial equity workshop and other sessions throughout the year on racial equity. As program participants, we are:  Developing understanding and awareness of racial equity.  Exploring the role, challenges, responsibilities, and opportunities for government to advance racial equity in the metro area.  Developing racial equity tools to use when deciding policies, practices, programs and budget.  Learning about national best practices to normalize racial equity as a key value and operationalize racial equity via new policies and institutional practice.  Creating connections and partnerships with other institutions and the community to advance racial equity region-wide. Past, current and future steps:  January-December 2016: Participant in LMC, GARE and CSI Race, Equity and Inclusion program via a cohort team and elected track. Outcomes included a St. Louis Park Racial Equity Statement, Action Plan and development of next steps including staff training and requesting volunteers as department liaisons.  March-December 2016: Regular meeting of cohort team consisting of Jake Spano, Gregg Lindberg, Tom Harmening, John Luse, Jason West, Jacque Larson, Jane Adade, Sagal Abdirahman and Nancy Deno to work on St. Louis Park homework.  July 2016: Overview of racial equity program with supervisors. Council discussion on race, equity and inclusion.  September 2016: Meeting with Human Rights Commission (HRC) and Multicultural Advisory Committee (MAC). Overview of racial equity program and St. Louis Park demographics. Mayor Spano and Councilmember Lindberg attended the meeting and a request was made to both HRC and MAC to provide recommendation(s) to council.  September 2016: Increased staff support and leadership for race and equity work. City Manager Tom Harmening asked for staff volunteers (at least two from each of the eight departments) who would be interested in continuing race and equity learning, support and program development, and serve as liaisons/leaders to help support work and answer questions from staff in each department. After a great response from staff from all levels, we have 30 liaisons to help with continued race and equity work. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Title: Advancing Racial Equity: Moving Forward Together as a City  October 2016 Supervisor Training: CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin presented Introduction to Advancing Racial Equity (half day workshop) to supervisors.  October 2016 Staff Liaison Training: CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin presented Building Racial Equity Expertise: Train the Trainer (half-day workshop) for the 30 staff members who volunteered as department liaisons. This group will also learn racial equity facilitation and training skills that will support transformation and change within the organization.  November 2016: Check in with cohort team and leaders to talk about next steps and support staff training sessions in December.  November 14, 2016: Council continued discussion on race, equity and inclusion. Human Rights Commission and Multicultural Advisory Committee members were invited to attend this study session.  November-December 2016: Register for year two with our cohort team with CSI and LMC to continue working with other agencies in support of race and equity work. Determine if additional staff will be invited to the new cohort to start in 2017 with CSI and LMC. This would be an opportunity to have additional city leaders/directors participate in the new session of the year-long program.  December 8, 19 and 20, 2016: CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin to conduct six training sessions for all staff on Introduction to Advancing Racial Equity. Each staff member will attend one four-hour session. Staff liaisons will be scheduled to attend several sessions to provide additional support, training and connections with staff.  December/January: Human Rights Commission and Multicultural Advisory Committee to provide input to council regarding race and equity.  January 27, 2017: Council discussion on race and equity at annual workshop.  February 27 and 28, 2017: Cities of Bloomington, Maplewood and St. Louis Park to partner on training with Pacific Education Group to provide additional training and support on diversity and inclusion. This two-day program, also used by St. Louis Park Schools, will allow department liaisons, executive staff and others to further develop an understanding, have conversations, gather tools and develop next steps for the organization. Each city will have approximately 25 seats for individuals to attend the two-day program.  First Quarter 2017: Development of department action plans with assistance from CSI consultants.  Future: Determine if we want to continue to work with Pacific Education Group on the Affiliate program, which trains staff and community leaders to support ongoing work with race, equity and inclusion. St. Louis Park Schools used this approach to develop equity facilitators/coaches. Continue race and equity work by scheduling regular check-ins with liaisons and working on action plans. As with the Vision process, race and equity work will be integrated long-term into the city’s practices as we develop programs; review, create and update policies; and provide services to residents. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Discussion Item: 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff would like to discuss with the Council its findings regarding the use of body worn cameras for police officers. Staff would like to discuss information in this report with Council and receive any Council feedback and direction. POLICY CONSIDERATION: There are a number of policy issues involved in the consideration of body camera deployment. This staff report identifies these issues to the greatest extent possible. SUMMARY: On 2/17/15, the City Council asked the police department to explore the acquisition and use of body worn cameras for police officers and the operational and policy issues associated with the permanent deployment of cameras in the department. The police department provided an update on 3/28/16. This report summarizes updates that have occurred since that report. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Discussed in report. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Frequently Asked Questions on Police Body Worn Cameras Information Memo on Use of Body Cameras Peace Officer Body-Worn Camera Data Prepared by: Kirk DiLorenzo, Deputy Chief; Clint Pires, CIO; and Soren Mattick, CA Reviewed by: John Luse, Chief of Police Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: On 2/17/15, after an initial study session report and discussion, the St Louis Park Police Department was tasked with exploring issues in the acquisition and use of body worn cameras for officers. That report was updated at a study session on 3/28/16, and can be found at: https://www.stlouispark.org/webfiles/file/agenda/16_03_28cs.pdf The primary use of the cameras is an additional tool to collect evidence for officers during their course of duty, and provide greater transparency and accountability related to the performance of police. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The Police Executive Research Forum, (PERF) and the U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office co-authored a report that was used to assist in framing the St Louis Park Police Department body camera evaluation process. The PERF report highlights a number of issues that should be taken into consideration when implementing a body worn camera program. Here are the main considerations from that report.  Privacy considerations  Determining when to record  Data storage, retention, and disclosure  Impact on community relationships  Addressing officer concerns  Managing expectations  Financial considerations The full report is available at: http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Free_Online_Documents/Technology/implementing%2 0a%20body-worn%20camera%20program.pdf Video upload interface - Both vendors provide “turn-key” solutions that include the cameras and secure cloud-based storage, and that integrates a sophisticated interface which allows searching, editing, and redaction. Both vendors also have a solution that allow an agency to use local storage. With the local storage option however, one vendor only provides a rudimentary video management software, and any editing and redaction software must be purchased separately. The other vendor provides a one seat license for its cloud based redaction tool. The local option, if chosen from either vendor would require a significant investment in additional network storage and staff maintenance. Finally, the tool set for managing the videos is much richer using the cloud-based solution. Based on deployment feedback across the country, a general guideline indicates that an officer will record approximately two hours of video per shift. St. Louis Park staffs seventeen officers per day. That means 34 hours X 365 days or approximately 12,410 hours per year of video collected. To further explain the storage required, it takes approximately one gigabyte of storage per hour of video, requiring 13 terabytes (rounded) every year. The estimated data storage amounts relate to Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers patrol operations only. It does not include storage requirements if cameras are deployed to the investigative, school liaison, community outreach, or drug task force officers. Additionally, it does not take into account any adjustments occurring based on data retention laws, or departmental policies. Quotes from both vendors were updated. The quotes included cameras, equipment maintenance, cloud storage, and redaction, editing, and indexing software. Both vendors have multi-year contracts that are similar in nature to cellular phone plans. When the plan expires, it must be renewed to receive new replacement equipment and access to the cloud-based video. Both vendors will allow the video to be downloaded to a local server if the customer chooses not to renew a contract. The amount of required storage at this point is an educated guess. The amount of video collected will be determined by future department policy on when camera activation occurs and what is recorded as well as state laws and data retention rules and policies. The updated cost estimate for the equipment, storage, and software services averages out to between $48,000 and $54,000 per year depending upon the vendor and options. It is important to be aware that there will be additional costs associated with any body camera system. The largest potential cost will be in staff time and resources required to respond to camera data requests. For each video request, staff must review the video in real time to determine if any segments are private and if so redact them. The redacted video must then be copied to a portable media format for release. Under current state law, only the cost for preparing the media can be charged to the requestor. If an individual requests to view forty hours of video, that video must be previewed and redacted by staff. If the requestor chooses not to request a copy of anything, there is no charge. The estimated FTE cost for an additional employee for redaction and editing tasks would be approximately $75,000 annually. If we move ahead you may see a request for several additional staff to handle records. Police staff estimate two additional FTE positions for data and evidence management. Additionally, some requests would require consultation from the city attorney which would result in additional consultation fees. There will also be some one-time costs associated with implementing a body worn camera system. Additional network connections that will allow multiple cameras to simultaneously upload to the cloud storage will be required, as well as some integration into the existing records management system that will automate video classification and case number assignments. Like the additional FTE’s mentioned above, these additional costs apply whether a cloud-based or local storage solution is chosen. If the local storage solution is chosen, the associated storage cost will also be significant. Typically, the storage requirement needs to be double the amount of storage needed for video because of the need for redundant data backup. The City’s Information Resources Department (IT) indicates that assuming a 5-year contract, the local storage solution would need to accommodate a total of approximately 150 terabytes, using the annual video storage estimates provided above by Police. That would essentially equate to video server equipment with that storage capacity to be installed at the secure Police Department facility and the Municipal Service Center secure backup site. The estimated cost for purchase, installation, vendor maintenance, and replacement for this equipment configuration only is $160,000 over the 5-year period. In addition, because this storage configuration is local, it would also consume additional St. Louis Park human, facility, energy, and network resources. Costs of any necessary technical (e.g., vendor-provided / related software) upgrades during the 5-year Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 4 Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers period are unknown and also in addition to the $160,000 estimate. In the alternative cloud-based solution, all of these are costs borne by the vendor, and the reason why the charges to police departments using cloud-based solutions are typically different from the identifiable costs from the vendor of a local storage solution. That said, based on information received thus far, the video management and redaction tools provided by vendors for local storage solutions are apparently less featured. So, staff time could be higher to perform what could be accomplished more efficiently with the rich tool set provided with the cloud-based solution. In addition, each vendor would charge an amount for cameras and use of its less featured software tools, which would include all elements except the local storage. From an IT perspective, it is recommended that Council first make its policy decision on whether or not to move forward with body cameras, for the Council’s collective reasons. System choices, effectiveness, and costs matter only if Council believes use of body cameras is good policy. If Council does decide to move forward, IT would recommend that the Police Department acquire the body camera system that would allow the most professional and defensible work to be done with the system, and not the cheapest of expensive systems. At this time, given the alternatives presented by vendors, it is the Chief Information Officer’s recommendation that the cloud-based solution proposed by both leading vendors, while not perfect, is the most fully featured, professional, and defensible solution. It also allows Police to work directly with the vendor on using and troubleshooting the system without reliance on third parties that support the local storage option. This recommendation is also supported by the CIO’s discussions with his colleagues who have real-world experience with body camera systems. Policy - An updated policy will need to be created if body cameras are to become a required piece of equipment. There are a number of questions and considerations that must be addressed in a future policy. At this time, some answers to potential questions are still unknown. The Minnesota legislature has passed laws on data privacy and body worn camera systems, which are outlined later in this report. At a minimum, the following points still need to be covered in a policy:  When is the camera turned on and off? Routine contact or enforcement?  Does a subject’s privacy outweigh evidence collection? (i.e. domestic violence interview, in a residence, etc.)  Are they deployed in our schools with our liaison officers? Deployment of body cameras on school liaison officers has been receiving mixed reviews where they have been deployed. This possibility has not yet been discussed with the St Louis Park school district or our private school partners.  Are they deployed in our plain clothes investigation division and SWAT unit?  Can an officer view the video before completing a report?  In a major incident, whose policy governs the use or access to the video? (i.e. Sheriff Dept., BCA, County Attorney’s Office)  If an individual wants to speak anonymously or as an informant?  Should new generation in-car cameras be installed in conjunction with body camera deployment? What budget impacts would this installation and deployment generate? Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Page 5 Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Current Minnesota body worn camera law information - City Attorney Soren Mattick provided the information in the attached supporting documents and will be present at the study session for questions and comments. Body worn camera progress in surrounding communities - Inquiries were made to surrounding metro police departments and those that we participate in our tactical consortium to see where they are the decision to budget and deploy body worn cameras.  Hopkins Police Department- A request will be submitted to budget for purchase and deployment in 2018. No firm policy at this time.  Minnetonka Police Department- Budgetary money has been placed in the 2019 CIP for camera system and for 1 ½ FTE’s for data management.  Edina Police Department- Currently no formal plan. Will look at policies and options in 2017 and will submit for budget in 2018.  Eden Prairie Police- Researching equipment now. No formal plan but will put in CIP placeholder for 2018.  Golden Valley Police- Currently reviewing equipment options, will move ahead in 2017, have not created policy or program yet.  Bloomington Police- Starting to craft policy. Received grant to complete a demonstration program in 2017.  Richfield Police- Had test cameras out. Have recalled all cameras, no specific timeline or plan on moving forward with a camera program. NEXT STEPS:  Follow-up on direction provided by the Council.  Develop department policy.  Finalize vendor negotiation for firm pricing.  Develop training and implementation.  Phased deployment of cameras over 18-24 months.  Continue to review body camera legislation, if any, adopted during current legislative session.  Continue to review body camera implementation policies and procedures utilized by agencies locally and nationally and continue to evaluate any direction or clarification provided by the courts. Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 6 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 7 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 8 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 9 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 10 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 11 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 12 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 13 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 14 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 15 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 16 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 17 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 18 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 19 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 4) Title: Body Worn Cameras for Police Officers Page 20 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Written Report: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017- 1700 RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to continue to implement our Pavement Management program? SUMMARY: The bridge on 37th Street over Minnehaha Creek is scheduled to be reconstructed in 2017. This bridge was inspected in 2011 as part of the city’s annual bridge evaluation program. The evaluation revealed the need for replacement due to the condition of the structural components. DNR requirements require the deck of the bridge to be raised approximately 3 feet to accommodate recreation on the creek. The project design is currently at 60% with final plans to be completed in January of 2017. Construction will begin next May and is expected to be completed in late fall of 2017. Boone Avenue is currently owned and maintained by Target Corporation. They are looking at the feasibility of upgrading Boone Avenue to Municipal State Aid (MSA) standards and turning it back to the City. Target is seeking the cooperation from the other businesses located on Boone Avenue for the potential turn back. They are early on in the process and are uncertain if they will pursue this turn back. Staff will inform Council of updates related to the possible turn back of Boone Avenue to the City. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is included in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2017. Funding will be provided by a combination of Federal, Utility, and Pavement Management Funds. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Bridge Renderings Location Map Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. ) Page 2 Title: West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017-1700 DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The bridge on 37th Street over Minnehaha Creek is scheduled to be reconstructed in 2017. This bridge was inspected in 2011 and the inspection revealed the need for replacement. This channel span bridge is no longer recommended by MnDOT due to their many structural and maintenance issues. The plan is to remove the existing vehicle bridge and the existing pedestrian bridge and replace with one new bridge that has sidewalk on both sides. During preliminary design WSB and Associates determined that the bridge would need to be raised to meet the requirements of the Department of Natural Resources. The estimated raise of the bridge is approximately 3 feet. Raising the bridge requires road reconstruction between Boone Avenue and Aquila Avenue to connect the new bridge into the existing infrastructure. This reconstruction requires significant temporary right of way. The design is currently at 60 percent. A rendering of what the bridge will look like is attached to this report. Boone Avenue which begins on the west side of our project is maintained by Target Corporation as is a private road. Target is interested in releasing Boone Avenue to the City. Staff has been in discussions with Target regarding what type of process would be needed in order for the City to maintain Boone Avenue. Target is aware that they would need to update Boone Avenue to Municipal State Aid (MSA) standards. At this point Target needs to obtain right of way from two other businesses to be able to release Boone Avenue to the City. They would also need to construct a new road with sidewalk on both sides. Target is looking into the feasibility of completing this project but stated that they would not construct this road until 2018. Staff will keep Council informed if Target continues to pursue this option. The construction of 37th Street Bridge and road reconstruction is expected to cost $2,475,055. This project has an 80% Federal and 20% local cost share on most items. There are items such as temporary easements and city utilities which do not qualify for federal funding. The contribution from federal funding is estimated at $1,817,584. The City’s share of this project is estimated at $657,075. This project is budgeted in the 2017 CIP and will be paid using a combination of Federal Funding, Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Pavement Management Funds. Proposed Schedule: The following is the proposed project schedule: 1. 60% Plans complete November 2016 2. Meeting with area businesses December 1st 2016 3. Final Plans complete January 2017 4. Advertise for bid February 2017 5. Construction May – Oct 2017 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 5) Title: West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017-1700Page 3 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 5) Title: West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017-1700 Page 4 ¥f¤ ")20 ¬«7 36TH ST W 35TH ST W AQUI L AA V E S ZINRANAVES36TH ST W AQUILA CIR S XYLONAVESYUKONAVESPHILLIPS PKWY37TH ST W A Q U IL A A V E S T O W B H W Y 7 KNO L LWOOD MALLA CCESRD WYOMINGAVESBOONEAVES P R IV A T E R DPRIVATERDPRIVATERD 0 250 500 750 1,000Feet ¯ Legend 37th Street Construction Area ¥f¤37th Street Bridge Construction Area Private (Boone Ave. S.) City Limits 37th St. W. Bridge and Street Construction Area Knollwood Mall Target Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 5) Title: West 37th Street Bridge and Road Reconstruction Project Update - Project No. 4017-1700 Page 5 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Written Report: 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Water Treatment Plants #4 & #6 Improvements RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the status of the interim modifications at Water Treatment Plant (WTP) #4 and the designs for the permanent upgrades to WTP4 and WTP6. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: Staff has been working on two major efforts to ensure St. Louis Park continues to provide the high quality, safe drinking water it is known for: 1) Partnering with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) to develop an interim solution to lower the VOC levels at WTP4 (4701 41st Street West). These interim modifications are partially complete and are awaiting confirmation of very positive initial results. If additional testing confirms the initial test results, MDH may consider the current modifications acceptable and complete. 2) Partnering with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to design permanent upgrades to WTP4 and WTP6 (42nd and Zarthan Ave) such that identified contaminants can be treated down to published advisory levels. The designs for the permanent upgrades to WTP4 are at the 65% stage. Designs for WTP6 are at the 45% stage. Both designs are an anticipated to be completed in June 2017. It is important to note that repeated testing by the MDH has confirmed that our water is safe to drink and meets all drinking water standards. The interim and permanent solutions described above are proactive measures being taken to ensure we continue to produce high quality, safe drinking water. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The planning for improvements is being paid for by the MPCA. The permanent upgrades are currently included in the City’s Capital Improvements Program for 2018/2019 as an unfunded expense. The MPCA is working to identify potential funding sources for their construction. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship and will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 2 Title: Water Treatment Plant #4 Improvements DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: At the July 25, 2016 Study Session, staff updated Council on the status of concerns associated with Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) at WTP4 (4701 41st St W). Certain VOCs, especially Vinyl Chloride and cis-1,2-dichloroethene, were approaching the allowable maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Staff then updated Council on two major efforts in the works to ensure St. Louis Park continues to provide the high quality, safe drinking water it is known for: 1) Partnering with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) to develop an interim solution to lower the VOC levels at WTP4, and 2) Partnering with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to design permanent upgrades to WTP4 such that identified contaminants can be treated down to published advisory levels (known as Health Based Values, HBVs, or Health Risk Limits, HRLs). Staff emphasized that repeated testing by the MDH has confirmed that our water is safe to drink and meets all drinking water standards. The interim and permanent solutions described above are proactive measures being taken to ensure we continue to produce high quality, safe drinking water. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: WTP4 Interim Modifications: The interim effort involved installing additional air injection ports to the system so additional air could be injected into the treatment process. The additional air injection required the removal of the carbon media from the carbon filter vessels so air bleeders could be installed on the vessels to remove the additional air (thereby removing additional VOCs as well). Removal of the carbon media was also beneficial as recent sampling results indicated the carbon media was increasing the VOC levels of the water. The interim plans were expected to lower the VOC levels substantially below the MCLs, but may not lower them below the HBVs. Staff received final approval to implement the interim effort on August 1, 2016. The carbon media was removed the week of August 22. As expected, the VOC levels did drop, but we were surprised to see that the levels increased again after the water passed through the empty vessels. After further investigation with MDH, we suspect the plastic liners on the vessel walls have failed and may be causing the VOC levels to rise. Staff has since modified the treatment flow to completely bypass the carbon vessels. Bypassing the carbon vessels will allow us to see if the VOC reduction from the pressure vessels alone would be sufficient to lower the VOC levels to less than half their respective MCLs (a level MDH considers to be a reasonable treatment goal for this effort). Additional testing is being done in-house and by MDH to confirm the final VOC levels. We expect to have test results and a firm path forward for the interim project by mid-December. WTP4 Permanent Upgrades: As discussed back in July, Staff has also been partnering with the MPCA and MDH on designs for permanent upgrades to WTP4. These upgrades are intended to treat the same VOCs previously discussed as well as recently identified contaminants of emerging concern such as Benzene and 1-4 Dioxane. The upgrades are expected to include Air Stripping technology to treat the VOCs (including Benzene) and an Advanced Oxidation Process to treat 1-4 Dioxane. These upgrades will lower all contaminants to below their respective HBVs. Similar plans for treatment upgrades are expected at WTP6 (4241 Zarthan Ave. S.). Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 6) Page 3 Title: Water Treatment Plant #4 Improvements The MPCA is funding and managing the design for the permanent solution at WTP4. Design plans for the permanent solution at WTP4 are at the 60% stage. Final construction plans for WTP4 are expected to be complete June 2017. If needed to support construction in 2017, it is likely the plans for WTP4 could be moved up as early as April 2017 or earlier. Since WTP4 requires very little exterior work, it is possible the project could be let in April/May of 2017 with construction complete by the end of 2017. The current cost estimate for the permanent solution at WTP4 is $3.5M. WTP6 Design Effort: Similar to WTP 4, the MPCA is funding and managing the design for the permanent solution at WTP6. The WTP6 design upgrade would allow us to run SLP6, a Prairie-du- Chien/Jordan well that is currently not run due to high contaminant levels. The MPCA and EPA are interested in running SLP6 for its likely benefits toward containing/capturing the Reilly PAH plume. It will also assist with containing/capturing the known VOC plume in the same area. Design plans for WTP6 are at the 45% stage. Final construction plans for WTP6 are expected to be complete June 2017. Since the WTP6 upgrade requires the construction of a new facility that will likely need planning and zoning variances, it is doubtful the WTP6 design can be moved up. The current cost estimate for the plant upgrade at WTP6 is approximately $6.3M. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The permanent upgrades are currently included in the City’s Capital Improvements Program for 2018/2019 as an unfunded expense. The MPCA is working to identify potential funding sources for their construction The following chart is a summary based on City issuing a 20-year Utility Revenue bond (in 2017) for either project or both projects. The quarterly impact effect is an estimate for a typical residential property based on a household size of 4 using 30 units of water per quarter (22,500) gallons) per quarter. Summary (quarterly est.)2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Estimates on houshold size of 4 based on current CIP and LRFMP (does not inlcude WTP 4 & 6)78.19$ 84.23$ 89.97$ 96.01$ 99.91$ 104.11$ 107.71$ 111.61$ 115.51$ 119.71$ Estimates adding WTP 4 only to CIP and LRFMP 78.19$ 85.43$ 92.97$ 100.51$ 105.31$ 110.41$ 114.31$ 117.61$ 120.91$ 123.61$ Estimates adding WTP 6 only to CIP and LRFMP 78.19$ 86.63$ 95.67$ 104.11$ 109.81$ 115.21$ 119.41$ 123.01$ 126.61$ 129.31$ Estimates adding WTP 4 & 6 to CIP and LRFMP 78.19$ 88.13$ 98.97$ 107.71$ 113.71$ 119.41$ 123.01$ 125.71$ 128.41$ 131.41$ Note: In either scenerio anticipates issuing a 20-year bond for either project ($3.5m WTP 4) and ($6.3m WTP 6) NEXT STEPS: Once the MPCA has completed the design of both treatment plants, staff will discuss funding and timing of these projects. Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Written Report: 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Update on Proposed EDA Property Acquisition from Hennepin County RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff wishes to inform the EDA of action taken to initiate the process to acquire remnant parcels from Hennepin County adjacent to the future Wooddale SWLRT Station POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA continue to support the acquisition of remnant parcels from Hennepin County to facilitate redevelopment adjacent to the future Wooddale SWLRT Station? SUMMARY: As discussed at the June 6 and October 10, 2016 Study Sessions, PLACE proposes to redevelop approximately 3.5 acres on the north side and 1.7 acres on the south side of the future Wooddale SWLRT Station with a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented, and sustainable development. The proposed redevelopment sites require the assemblage of nine properties; three of which are remnant parcels (3520 Yosemite, 3565 Wooddale and the western portion of 3548 Xenwood Ave.) currently owned by the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA). HCRRA has indicated a willingness to sell the parcels to the EDA so as to facilitate development on the subject sites consistent with that proposed by PLACE. HCRRA would also convey a fourth remnant parcel, 3524 Yosemite, which the city would retain for right-of way purposes. To initiate the formal acquisition process, Hennepin County requested a letter from the EDA indicating its intent to purchase the four remnant parcels. To that end, staff recently sent the attached letter drafted by Kennedy & Graven which outlines general terms for a proposed purchase agreement with Hennepin County. Staff is currently in discussion with Hennepin County staff over specific business terms of that property acquisition. Such terms will be brought to the EDA for its review. A formal purchase agreement would then 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 the subject parcels so as to assemble sites large enough to spur redevelopment on either side of the future Wooddale SWLRT Station. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Hennepin County is required to sell the subject parcels at estimated fair market value which it determined to be $1.1 million. The City Assessor examined this value and concurs that the proposed purchase price is easily supported. It is proposed that three of the four parcels acquired by the EDA would subsequently be sold to PLACE as part of the property assemblage for its proposed project. The 3524 Yosemite parcel would be retained for right-of-way purposes and the eastern portion of 3548 Xenwood Ave. would be held by the EDA for future redevelopment purposes. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Map: Properties to be Purchased from Hennepin County Letter of Intent Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy Executive Director of the EDA and Deputy City Manager Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 7) Page 2 Title: Update on Proposed EDA Property Acquisition from Hennepin County Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Update on Proposed EDA Property Acquisition from Hennepin CountyPage 3 Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 7) Title: Update on Proposed EDA Property Acquisition from Hennepin CountyPage 4 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Written Report: 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Residential Knox Box Key Vault Program RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. The purpose of this report is to inform the City Council of the requested additional information on the Knox Box residential key vault program and specifics on the donation from the American Legion Post 282 in the amount of $5,000.00 for the initial purchase and implementation of this program. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: When a person calls for help and they are within their homes, many times they are unable to get to the door to let in whatever help has arrived. This program will allow residents to provide a key to their home in a secured lockbox located at the entry point of the home. This eliminates the need for forced entry into the home which can cause significant damage. The Fire Department was approached by Fire Commissioner and American Legion Post 282 member Bill MacMillan about the need to serve our residents better through a quick access key box program, as it would save valuable time in gaining access to the person in need and potentially save a life. The American Legion Post 282 has graciously agreed to donate $5,000 to implement this program. Many of the potential users of this program may be veterans. The initial donation of $5,000.00 will cover the cost of 29 units. This program will be administered by the Fire Department and lock boxes will be leased with a one-time fee of $50.00 to cover installation. These residential lock boxes will be installed by a member of the Fire Department and will remain the property of the St. Louis Park Fire Department. Key boxes are to be returned to the Fire Department when no longer needed. Key box holders will be audited every six months to determine if the need to use them still exists. Should the demand for these residential lock boxes increase over the initial donation, we will seek additional funding. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Quote Prepared by: Cary Smith, Fire Marshal Reviewed by: Steve Koering, Fire Chief Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 8) Page 2 Title: Residential Knox Box Key Vault Program DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The Fire Department was approached by Fire Commissioner and American Legion Post 282 member Bill MacMillan about the need to serve our residents better through a quick access key box program, as it would save valuable time in gaining access to the person in need and potentially save a life. The American Legion Post 282 has graciously agreed to donate $5,000 to implement this program. Without these lock boxes, it delays our response in assisting patients and causes the use of forcible entry tools that will cause damage to property. There is currently a similar key box program for commercial and multi-family dwellings that is paid for by the property owners. The key boxes are permanently installed at these properties. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Currently there is no residential key box program in place in St. Louis Park. NEXT STEPS:  Donation from the Legion is scheduled for the November 21 regular city council meeting.  Finalize the program details including development of a liability waiver and also adding the fee as an administrative fee to the fee schedule.  The purchase of the residential lock boxes will be made by the Fire Department and they will be owned by the City and leased to the property.  The initial plan is to offer these residential lock boxes to residents that we frequently provide services to that are also participating in the Firefighter Post Discharge Visits through Park Nicollet. The Fire Department will install these residential lock boxes with a one-time $50.00 lease fee to cover the Fire Department’s cost to install these lock boxes.  The Fire Department will maintain records of properties that have these installed and conduct bi-annual audits to determine if the need to use the lock boxes still exists. 1601 W Deer Valley RoadPhoenix, AZ 85027 ● (800) 552-5669 ● Fax (623) 687-2290 Visit us at.:www.knoxbox.com Quotation Page .................................:1 of 1 Number ............................:SQT000013713-1 Date .................................:9/8/2016 Quotation deadline ..........:9/3/2017 Payment Terms................:Net 30 Quoted by:.......................:Franny Singer Phone .........................:(866) 223-2623 E-Mail .......................:fsinger@knoxbox.com St Louis Park Fire Dept ATTN: Cary Smith 3750 WOODDALE AVE S MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416-5345 Dear Cary: I am pleased to provide the following Knox product specification and cost proposal: ItemItem number Description Quantity Unit price Amount 1503DH 1500, SURFACE, DOVE, HINGED W/ DOORHANGER PS-98-0013-01-75 - HOME 29.00 174.00 5,046.00 1503DH 1500, SURFACE, DOVE, HINGED W/ DOORHANGER PS-98-0013-01-75 - HOME 5.00 0.00 Sales balance Misc. charges Sales tax Total 5,046.00 0.00 0.00 5,046.00 USD All pricing is subject to change and is based on a quantity order to be shipped all at one time. Prices quoted are valid through the "Quotation deadline" date shown above. All shipping and handling fees are estimates based upon ground service to the address shown above. Knox will provide you a firm cost for shipping and handling fees when order is placed. Knox provides detailed installation instructions with each Knox product however; Knox is not responsible for actual installation. SALES TAX DISCLAIMER: Knox is required to collect sales tax for purchases made in the following states: AZ, CA, CO, FL, IL, IN, MA, MD, MI, TX and WA. Where applicable, Knox will charge sales tax unless you have a valid sales tax exemption certificate on file with Knox. If you are exempt from sales tax, you must provide us with a sales tax exempt certificate at the time the order isplaced. If I can provide further information, please contact me at the phone number or email address listed above. Sincerely, Franny Singer Account Manager Study Session Meeting of November 14, 2016 (Item No. 8) Title: Residential Knox Box Key Vault Program Page 3 Meeting: Study Session Meeting Date: November 14, 2016 Written Report: 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Upcoming Resolution Supporting Sela Group’s Submission of a Grant Application RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. The purpose of this report is to inform City Council of Sela Group’s submission of a grant application to the Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Program for its Parkway 25 project. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does City Council support Sela’s Group’s application for a TOD grant to facilitate its proposed mixed-use redevelopment at CSAH 25 and Glenhurst Ave? SUMMARY: Sela Group has purchased the Vescio Cucina and Valu Stay Inn properties at 4001 County Road 25 and 4025 Highway 7. On September 6, 2016 city council approved Sela’s redevelopment application for a planned unit development for Parkway 25. Parkway 25 is a five- story mixed-use redevelopment that consists of 111 market rate residential rental units, approximately 9,500 square feet of commercial space, and parking located in two surface lots and in an underground ramp. On-site amenities including bike parking and bike repair station, a dog- run, landscaping and active areas over parking, new sidewalks and a corner plaza at the NE corner of the site. Construction is anticipated to begin in March 2017 and be complete by late March 2018. The project is pursuing LEED certification for sustainable, environmental, site design and site selection criteria. To help defray some of the public improvement costs, Sela has applied for a $1,131,684 Hennepin County TOD grant for site furnishings; landscaping; streetscaping; lighting; stormwater, a pedestrian plaza and pedestrian and bike improvements including sidewalks and bike infrastructure. Hennepin County requires a resolution of support from the governing body of the city where the project site is located indicating that the city supports the grant application. Grant awards are typically announced by December/January. An authorizing resolution for the grant application will be brought to the November 21st city council meeting as a consent item. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This grant program does not require any financial match from the city. Sela Group is the grant applicant, and should funds be awarded, Sela will work directly with Hennepin County to administer the grant. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Julie Grove, Economic Development Specialist Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director